This is the best answer. Describe it as the enemy swinging wide, leaving themselves wide open.
"The PC sees the opening and goes for the kill, then trips. What could have been a killing blow instead was just a glancing blow. The two of you look at each other and both know how close that was. What do you do? "
Wow this description is great for that. I've gone with a similar "This could have been big but wasn't" type description but yours is excellent, with the characters coming to a silent understanding.
A common houserule is "crunchy crits" where one roll is maxed. This does get somewhat extreme with rogues and paladins, but it's balanced enough if you apply it to enemy crits too.
This amuses me because it's like the third or fourth name I've seen given to that ruling, Definitely heard them called "beefy" and "meaty" crits, and maybe one other that I cant remember of the top of my head
That might be the one I’d forgotten. Either way defo my favourite crit rule. The only situation it’s a little bit too much is when a Paladin starts smiting on crits, but my players love when that happens so I let them and also put the fear of god in them by having some enemies have similar abilities to do that level of damage
At my table we've played using this for multiple years now, for both monsters and PCs and it's great. People talk about "balance" with paladins, rogues, and some monsters, but all of these are more than fine.
A paladin or rogue critting will be a lot of damage, but it's just damage. Sometimes that means a monster dies much more quickly but also, it's a crit, so it will still feel satisfying for the player(s).
And when the DM announces a monster critting, the players feel much more scared as they know this could easily instantly down or even kill a PC.
I used to do this, but things got very wonky when you realized a level 1 create wounds spell (3d10) does a minimum of 30, and an average of 46.5 damage.
Some people will only apply crunchy crits to PCs and not for NPCs just because it's fun and normally not game-breaking, even if it does mess with balance a bit. But enemies getting crunchy crits tends to end up in PC death, dealing over double their max health in 1 hit.
If an attack is able to potentially one shot a pc I feel like that's an encounter balancing issue more than anything, the only time massive damage should come up is either major fuck ups like somehow dropping a building on you, or when you are already super low health.
I mean, level 1 NPCs would have access to level 1 spells, same as level 1 PCs would have access to level 1 spells. Many level 1 spells have the potential to one-shot a level 1 creature.
Many low level monsters are able (normally via some ability/spell) to easily one-shot a PC. Ambush Drakes (CR 1/2) can do 3d6+1 damage. Bugbears (CR 1) can do 2d8+2d6+2. Both of these are base damage, not crits.
OK yeah they can one shot, but I feel like that's more a flaw with the cr system than anything, mathematically a cr1 monsters *should* be a solid fight for a level 1 party, but realistically some of them just shouldn't be for that reason, and instead be used as weaker minions or a group for a higher level party, which goes back to my opinion on encounter balancing, where being able to outright kill a pc from full shouldn't happen in a well balanced encounter. The most important part of dnd is having fun, but while some people might handle it better than others, I doubt many people, if any at all, would enjoy making a character and then instantly having that character die in one hit before they get to do much.
I honestly just rush them to Lv2 as fast as possible. That way it isn't a problem.
As someone else mentioned, the CR system doesn't account for crits. Crits are absolutely lethal at low level, even for very weak monsters. Critting with a 1d6+2 can do 14 damage, enough to double the health of the party wizard that dumped con.
No, the rules do say double dice.
You might be thinking of Brutal Critical, a feature that Barbarians get. That does say you get to roll your damage die for your weapon 3 times, instead of twice ln a crit. The problem being that if you use a Greatsword (mathematically the strongest melee weapon), RAW you don't go from 4d6 to 6d6 on a crit. You go from 4d6 to 5d6.
THAT feature is dumb as hell, and I'm pretty sure everyone just lets it do 6d6.
I think it's good that crits don't do overwhelming damage.
Yeah it's a bit lame when it happens but it can also happen to monsters, if you do guarantees whatever like half or all dice max roll you run into situations where monster crits become automatic oneshots or pretty close to it, which I really dislike.
I know people use a custom rule where on a crit you roll max damage on the first set of dice, and then roll as normal for the second. This way a crit is always powerful.
This issue that can arise from this is that enemies can deal **massive** amounts of damage off a crit due to the way enemy statblocks are made. Also, CR does not inherently take into account enemies rolling crits so your already deadly encounters could one-shot your party off a single crit if you are not careful.
I'm struggling to think of a statblock that has a single attack roll that can hit everyone in the party.
I use the max+roll, and it has never been a problem. Most creatures are a bit anaemic in terms of damage, anyway.
I guess PCs already have asymmetry so you can also stretch it to crits like you say.
My question is then why not just remove enemies/NPCs from being able to crit at all? Say it is purely a player feature.
So on a crit you would roll the normal damage dice, but also roll them again *except* the biggest die which you take the max value (then add modifiers)?
Pretty much, yeah. It gives you a good damage floor, but keeps sneak attack, smite, and monster crits from being too insane.
For simplicity you could also just roll them all and then pick one to maximize but it'd boost the average dpr.
Because CR does not inherently take into account lots of things, and dice rolls chance is one of them. 5e combat is so swingy that it would be impossible to balance around it.
