Criticals 3.5e - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Criticals 3.5e

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
bronzebeard
May 17, 2009 17:38:43 Just a quick ask:

Using the critical miss and hit rules in the book seems straightforward at the beginning. The more you advance, bumps start to appear in the road. Things like, criting that ogre-mage with my 3d8 + 5 / *3 mace creating huge numbers to track.
Do any of you use an alternate form to the Critical Hit and Miss rules?
How does that work for you?
#2
bronzebeard
May 20, 2009 8:29:22 Bump for the greater good?
#3
doneisi
May 20, 2009 8:43:06 Well the 4e crit rules are more simple, but much less powerful. A crit in 4e maximizes damage dice and auto hits, a crit failure is simply a miss.
#4
Novacat
May 20, 2009 8:59:11
Just a quick ask:

Using the critical miss and hit rules in the book seems straightforward at the beginning. The more you advance, bumps start to appear in the road. Things like, criting that ogre-mage with my 3d8 + 5 / *3 mace creating huge numbers to track.
Do any of you use an alternate form to the Critical Hit and Miss rules?
How does that work for you?

You think (3d8+5)*3 creates huge numbers? Sit down, boy, and let me tell you the tale of Ben, the Gargantuan Centaur Hulking Hurler/Warhulk that threw moons at people. Try calculating 17,039,360d6+45. I seriously crashed the online diceroller I was using. Had to restart my phone.

EDIT: My point is... that's a bad example of a complicated equation, and I can't think of any crit-related examples, so I would appreciate some elaboration on what, exactly, is causing the problem with the critical hit system as-is, so that I may more appropriately suggest a fix. I've never had a problem with the as-written critical hit system, so I'm not able to relate with you without more accurate information.
#5
silent_stone
May 20, 2009 11:58:18 A possible way of handling "rolling" large numbers of dice is to not roll them at all, and just treat each one as ending up with an average result for the die type. For example, the average d8 roll is 4.5, so 3d8+5 times 3 would be 55.5 damage, rounded down to 55. The average d6 roll is 3.5, so 17,039,360d6+45 would be 59,637,805 damage. All you need is a calculator, and they're cheap.

P.S. Novacat, what I would like to know is was there any enemies Ben couldn't kill in one hit?
#6
Novacat
May 21, 2009 4:51:55
P.S. Novacat, what I would like to know is was there any enemies Ben couldn't kill in one hit?

He never saw play, actually.
#7
bronzebeard
May 21, 2009 8:36:31
so I would appreciate some elaboration on what, exactly, is causing the problem with the critical hit system as-is, so that I may more appropriately suggest a fix. I've never had a problem with the as-written critical hit system, so I'm not able to relate with you without more accurate information.

It just a theoretical problem:

Say I use a sword with a crit rating of 19-20. The % of crit is 10%. Meaning that out of every ten rolls 1 will end up a crit (presumption). Now think that the players are encountered I attack them with a group larger then theirs - say, 1.5 more (there are 4 players, so 6 npcs). In fact, we could say that approximately every other round the monsters crit the players.

What I'm getting at is that the numbers are working against the players here. Critting sounds nice but the probability indicates that whatever chance they have of critting, the monsters will crit more.

That is for one.
Second is that whenever there is a crit, there's a roll for crit-confirm and if it is critted again then needs to be crit-confirmed one more time. And confirm-miss. and... blah! how much time can you waste on this things?

I want the crit to be epic but with no huge impact on the battlefield so if the characters are on the receiving end of the crit-stick then they're not doomed.

=D
#8
jostein
May 21, 2009 9:49:31
What I'm getting at is that the numbers are working against the players here. Critting sounds nice but the probability indicates that whatever chance they have of critting, the monsters will crit more.

And the DMs guide tell you that, and gives you rules for softening the crits.

