Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2015 7:00:34 GMT -6
Just to further the conversation ... what is it about critical hits that you don't like on general principles? My beef with critical hits on a natural 20 is mostly conceptual. If you hit the target on a roll of 17 or better, one hit in four is a crit; if you hit the same target on a 12 or better, only one hit in 9 is a crit. It doesn't sit right with me that a high-level fighter will score relatively fewer critical hits than a low-level one. This is true but totally irrelevant. Assume a 1st level and 7th level fighter both attack an AC2 target 20 times. Assume honest dice and average results. The 7th level fighter hits on a 12 or better. That's 9 hits, one of which is a 20 for double damage... effectively 10 hits. The average of 1d6 is 3.5, so in those 20 attacks the 7th level fighter will do an AVERAGE of 35 points of damage. The 1st level fighter hits on a 17 or better. That's 4 hits, one of which is a 20 for double damage... effectively 5 hits. The first level fighter does half the damage of a 7th level fighter.
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Oct 8, 2015 7:24:15 GMT -6
The problem that Gary had with critical hits, as explained in the Dungeon Masters Guide, was that it took away your ability to judge when you should escape combat/leave the dungeon/avoid taking risks. If you've got 10 hit points, without critical hits you know you can survive at least one hit. With, say, double-damage critical hits you don't know this. This is an important tactical part of the game, he explains, that should not be removed. Hit points do not simulate anything physical; they represent your knowledge of when to get away.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2015 8:38:29 GMT -6
Hit points do not simulate anything physical; they represent your knowledge of when to get away. But this is only true if the monsters can also do critical hits to you. There's no need to remove the player's ability to perform critical hits on the monsters. It also only applies if each PC is being attacked by one monster with only one attacks. That's a fairly rare circumstance especially in AD&D.
|
|
Elphilm
Level 3 Conjurer
ELpH vs. Coil
Posts: 68
|
Post by Elphilm on Oct 8, 2015 11:13:34 GMT -6
This is true but totally irrelevant. Finarvyn asked for reasons to dislike critical hits, and I gave my opinion, clearly saying that it was a conceptual issue, not a problem with the actual combat performance of a high-level fighter vs. a low-level one. Nobody in their right mind would argue that crits make low-level fighters more effective than high-level fighters. I'm not sure what's the point of arguing that I'm "fussed up about" critical hits and that my opinion is "totally irrelevant." You don't have to agree with my taste.
|
|
Elphilm
Level 3 Conjurer
ELpH vs. Coil
Posts: 68
|
Post by Elphilm on Oct 8, 2015 11:15:49 GMT -6
There's no need to remove the player's ability to perform critical hits on the monsters. Nobody's removing anything, really; critical hits on a natural 20 are a houserule, not a core part of either OD&D or AD&D.
|
|
spacelem
Level 1 Medium
Green haired rodent
Posts: 23
|
Post by spacelem on Oct 8, 2015 11:24:20 GMT -6
I'm happy with the concept of crits. Sometimes you really do hit a spot that does considerably more damage or hinders the opponent more than you'd have expected.
But the key thing is: whether they make sense or not, most of us think that crits are fun. And that's really all the reason you need to have them.
|
|
|
Post by sepulchre on Oct 8, 2015 11:47:27 GMT -6
The issue is not whether the game is fun with critical hits. Rather, the focus becomes whether the game by design lacks something without a critical hit battery. As Elphilm noted, maximum damage is a 'critical hit' in a hit point game. Critical hits understood as anything else are just extraneous. If your game demands an increased frequency for death and dismemberment, switch to a non-heroic game (lvls 1-3) or return to some version of Chainmail's MTM. I prefer the latter. The loving adoration of characters Gygax refers to in the Dungeon Master's Guide is for characters of fantasy, figures that avail the trials of combat far beyond the normal range. The addition of a critical hit battery just reverses the intention of changing the design from one of historical combat to one of fantastic combat (the direction of D&D's 3LBBs, really).
|
|
Elphilm
Level 3 Conjurer
ELpH vs. Coil
Posts: 68
|
Post by Elphilm on Oct 8, 2015 12:12:30 GMT -6
Well, even though I don't care for double damage crits (for various reasons stated in this thread), I'm not going to argue that anyone should drop them from their game. If you like critical hits and they work fine in your game, you don't need the validation of some random stranger on the internet to keep using them. I figured that would be self-evident...
|
|
|
Post by sepulchre on Oct 8, 2015 12:23:25 GMT -6
You're misrepresenting my point. It's not whether a stranger validates your opinion, rather it's about strangers engaging in a rational conversation about design; that some opinions might turn out to be right or wrong, or have an application to playing the game is a consequence of such a dialogue. Whether one can play the game 'however one wishes' is irrelevant, that is rather self-evident.
|
|
Elphilm
Level 3 Conjurer
ELpH vs. Coil
Posts: 68
|
Post by Elphilm on Oct 8, 2015 13:00:34 GMT -6
I was writing more in response to spacelem than you, really.
|
|
|
Post by sepulchre on Oct 8, 2015 13:13:26 GMT -6
Fair enough, then you and I have an understanding.
|
|
|
Post by Porphyre on Oct 13, 2015 0:27:14 GMT -6
the mechanic is also used in Suppl 2 with the Monk Class for stunning :
|
|
Koren n'Rhys
Level 6 Magician
Got your mirrorshades?
Posts: 355
|
Post by Koren n'Rhys on Oct 13, 2015 10:24:01 GMT -6
I like the concept of crits. At the table, rolling a Nat 20 is exciting and fun, which to me is the main objective of playing at all. I do tend to waffle on how to actually implement them though. Max vs. double damage. Sticking with pure d6 - it comes down to 6 damage or 2-12. A chance for significantly higher damage if you roll well, but I tend to prefer the interpretation of it simply being max damage.
Question for you who DO use double damage. Do you roll 2d6 or double the results of a single roll?
|
|
|
Post by Porphyre on Oct 13, 2015 13:38:09 GMT -6
In a real life game, I would ask for a double d6. In an online game by forum, it is easier at faster to double the result than ask the player to roll another...
|
|
|
Post by scottenkainen on Oct 15, 2015 12:43:58 GMT -6
Question for you who DO use double damage. Do you roll 2d6 or double the results of a single roll? When I used to use critical hits, I always doubled the roll. Some DMs I've played with allowed you to double the total, after adding in any bonuses. ~Scott "-enkainen" Casper
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2015 19:07:21 GMT -6
Question for you who DO use double damage. Do you roll 2d6 or double the results of a single roll? 2d6 with double bonuses. A crit could just be two hits so rolling twice makes more sense there. Lately, I've been considering having magic weapons roll larger dice rather than have fixed bonuses to damage. It's close enough on average but easier to roll. So, if a regular sword does d6 damage, a +2 sword would do d10. Same with strength bonuses.
|
|