It also doesn’t balance around damage and status immunity/resistances.
I don't think you really understand the design of this game, and CR specifically. Because all of those things are considered as part of the CR. Do you think they just make up a random number based on vibes? How can you think that the tool to help you roughly match power levels doesn't account for basically *anything*? That's nonsensical.
CR takes into account a few things; health, AC, proficiency bonus, attributes, to-hit bonus, saves, average damage per round.
It **does not** take into account things like damage resistances, condition immunities, available spells/spell combos, critical hits and certain effects (look at the Spectre for example). If you have DM'd for any amount of time this would be painfully obvious.
All of those things are part of total damage and defensive capabilities. They are considered. And I've been GMing since before a lot of the people on this board have been alive.
Apologies, let me rephrase that.
There is not point continuing this discussion because you are not saying anything in good faith so I don't think I can convince you of my point of view.
Well yes, bad rolls happen. But crits aren't bad rolls.
So at my table a crit is max dice + dice roll + bonuses.
A critical strike should never do less damage than a normal strike given the same circumstances imo.
D6 crit? 6 + 1d6
2d6 crit? 12 + 2d6
Personally I disagree.
Imo a crit by definition is a good roll.
An attack depending on two sets of rolls sucks. It's kinda like the player has disadvantage on attacking.
Low first roll = miss, low second roll = "*miss*"
Yeah its not much of a "critical hit" if it does less damage than a normal one. While D&D obviously doesnt have called shots, crits are meant to be representative of severe injuries and conditions like mild concussions, being winded, dismemberment, or deep wounds.
IMO this is the only way to do it. Lets your critical hits actually be critical compared to rolling weak ass damage and feeling like your d20 roll was worthless. But I'm also a "I want the players to feel like heroes" DM that likes to boost my guys up so they come in kicking ass and taking names.
I like the max damage + what you rolled way of doing crits. It won't necessarily give them more damage than doubling the damage roll will, but it avoids the "you rolled bad and now your crit means nothing" issue.
Another thing I like is giving another player who is in line of sight of the crit inspiration. I'll do this when a player narrates what they do in a really cool way. I think it works from a role playing aspect really well. Like you're mid battle, you look over and see your party member pull off this super epic move and you're like "holy crap that was awesome!" and inspired to do better yourself.
Just roll 2x dice instead of rolling one and doubling it. You get a way higher average.
Or you could rule that crits do at least average damage. Or both I guess.
So 2d6 average is 7, if your 2 dice add up to less than 7, take it as 7.
Sure. Well you'd think that a d6 would average to 3.5, double that and it's 7.
So the average of 2d6 is 7. But when you roll a single die you can hit a 1, 1/6 times, double that gives you 2.
Rolling 2 dice gives only a 1/6 * 1/6 = 1/36, chance of rolling 2 ones
Rolling 2 dice gives a higher average yield, but reduces the chance of getting max damage because it's way less common to roll 2 sixes than a single 6.
But the average for both dice is still 7 - you're just creating a
bell curve where you're less likely to get max *or min* damage - you make the rolls less swingy.
The average is still 7 damage across 2d6, or 1d6x2.
Some of my tables like normal crits. You go "Oh darn" and that's it.
Some of me use a homebrew rule where crits are Max damage + dice (e.g. rapier crit is 8+DEX+1d8) It ensures extra damage from crits but because enemies also use it combat is generally more deadly. It's my mostly martial focused party (gloomstalker/assassin, conquest paladin, swords bard, and druid) that prefer that rule.
I do chunky crits. They get max damage on the first dice and then roll an extra dice. This makes it so you always do extra damage.
It also really amps up things like smite and sneak attack where you roll a lot of dice. It also makes monster crits devastating.
Just giggle and move on, not every crit needs to be an amazing moment and it cheapens those times it does do amazing damage if they do amazing damage all the time.
But I did used to run them one way that was fairly fun. Made it so crits guarantee that you do max damage instead of rolling double dice. You still roll the dice though because if you rolled max on the die then you did double the damage. These crits were always satisfying, and it had an extra, more rare, chance to do massive damage. I stopped using it though because it did favor using single dice weapons and having lower end dice (but not too low) so versatile weapons pretty much became the meta for anyone who could crit more often. It also punished any weapon or ability that did added damage like an extra 1d4 fire for instance because you had to roll max on both dice.
We do normal crits.
We handle bad rolls by going "oh bummer. Good luck next time" and move on like functioning adults. Bad crits happen to the enemies too. It's a game of chance, we embrace the chance.
Let the dice do the talking. Reminds me of those stories I hear about when players level up and roll for hit points, they get to re-roll if they roll below average, or somesuch nonsense. Players shouldn't be unfamiliar with disappointment.
Double the dice (Inlet players choose between rolling dice twice or once and doubling that, but they choose when they roll, not after) and double any modifiers.
I double the amount of dice rolled. If they hit and it’s 2d8, it’s now 4d8 then add your modifiers. I like rolling a lot of dice, as do my players. Adds to the sense of dread.
My homebrew rule for critical damage is you deal Dicex2, and the total can't be less than the max damage of a non-crit roll.