My players knows that the odds are stacked aainst them with crits, but they want them anyway
#9
eldritch_lord
May 21, 2009 10:38:39
It just a theoretical problem:

Say I use a sword with a crit rating of 19-20. The % of crit is 10%. Meaning that out of every ten rolls 1 will end up a crit (presumption). Now think that the players are encountered I attack them with a group larger then theirs - say, 1.5 more (there are 4 players, so 6 npcs). In fact, we could say that approximately every other round the monsters crit the players.

What I'm getting at is that the numbers are working against the players here. Critting sounds nice but the probability indicates that whatever chance they have of critting, the monsters will crit more.

Anything based on randomness is going to help the NPCs--they usually live and die based on a single encounter, so if they're critted it doesn't really matter, but PCs have to keep going through multiple encounters and a crit can wreck their day.

Most monsters only have a 20/x2 crit rating for that very reason; if you have NPCs packing 19-20 or 18-20 weapons or ones with x3 or x4 crit ratings, you're going to see a lot more damage from them.

Second is that whenever there is a crit, there's a roll for crit-confirm and if it is critted again then needs to be crit-confirmed one more time. And confirm-miss. and... blah! how much time can you waste on this things?

Honestly? Drop the confirmation rolls. They're time-consuming, the only impact they have is to make crits take longer, martial types need all the love they can get, and we did just fine in 2e before confirmation rolls were invented. I haven't used confirmation rolls in a single game I've run, and it's worked out just fine.

I want the crit to be epic but with no huge impact on the battlefield so if the characters are on the receiving end of the crit-stick then they're not doomed.

Well, one option is as I mentioned above: only use 20/x2 crits, whether monsters or NPCs with 20/x2 weapons. That should minimize the risk. Alternately, come up with some sort of crit table--instead of multiplying damage, maybe they knock the PCs back 10 feet and prone, or daze them, or inflict a -2 penalties on attacks, or something else besides damage.
#10
bronzebeard
Jun 21, 2009 17:13:02 I'd just like to come back to wrap this up nicely.
Thank you to everyone who gave me his piece of advice - at the end (after a talk with the players) I decided that crit will say multiplied but I the confirm will be dropped. I also would use the 20 monster crit thing that is mentioned above me.

