This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

[4E] Critical Hits Article from WotC...

Started by jedimastert, January 07, 2008, 04:07:24 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

B.T.

Quote from: James McMurrayI'm not sure if they're becoming more common or not. Because of the 18-20 weapons, Keen magic, and Improved Critical feat it's possible to be rolling confirmation rolls in 3.x on a little under half your attacks (or over half if you really go insane). Whether that's going to mean more or less than 5% of your hits are crits depends on the attack bonus vs. AC ratio of the average opponent.
Keen/Improved Critical don't stack in 3.5.  Thank goodness.  In 3.0, rapiers could have what, a 12-20 crit range?
Quote from: Black Vulmea;530561Y\'know, I\'ve learned something from this thread. Both B.T. and Koltar are idiots, but whereas B.T. possesses a malign intelligence, Koltar is just a drooling fuckwit.

So, that\'s something, I guess.

jedimastert

Quote from: 1of3Or do you seriously think that monsters won't be allowed to wield magic swords (provided they have hands)?

I am starting to believe that. It sounds like monsters won't get the better crit even if they were to pick up the sword in the article's example.

B.T.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;530561Y\'know, I\'ve learned something from this thread. Both B.T. and Koltar are idiots, but whereas B.T. possesses a malign intelligence, Koltar is just a drooling fuckwit.

So, that\'s something, I guess.

jedimastert

Quote from: MelanThis was predictable. :)


After seeing some of the WotC design philosophies in the development articles I think you are on to something with that Tyranny of Fun idea.

James McMurray

Quote from: B.T.Keen/Improved Critical don't stack in 3.5.  Thank goodness.  In 3.0, rapiers could have what, a 12-20 crit range?

That just slows the crit build down, it doesn't stop it. Using a little splatbook mining you can get 7-20 falchons in 3.5, assuming the GM is not allowing a conversion of the 3.0 Weaponmaster, but does allow material from the Book of Vile Darkness, which is kind of a 3.25 product.

Most characters won't have near that much, but depending on the to-hit vs. AC ratio, even a 15-20 Keen Rapier can come crit more than 5% of the time.

jedimastert

Quote from: B.T.Why do you think that?

QuotePCs also have some extra tricks up their sleeves to make their criticals better. Magic weapons (and implements for magical attacks) add extra damage on crits. So your +1 frost warhammer deals an extra 1d6 damage on a critical hit (so your crit's now up to 14+1d6 damage in the example above). Monsters don't get this benefit, so PC crits outclass monster crits most of the time.

Because that was what was written in the article. (I just mean to point this out and I do not mean it sarcastically)

James McMurray

I tool that to mean that there won't be a lot of +1 Frost Zombies running around, not that monsters are not allowed to use magic weapons.

B.T.

Or maybe monsters won't use magic weapons (maybe they'll have mundane weapons but get an enhancement bonus to attack or something).  I know they're trying to reduce equipment-dependency, but I'm hoping that it's just sloppy writing.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;530561Y\'know, I\'ve learned something from this thread. Both B.T. and Koltar are idiots, but whereas B.T. possesses a malign intelligence, Koltar is just a drooling fuckwit.

So, that\'s something, I guess.

James McMurray

If there's arule that monsters can't use magic weapons, I can see that being house ruled almost universally.

jedimastert

Quote from: James McMurrayI tool that to mean that there won't be a lot of +1 Frost Zombies running around, not that monsters are not allowed to use magic weapons.

Well actually...

QuoteThe simplest monsters are cooler in the new edition of the D&D game, and zombies are no exception. But even though they're soulless animated corpses, zombies don't have to be dead simple. The 4th Edition designers threw the new zombie a bone, coming up with a few ways that everyone's favorite corpse creatures can function in the game to give more chills and kills.

To this end, in the Monster Manual, three exotic zombies appear. The first is the chillborn zombie, the coldness of the grave given just enough volition to be bent on murder. The corruption zombie is a paragon of rot with a great throwing arm. The final new zombie is the gravehound zombie.