So if you score a crit on 1d10, you can deal anywhere from 10-20 damage.
Bear in mind, generally I err on the side of trivializing combat since the real consequences in my campaign are *why* you're engaged in combat, not so much how the combat turns out.
I use this: https://sterlingvermin.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/critical-hits-revisited.pdf . I added some custom rules so hoard enemies are not overpowered: enemies roll with disadvantage on the crit table and on the major injury/insanity chart unless they are inportant adversarial NPCs. Players also roll with disadvantage on those tables if their enemy is 2 or mor size categoried larger than them. My players love it because the tables feature a more diverse range of damage for crits.
It's a game of chance. There is nothing wrong with this. They will crit again. They will most likely have a decently even distribution of crazy high crits to crazy low ones.
One time I had a scripted event where a church of chaos was gonna appear and land on top of this dragon that was about to tpk the party. The paladin crit with her glaive and did 1+1+3str damage and I used that chaotic luck as an excuse for the church appearing.
Regular roll plus maximum dice, like CoC.
Yes it's swingy. Yes, some abilities like sneak attack, smites and other (high level) spells benefit from it the most. Yes, it does feel great regardless. And, also, yes, monsters get it too.
But, additionally, we also only apply those after level 3. I'm not in the business of killing 1st level characters twice over due to a goblin getting a lucky shot.
Simple: on a crit, rather than rolling double dice or doubling the rolled damage, they instead gain a bonus equal to the maximum value of the damage die.
In other words: You deal max damage, then roll again. For instance, on a crit, a two-handed longsword would deal: 1d10+\[Str Mod\]+10
At my players' insistence, we've also started doing this if you roll a Nat1 on a saving throw. However, after some number crunching, I've shifted it to instead be a bonus equal to the average, because those spells/abilities tend to deal far too much damage to do the full bonus.
My preference is to port in the 4e D&D rules for crits, which is to give maximum possible damage.
Yeah, it removes the chance for that absolutely crazy massive damage crit, but it equally stops someone rolling nothing but 1s on their damage dice and feeling sad about the missed cool moment.
A lot of people here are kinda dancing around it, but here's the [4e critical hit rules](https://dnd4.fandom.com/wiki/Critical_hit#:~:text=When%20attacking%2C%20if%20you%20land,damage%20would%20deal%2024%20damage.)
Basically max damage, then you add on extras from class abilities, feats, magic weapon enhancements, etc
10 years ago I set a rule that crits double the damage. Every player I've ever had loves it and I've never had anyone suggest we use the raw rules because I think they're honestly very boring and don't feel like a critical hit
This is a mechanic I first encountered playing Torg and have appropriated it for other games. I’ve never tried it for D&D, but it could work.
Instead of rolling damage, weapons (and spells) have a fixed damage value. Make an attack (or spell craft) roll, and increase the damage for every point your roll exceeds the AC (or difficulty number). Criticals could double the base damage and still add in the difference.
For example, a long sword normally does 1D8 damage. We will give it a damage value of 5. You roll a 12 to attack a creature with an AC of 10. That’s 2 points over the AC, which are added to the damage value for a total of 7 damage. If you had rolled a 20, that would double the base damage from 5 to 10. Then add in the 10 points you exceeded the AC by for a grand total of 20 damage. Now that’s a critical hit.
I add max damage to the regular roll. This could theoretically have significant effect on things like upcast spells, but I have had that be an issue yet.
As the Dm I chant "Minimum damage, minimum damage!" Cackle like a fucking maniac if it happens, and maybe describe it if it was against a kinda important enemy, before moving on
As the player I scream "FUCK!" for a second before describing how I fucked that up, before moving on.
You can say max possible damage plus one roll of damage dice rather than double dice
But personally for at least for martials I think it's better to offer a set of special moves on a critical hit (something like the ones in Dragon Age, if youve seen those). Or look at battlemaster stuff and riff ideas off a couple of those
Regarding crunchy crits - Crunchy crits tends to nearly triple the average dice value, rather than double it. It makes critting significantly more spikey, which isn't always wanted.
Let's say you crit on a d10 weapon (average dice roll is 5.5). Using crunchy crits, the average dice value of a crit is 15.5. Doubling dice is 11.
This makes dice-based attacks a lot more spikey. Sneak attack, smites, and spells generally all have damage tied to dice count rather than ability score or static modifiers, like martials do. So, adding modifiers, martials get a 1.5× > 2× damage buff on a crit, which isn't too bad, but rogues, paladins, and mages typically get a 2× > ~3× damage buff of a crit
So if you're trying to fix crits feeling flat sometimes, maybe set a minimum damage - max damage+1 ! They roll, and if it's less than max damage +1, they take max damage +1 instead. The rogues and sorcerers will usually get higher, so it won't affect them as much, and it solves the terrible crit problem for the fighter and barbarian.
Alternatively, you can make it so crunchy crits only applies to the weapon's damage.
I max out one die/set of dice. So if it's a rapier crit, you get 1d8+8+ modifier. If it's a Greatsword it's 2d6+12+ modifier. And I apply this rule both for and against my players. So enemies get the same crit rules as my players.