Thank you.
BB

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 bronzebeard May 17, 2009 17:38:43	Just a quick ask: Using the critical miss and hit rules in the book seems straightforward at the beginning. The more you advance, bumps start to appear in the road. Things like, criting that ogre-mage with my 3d8 + 5 / *3 mace creating huge numbers to track. Do any of you use an alternate form to the Critical Hit and Miss rules? How does that work for you?
#2 bronzebeard May 20, 2009 8:29:22	Bump for the greater good?
#3 doneisi May 20, 2009 8:43:06	Well the 4e crit rules are more simple, but much less powerful. A crit in 4e maximizes damage dice and auto hits, a crit failure is simply a miss.
#4 Novacat May 20, 2009 8:59:11	Just a quick ask: Using the critical miss and hit rules in the book seems straightforward at the beginning. The more you advance, bumps start to appear in the road. Things like, criting that ogre-mage with my 3d8 + 5 / 3 mace creating huge numbers to track. Do any of you use an alternate form to the Critical Hit and Miss rules? How does that work for you? You think (3d8+5)3 creates huge numbers? Sit down, boy, and let me tell you the tale of Ben, the Gargantuan Centaur Hulking Hurler/Warhulk that threw moons at people. Try calculating 17,039,360d6+45. I seriously crashed the online diceroller I was using. Had to restart my phone. EDIT: My point is... that's a bad example of a complicated equation, and I can't think of any crit-related examples, so I would appreciate some elaboration on what, exactly, is causing the problem with the critical hit system as-is, so that I may more appropriately suggest a fix. I've never had a problem with the as-written critical hit system, so I'm not able to relate with you without more accurate information.
#5 silent_stone May 20, 2009 11:58:18	A possible way of handling "rolling" large numbers of dice is to not roll them at all, and just treat each one as ending up with an average result for the die type. For example, the average d8 roll is 4.5, so 3d8+5 times 3 would be 55.5 damage, rounded down to 55. The average d6 roll is 3.5, so 17,039,360d6+45 would be 59,637,805 damage. All you need is a calculator, and they're cheap. P.S. Novacat, what I would like to know is was there any enemies Ben couldn't kill in one hit?
#6 Novacat May 21, 2009 4:51:55	P.S. Novacat, what I would like to know is was there any enemies Ben couldn't kill in one hit? He never saw play, actually.
#7 bronzebeard May 21, 2009 8:36:31	so I would appreciate some elaboration on what, exactly, is causing the problem with the critical hit system as-is, so that I may more appropriately suggest a fix. I've never had a problem with the as-written critical hit system, so I'm not able to relate with you without more accurate information. It just a theoretical problem: Say I use a sword with a crit rating of 19-20. The % of crit is 10%. Meaning that out of every ten rolls 1 will end up a crit (presumption). Now think that the players are encountered I attack them with a group larger then theirs - say, 1.5 more (there are 4 players, so 6 npcs). In fact, we could say that approximately every other round the monsters crit the players. What I'm getting at is that the numbers are working against the players here. Critting sounds nice but the probability indicates that whatever chance they have of critting, the monsters will crit more. That is for one. Second is that whenever there is a crit, there's a roll for crit-confirm and if it is critted again then needs to be crit-confirmed one more time. And confirm-miss. and... blah! how much time can you waste on this things? I want the crit to be epic but with no huge impact on the battlefield so if the characters are on the receiving end of the crit-stick then they're not doomed. =D
#8 jostein May 21, 2009 9:49:31	What I'm getting at is that the numbers are working against the players here. Critting sounds nice but the probability indicates that whatever chance they have of critting, the monsters will crit more. And the DMs guide tell you that, and gives you rules for softening the crits. My players knows that the odds are stacked aainst them with crits, but they want them anyway
#9 eldritch_lord May 21, 2009 10:38:39	It just a theoretical problem: Say I use a sword with a crit rating of 19-20. The % of crit is 10%. Meaning that out of every ten rolls 1 will end up a crit (presumption). Now think that the players are encountered I attack them with a group larger then theirs - say, 1.5 more (there are 4 players, so 6 npcs). In fact, we could say that approximately every other round the monsters crit the players. What I'm getting at is that the numbers are working against the players here. Critting sounds nice but the probability indicates that whatever chance they have of critting, the monsters will crit more. Anything based on randomness is going to help the NPCs--they usually live and die based on a single encounter, so if they're critted it doesn't really matter, but PCs have to keep going through multiple encounters and a crit can wreck their day. Most monsters only have a 20/x2 crit rating for that very reason; if you have NPCs packing 19-20 or 18-20 weapons or ones with x3 or x4 crit ratings, you're going to see a lot more damage from them. Second is that whenever there is a crit, there's a roll for crit-confirm and if it is critted again then needs to be crit-confirmed one more time. And confirm-miss. and... blah! how much time can you waste on this things? Honestly? Drop the confirmation rolls. They're time-consuming, the only impact they have is to make crits take longer, martial types need all the love they can get, and we did just fine in 2e before confirmation rolls were invented. I haven't used confirmation rolls in a single game I've run, and it's worked out just fine. I want the crit to be epic but with no huge impact on the battlefield so if the characters are on the receiving end of the crit-stick then they're not doomed. Well, one option is as I mentioned above: only use 20/x2 crits, whether monsters or NPCs with 20/x2 weapons. That should minimize the risk. Alternately, come up with some sort of crit table--instead of multiplying damage, maybe they knock the PCs back 10 feet and prone, or daze them, or inflict a -2 penalties on attacks, or something else besides damage.
#10 bronzebeard Jun 21, 2009 17:13:02	I'd just like to come back to wrap this up nicely. Thank you to everyone who gave me his piece of advice - at the end (after a talk with the players) I decided that crit will say multiplied but I the confirm will be dropped. I also would use the 20 monster crit thing that is mentioned above me. Thank you. BB