That list might spark some preconceived notions about what these undead do. All three possess the implacable resilience of regular zombies, but each comes with an added spin. You might expect easy clichés and predictable performances, but the ideas behind these new breeds of zombie aren't dead on arrival.

A chillborn is cold, but it's not merely an icy zombie. Whatever accursed rites or foul maledictions gave a semblance of life to the chillborn made it even tougher than normal, its body and mind hardened by the freezing hand of death. Life-sapping cold streams from the creature, and the more chillborn zombies in a group, the deeper the freeze. As might be expected, the remorseless fists of the chillborn deal some cold damage, but when a chillborn strikes you, you just might freeze in place, still able to fight back but unable to flee the biting aura the zombie exudes. All chillborn deal more damage to immobilized victims, and your inability to maneuver certainly benefits anyone relying on the chillborn to provide a defensive front line.

One creature that requires such a line of defenders, although probably provided by allies other than the chillborn, is the corruption zombie. This creature is so tainted that its body constantly exudes putrid flesh. It tears off chunks of its own rotting body to hurl at its foes, but leaving itself unharmed due to the supernatural nature of its tissues. If one of its thrown motes of corruption strikes you, however, you're in trouble -- not only does the gobbet hurt, but the unclean flesh also weakens you. Your instincts might dictate charging the zombie to stop its ranged attacks. But the stink of death is so strong near the creature, so sickening, that it can overwhelm the fortitude of the hardiest warrior, slowing his movement and enfeebling his attacks. Even so, if you can stand the smell, pressing the corruption zombie into melee might be an effective way to put an end to the creature.

This isn't true of a gravehound zombie. So named because it's usually created from the corpse of a sizeable dog, a gravehound zombie is a melee monster like many other zombies. It's much faster than normal zombies, and its bite makes up in damage what it lacks in accuracy. The real problem with gravehounds is that their bite causes continuing decomposition around the wound. That trouble can persist even after the gravehound is destroyed. When the gravehound goes down, it lashes out one final time. If it hits you, its jaws lock. Until you can use brute force to open the death grip, you have to drag the hound around and deal with the decay its teeth cause. Being hindered like that during a battle can be more than just a minor nuisance.

When you're playing D&D, you want exciting entertainment. Defeating these exotic zombies is all the more satisfying, the possibility of horrible death all the more threatening, given their terrifying abilities. They set a great precedent for the zombie category's future expansion, and the prospect of even more terrifying fun.

Link: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drdd/20071022

 :D

jedimastert

Quote from: James McMurrayIf there's arule that monsters can't use magic weapons, I can see that being house ruled almost universally.

I think they can use the magic weapon, but the implication is that only PCs will get the extra damage die on a crit.

James McMurray

Quote from: jedimastertI think they can use the magic weapon, but the implication is that only PCs will get the extra damage die on a crit.

That's one way to read it, but it seems kinda silly for them to design it like that. It becomes a complicating factor for monsters instead of a simplifying one, because now you have to remember which effects they can and can't benefit from. I'm much more inclined that this was just a guy penning his thoughts and leaving unintentional loopholes in his words than that their design team opted to go so far afield.

I'd bet dollars to donuts that's not what they meant.


Haffrung

Regardless of whether monsters can use magic weapons, the upshot of the new crit rule is that PCs always have a chance for a crit, while monsters will rarely have a chance for a crit. The PCs have kewl new powers, HP inflation, etc. while monsters don't keep pace. It's pretty clear by now that 4E is aiming for a superheroic powergaming feel, with more and more of the lethal dangers to PCs being mitigated or done away with. Spider-Man never gets killed by his opponents. Why should PowerAxeDwarf-Man? I'm really curious if we'll see some sort of script immunity hard-coded into the 4E rules: Mooks cannot kill PCs, only Named Foes can, or something like that.
 

James McMurray

Quote from: Haffrungthe upshot of the new crit rule is that PCs always have a chance for a crit, while monsters will rarely have a chance for a crit.

What is your basis for this statement? I see nothing that limits how often a monster is allowed to roll a 20, and there's even an example of a monster critting in the article.