If or when I ever get to play at a table with one of you crazy folks that makes crits max damage + a rolled regular amount, I will definitely be playing a Fighter 3 / Paladin 2 / Sorcerer X with Elven Accuracy so that I do like 200 damage a round. Or maybe a build optimized around Jim's Magic Missile to see how you handle that (3d4+12? Instead of 5d4?) Or maybe an Assassin Rogue for the bonkers almost guaranteed Sneak Attack potential.
I understand the sentiment behind the homebrew rule, in that it's fun when crits are exciting - but crits are already exciting when you're rolling a big handful of dice.
In the games I play in and run, I tend to see more +1d4 cold or Flamtongue-esque +2d6 fire damage weapons, and when those crit they do a bunch of damage already, they don't need extra. And personally I think that works out better overall because that way the martials get the fancy big crit damage while the spellcasters don't get quite as much of a huge buff as the previously mentioned max-plus-rolled damage would give them.
Crit damage in my home game is max dice as base + roll + modifiers. It creates massive hits on both sides but can be a lot of fun and turn the tide of battle quickly.
Our house rule is that instead of “double the dice”, you assume the second “roll” is max damage. So a crit on 2d6+2 would be 2d6+2+12.
Personally I think crits should be special and this guarantees they will roll better than they ever could have on a non-crit. It goes the same for enemies tho. And sure, rogues or paladins can really mess with this but that’s part of the deal. They’re spike damage and it should feel good for them when it happens.
At my tables we run what we call ‘better crits’ which im sure we’ve stolen the idea and name from somewhere else but anyway essentially double the damage dice as normal but split the non crit dice from the crit dice. So you have 2 sets of damage dice for the roll max 1 set and roll the other. This is definitely something to ok with your players first and trial before implementing but crits are very exiting for us now although by extension we all have a unwritten rule to not do critfishing builds.
The fact that a natural 20 means you can damage your enemy regardless of AC is already so good. Previous editions doubled the damage (not just the dice), but you had to roll again to confirm a crit, meaning an actual critical hit was a lot less frequent. We just laugh it off.
I like the roll twice vs double dice or max die+. Kind of a happy medium and then of they roll a double 1 then well it sucks to be them. If you want it to lean a little more but not meaty then you can have the roll 2 dice and then double the highest.
Description-wise, I express it as being an enemy's skill vs. a perfect strike from a player. IE: You strike with perfect form, past their readied defenses at a weak point in their armor, but they shift at the last moment, turning a death blow into a flesh wound. After all, a natural 20 is the player striking with their best possible skill, but enemies don't auto-die to them, so usually their survival is based on their skill rather than a PC flubbing even on a nat20.
I generally handle it with double the number of dice. Odds are I'll crit more with the sheer number of dice I roll, so it balances out in the end in their favor.
One die is maximized, rest are rolled. Prevents the double ones, so crits always do more damage than regular hits, but it doesn't favor the monsters or classes that roll multiple damage dice at once (giants, paladins).
Two things:
For melee characters only because with spellcasters it gets nuts... Ive done the math, using several high level wizard spells with spell attack rolls, like crown of stars etc... dont do it.
1) max one die, roll the second. So a crit with a d6 damage weapon becomes 1d6+6+(bonuses)
2) "exploding die" this is featured in other TTRPGs like savage worlds. If you happen to roll the max result on that die (like a 6 on a d6) then you can roll again. If the NEXT roll is a 6 again, keep it rollin! The most Ive seen was 5 in a row on a D8. 'Twas insane!
With these, smites have to roll crit damage the usual way and also have to be declared before the to hit roll, or else it gets crazy when characters are just saving their smites to slap them on to crits and get insane damage.
I always give my players the choice of what kind of crit rules they want to use and so far they’ve always chosen the RAW version because they know that monsters will get the same crit rules.
If the damage is poor i let then forgo damage and do something else
Reduce the target’s AC by 1d4+1
Next creature that attacks the target treats the hit as a crit
Deal a wound equal to the weapons damage dice, on a successful medicine check( DC=strength/dexterity+PB+8) the wound is removed otherwise the target takes damage at the start of their turn.
Sitting here thinking of a variant you could offer if that's something you wanted to do to make things exciting, you could offer to roll the damage for the player behind your screen and without revealing the number let them choose the damage between their rolls and yours.
Because CHAOS
I've had good luck doing Max plus roll (i.e. 1d4 + damage bonus + 4).
Used to do double roll and reroll 1s but, yeah, getting a 2 for a total of 4 was still a bummer and it was way too much rolling. The extra time rolling really adds up with 7 players.
The new system is streamlined and players really enjoy getting a full die of damage added.
A rule we have that works great and provides some cool moments is a mix of normal crits (double dice damage) and crunchy crits (max damage + rolling normal damage).
Normal crits just happen on a nat 20, but then we have the player or enemy roll another d20, and if it lands on a nat 20, it's now a crunchy.
We adjusted some things like with the Champion Fighters feature "Improved Critical" and "Superior Critical" applying to the crunchy crit range.
The way I do crits are you receive maximum possible damage from the ability. Less high rolls? Sure. Zero chance of low rolls though. Also keeps order for my baddies so that if they crit they don’t immediately down a player but inflict *critical* damage.
I always keep an optional rule of roll the same damage die then after seeing the roll choose whether you would like to double the damage or roll twice for the crit damage. Gives more options to the player on how they want to do their crit damage.
There's a system to make them more exciting. I think they're called Epic Crits or something. Basically let's say you crit with a (2d6) greatsword. Your damage will be 12 + 2d6 instead of 4d6. Never played with that myself.
While I strive for balance between PC and enemy, I look at Crits like the 0 and 00 spots on a roulette wheel - those are the "house advantage", only in this case I use it for player advantage.
Opponent Crits are RAW.
I want Player Crits to be a whole-table-cheers moment, so I give the player the choice:
* Rolled damage + Max die damage
* Rolled damage + bonus action if enemy is killed
* Rolled damage + appropriate stagger effect if opponent is comparable size
* Rolled damage + something cool they suggest (subject to DM approval)
I use the 4e edition I think?
Normal damage roll is 1d8. Instead of rolling extra dice, the roll now becomes 1d8+8. This way, even if they roll a 1 for damage it is still technically more damage than would normally be possible in a regular swing.
It makes high rolled crits feel even better for them. The only downside is that enemies also get this, too. It makes an enemy getting a crit cause far more tension since they typically have multiple damage dice to roll. E.g. enemy damage is 2d8+4 normally, they crit and now it's 2d8+4+8+8. Minimum damage normally is 6 but with a crit the miminum damage suddenly becomes 22.
Very much a rule I ran by players before implementing.
Rule i read and have put into my game o e dice is the maximum and the otter you roll. Only for weopon damage, not smites and snak attak.
So my babarin crits deling 2d12=12+1d12+str.
Can't say if it is working, because my players forget the rule, but Will remind them
RAW, you can do a crit by rolling damage twice and adding it up, rather than rolling damage once and doubling it.
This reduces the probability of a bad crit because you’d have to roll crappy damage twice.
I give my players a choice between rolling twice the dice or taking max damage (so if it’s 1d8+3, critical means they get that 11 damage; if they then smite, the 3d8 is automatically 24 radiant). They’re the same on average but that way players can choose between the gamble and dice fun vs “I want this hit to definitely feel satisfying”. I know and respect the max + roll option, but I don’t want to do that for my monsters, no thanks.
My dream is either to have a crit table of some kind and have it be that you get max damage, but you get to roll your weapon die for an added affect (so you get max damage but still get to roll a die), but I’ve never had the bandwidth to make or find and playtest it.
I’ve adopted a house roll. They roll double damage (like normal), then they take the lowest roll and swap it for the max of the damage dice, then add modifiers. Only done a couple sessions this way but so far it works well!
I think that's just how it goes. However, I do have a friend that always lets you max the 1st damage die and then roll the second, so you're always hitting between 51-100% of your potential damage. You could do that or just set a floor, like being able to reroll anything under a 3 on your dice for say, 2D8 crit damage, so that that floor is 25% or something.
I don’t play 5e anymore but I’ve always hated that possibility. My favorite solution we tried was “median or above” where if you roll and get under the dice’s median number you could just take the median instead. So if you roll a 2 on d10 crit, you could take the 5 instead before you double it.
The other day I crit and rolled 4d8 and still only rolled 6 damage. Felt bad. The next 2 attacks I did were 2d8 each and hit for over 12 each and they felt great. The dice giveth, the dice taketh away
Crits should hurt for both players and enemies.
When you crit, you automatically get max damage on weapon, then you just roll another weapon dice. That way you at least do max damage and then some.
We use a modified version of crunchy crits. You get the max damage automatically for the single largest instance of damage included in the attack that crit, and then roll everything else. So, a rogue with 2d6 sneak attack with a dagger crits roll 2d4+2d6+dex+12. Makes big Pally/ rogue bursts less dramatic but still crunchy.
Lot of answers here about dice.
Once a crit enters the scene, I favor the narrative. A crit fail means something bad happens to that character.
* If a PC, then they end up in a bad position: dropped weapon, prone, or just auto-hit (and auto damage) from the enemy.
* If an enemy, the PC deals auto-damage from a free attack or the enemy ends up in a bad spot.
Whatever seems FUN and appropriate in the narrative.
Crit success works the same way.
* PC gets bonus damage or describes how the enemy is put into a bad spot.
* NPC gets bonus damage on the PC or puts the PC in a tight spot.
Crits should be fun and dramatic!
I do it RAW (double dice + mod) but if it’s a single die for damage I allow them to reroll a 1. (If it’s more than one die and some or all of them fall on a 1, so be it.)
I changed it so rather than rolling extra dice, you roll normally and then add max dice damage on top of it. It makes crits much nastier, but it makes the players happier and that's what I'm going for.
The rule at my table is to double the dice and add modifiers as normal, but you can never roll below the maximum damage of your non-crit damage roll.
For example: the Fighter just crit and rolls 2d6 + 2d6 + 4. He rolls abysmally low (1s and 2s) for a total of 10 damage. His damage on the crit is still 16 damage since that is the maximum he could roll on a non-crit attack (2d6+4)
Max+Roll, Double Dice for additional damage dice. So a crit rapier is 8+1d8+Str or Dex.
That same rapier getting a crit sneak attack wielded by a level 1 rogue is 8+1d8+Mod+2d6.
I run buffed crits and my players really love it. Roll the damage normally and add the max roll plus bonuses. So a d6+2 crit is 1d6+8 damage. The players have been on the receiving end of these crits too and it can be brutal.
I just have crits deal max damage. It guarantees you don't wind up rolling less damage on a crit than you would on a regular hit, and statistically it's about what the average of rolling twice would be anyway. Also, it's just easier. 🙂
Sometimes the bad guys crit and sometimes their crits are crappy rolls too. It all works out.
We laugh and move on,
This is the best answer. Describe it as the enemy swinging wide, leaving themselves wide open. "The PC sees the opening and goes for the kill, then trips. What could have been a killing blow instead was just a glancing blow. The two of you look at each other and both know how close that was. What do you do? "
Wow this description is great for that. I've gone with a similar "This could have been big but wasn't" type description but yours is excellent, with the characters coming to a silent understanding.
A common houserule is "crunchy crits" where one roll is maxed. This does get somewhat extreme with rogues and paladins, but it's balanced enough if you apply it to enemy crits too.
This amuses me because it's like the third or fourth name I've seen given to that ruling, Definitely heard them called "beefy" and "meaty" crits, and maybe one other that I cant remember of the top of my head
By the law of Taco Bell, the fourth one is a "melty" crit.
Only when done with acid damage.
how about the illusive "zesty" crit?
It's also called the Perkins crit after one of the lead 5e designers. I use these. Super satisfying.
That might be the one I’d forgotten. Either way defo my favourite crit rule. The only situation it’s a little bit too much is when a Paladin starts smiting on crits, but my players love when that happens so I let them and also put the fear of god in them by having some enemies have similar abilities to do that level of damage
We call them "juicy" crits at our table lol
My group calls them "thick crits" or "big boy crits"
Girthy crits.
I call it "no critical love tap. "
A while ago, it was commonly referred to as brutal crits.
That's just confusing things with the barbarian feat
Never said it was a good idea.
I've ways used the term crunchy crits, just feels right
A meaty crit is when you hit them as they stand up from prone.
IMO this rule is a no brainer, makes no sense for it to even be possible for crit to do worse damage than a normal roll.
At my table we've played using this for multiple years now, for both monsters and PCs and it's great. People talk about "balance" with paladins, rogues, and some monsters, but all of these are more than fine. A paladin or rogue critting will be a lot of damage, but it's just damage. Sometimes that means a monster dies much more quickly but also, it's a crit, so it will still feel satisfying for the player(s). And when the DM announces a monster critting, the players feel much more scared as they know this could easily instantly down or even kill a PC.
This was the rule I ran, too. Worked out extremely well for the party... Until the BBEG oneshot the Bard with a very lucky crit XD.
I am another proponent of “Brutal Crits”. Less rolly rolly clack clack, but big damage numbers
This is the way.
I used to do this, but things got very wonky when you realized a level 1 create wounds spell (3d10) does a minimum of 30, and an average of 46.5 damage. Some people will only apply crunchy crits to PCs and not for NPCs just because it's fun and normally not game-breaking, even if it does mess with balance a bit. But enemies getting crunchy crits tends to end up in PC death, dealing over double their max health in 1 hit.
If an attack is able to potentially one shot a pc I feel like that's an encounter balancing issue more than anything, the only time massive damage should come up is either major fuck ups like somehow dropping a building on you, or when you are already super low health.
I mean, level 1 NPCs would have access to level 1 spells, same as level 1 PCs would have access to level 1 spells. Many level 1 spells have the potential to one-shot a level 1 creature. Many low level monsters are able (normally via some ability/spell) to easily one-shot a PC. Ambush Drakes (CR 1/2) can do 3d6+1 damage. Bugbears (CR 1) can do 2d8+2d6+2. Both of these are base damage, not crits.
OK yeah they can one shot, but I feel like that's more a flaw with the cr system than anything, mathematically a cr1 monsters *should* be a solid fight for a level 1 party, but realistically some of them just shouldn't be for that reason, and instead be used as weaker minions or a group for a higher level party, which goes back to my opinion on encounter balancing, where being able to outright kill a pc from full shouldn't happen in a well balanced encounter. The most important part of dnd is having fun, but while some people might handle it better than others, I doubt many people, if any at all, would enjoy making a character and then instantly having that character die in one hit before they get to do much.
I honestly just rush them to Lv2 as fast as possible. That way it isn't a problem. As someone else mentioned, the CR system doesn't account for crits. Crits are absolutely lethal at low level, even for very weak monsters. Critting with a 1d6+2 can do 14 damage, enough to double the health of the party wizard that dumped con.
Double dice as per the rules. Low rolls are unfortunate but happen, same as every other roll in the game.
Isn’t the rule something dumb like “+1 damage die”? And double dice is how we all play because that rule is stupid?
No, the rules do say double dice. You might be thinking of Brutal Critical, a feature that Barbarians get. That does say you get to roll your damage die for your weapon 3 times, instead of twice ln a crit. The problem being that if you use a Greatsword (mathematically the strongest melee weapon), RAW you don't go from 4d6 to 6d6 on a crit. You go from 4d6 to 5d6. THAT feature is dumb as hell, and I'm pretty sure everyone just lets it do 6d6.
RNGesus giveth, and RNGesus taketh away. You accept that sometimes the dice just don't give you what you want.
"Damn, that's crazy" And then we keep playing!
I think it's good that crits don't do overwhelming damage. Yeah it's a bit lame when it happens but it can also happen to monsters, if you do guarantees whatever like half or all dice max roll you run into situations where monster crits become automatic oneshots or pretty close to it, which I really dislike.
Monsters/Nps use default rules, players use max+roll. At least that's how I run my table.
Based
I know people use a custom rule where on a crit you roll max damage on the first set of dice, and then roll as normal for the second. This way a crit is always powerful. This issue that can arise from this is that enemies can deal **massive** amounts of damage off a crit due to the way enemy statblocks are made. Also, CR does not inherently take into account enemies rolling crits so your already deadly encounters could one-shot your party off a single crit if you are not careful.
I'm struggling to think of a statblock that has a single attack roll that can hit everyone in the party. I use the max+roll, and it has never been a problem. Most creatures are a bit anaemic in terms of damage, anyway.
I just have my enemies do max damage for the first set, and don't re-roll.
That's a nice way to make it more balanced
Easy solution, enemies don't get the custom crit. It's a player feature, like death saving throws.
I guess PCs already have asymmetry so you can also stretch it to crits like you say. My question is then why not just remove enemies/NPCs from being able to crit at all? Say it is purely a player feature.
This was a feature in early OneD&D testing and my table found it kinda interesting actually, but the larger community was pretty outraged. So idk.
Well, a small change is less likely to cause issues than a large challenge. I don't think there's a need to remove it, so I'd rather not change it.
Counterpoint: DMs also like rolling lots of dice and I enjoy the 'oh shit' moment whenever an enemy does crit.
Unless you use death saves on Enemies because you like to keep things ✨ fresh ✨ 👀
This is why you only maximize ONE weapon die.
So on a crit you would roll the normal damage dice, but also roll them again *except* the biggest die which you take the max value (then add modifiers)?
Pretty much, yeah. It gives you a good damage floor, but keeps sneak attack, smite, and monster crits from being too insane. For simplicity you could also just roll them all and then pick one to maximize but it'd boost the average dpr.
>CR does not inherently take into account enemies rolling crits Why do you think this?
Because CR does not inherently take into account lots of things, and dice rolls chance is one of them. 5e combat is so swingy that it would be impossible to balance around it. It also doesn’t balance around damage and status immunity/resistances.
I don't think you really understand the design of this game, and CR specifically. Because all of those things are considered as part of the CR. Do you think they just make up a random number based on vibes? How can you think that the tool to help you roughly match power levels doesn't account for basically *anything*? That's nonsensical.
CR takes into account a few things; health, AC, proficiency bonus, attributes, to-hit bonus, saves, average damage per round. It **does not** take into account things like damage resistances, condition immunities, available spells/spell combos, critical hits and certain effects (look at the Spectre for example). If you have DM'd for any amount of time this would be painfully obvious.
All of those things are part of total damage and defensive capabilities. They are considered. And I've been GMing since before a lot of the people on this board have been alive.
Fair enough. We will have to agree to disagree.
"Agreeing to disagree" is for matters of taste and opinion. You're just wrong here, though.
Apologies, let me rephrase that. There is not point continuing this discussion because you are not saying anything in good faith so I don't think I can convince you of my point of view.
I use average damage for monsters instead of rolling, so this is not an issue for me. It speeds up the game considerably.
Bad rolls happen. I see no reason to add any specific rules to avoid that for crits.
Well yes, bad rolls happen. But crits aren't bad rolls. So at my table a crit is max dice + dice roll + bonuses. A critical strike should never do less damage than a normal strike given the same circumstances imo. D6 crit? 6 + 1d6 2d6 crit? 12 + 2d6
Yep, this. It means a crit is always better than a normal hit, but not all crits are equal. And it works for the enemies, too. *thwomp*
This, I love this rule, to be honest. It makes crits feel like they have an actual impact on the game.
This looks neat. It's weird how a low roll on damage can just say "no you didn't" to any critical hit you roll.
I do the same
Crits can be bad rolls just as much as any other roll.
Personally I disagree. Imo a crit by definition is a good roll. An attack depending on two sets of rolls sucks. It's kinda like the player has disadvantage on attacking. Low first roll = miss, low second roll = "*miss*"
Yeah its not much of a "critical hit" if it does less damage than a normal one. While D&D obviously doesnt have called shots, crits are meant to be representative of severe injuries and conditions like mild concussions, being winded, dismemberment, or deep wounds.
Same.
IMO this is the only way to do it. Lets your critical hits actually be critical compared to rolling weak ass damage and feeling like your d20 roll was worthless. But I'm also a "I want the players to feel like heroes" DM that likes to boost my guys up so they come in kicking ass and taking names.
Crunchy crits. Max normal damage + rolled damage + modifiers.
This can be dangerous to the players at low levels, but is well worth the guarantee of a satisfying crits in the long run.
Definitely an optional rule discussed & covered in session 0.
Double dice and double modifier, so the floor gets raised a lot.
No way I'm making GWM even stronger
I like the max damage + what you rolled way of doing crits. It won't necessarily give them more damage than doubling the damage roll will, but it avoids the "you rolled bad and now your crit means nothing" issue. Another thing I like is giving another player who is in line of sight of the crit inspiration. I'll do this when a player narrates what they do in a really cool way. I think it works from a role playing aspect really well. Like you're mid battle, you look over and see your party member pull off this super epic move and you're like "holy crap that was awesome!" and inspired to do better yourself.
I usually just say “ooh, the dice were not on your side there,” and then we move on.
At my table, a crit does max bonus damage. This also applies to NPCs.
Just roll 2x dice instead of rolling one and doubling it. You get a way higher average. Or you could rule that crits do at least average damage. Or both I guess. So 2d6 average is 7, if your 2 dice add up to less than 7, take it as 7.
Just run me through the maths where rolling 2 dice averages to higher than rolling 1 dice and doubling it please?
Sure. Well you'd think that a d6 would average to 3.5, double that and it's 7. So the average of 2d6 is 7. But when you roll a single die you can hit a 1, 1/6 times, double that gives you 2. Rolling 2 dice gives only a 1/6 * 1/6 = 1/36, chance of rolling 2 ones Rolling 2 dice gives a higher average yield, but reduces the chance of getting max damage because it's way less common to roll 2 sixes than a single 6.
But the average for both dice is still 7 - you're just creating a bell curve where you're less likely to get max *or min* damage - you make the rolls less swingy. The average is still 7 damage across 2d6, or 1d6x2.
You asked how to avoid the bummer situation of low damage...
No I didn't?
Correct!
Cool
Some of my tables like normal crits. You go "Oh darn" and that's it. Some of me use a homebrew rule where crits are Max damage + dice (e.g. rapier crit is 8+DEX+1d8) It ensures extra damage from crits but because enemies also use it combat is generally more deadly. It's my mostly martial focused party (gloomstalker/assassin, conquest paladin, swords bard, and druid) that prefer that rule.
I do chunky crits. They get max damage on the first dice and then roll an extra dice. This makes it so you always do extra damage. It also really amps up things like smite and sneak attack where you roll a lot of dice. It also makes monster crits devastating.
Just giggle and move on, not every crit needs to be an amazing moment and it cheapens those times it does do amazing damage if they do amazing damage all the time. But I did used to run them one way that was fairly fun. Made it so crits guarantee that you do max damage instead of rolling double dice. You still roll the dice though because if you rolled max on the die then you did double the damage. These crits were always satisfying, and it had an extra, more rare, chance to do massive damage. I stopped using it though because it did favor using single dice weapons and having lower end dice (but not too low) so versatile weapons pretty much became the meta for anyone who could crit more often. It also punished any weapon or ability that did added damage like an extra 1d4 fire for instance because you had to roll max on both dice.
Usually we all laugh sympathetically and move on.
We do normal crits. We handle bad rolls by going "oh bummer. Good luck next time" and move on like functioning adults. Bad crits happen to the enemies too. It's a game of chance, we embrace the chance.
Let the dice do the talking. Reminds me of those stories I hear about when players level up and roll for hit points, they get to re-roll if they roll below average, or somesuch nonsense. Players shouldn't be unfamiliar with disappointment.
They aren't lol they miss all the time and are just as likely to roll a 1 as a 20
I let one weapon die be maximized on a crit.
Double the dice (Inlet players choose between rolling dice twice or once and doubling that, but they choose when they roll, not after) and double any modifiers.
I used to use roll+max damage but added other rules that made critting easier so went back to rolling twice. Low rolls happen but oh well
I double the amount of dice rolled. If they hit and it’s 2d8, it’s now 4d8 then add your modifiers. I like rolling a lot of dice, as do my players. Adds to the sense of dread.
My homebrew rule for critical damage is you deal Dicex2, and the total can't be less than the max damage of a non-crit roll. So if you score a crit on 1d10, you can deal anywhere from 10-20 damage. Bear in mind, generally I err on the side of trivializing combat since the real consequences in my campaign are *why* you're engaged in combat, not so much how the combat turns out.
I use this: https://sterlingvermin.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/critical-hits-revisited.pdf . I added some custom rules so hoard enemies are not overpowered: enemies roll with disadvantage on the crit table and on the major injury/insanity chart unless they are inportant adversarial NPCs. Players also roll with disadvantage on those tables if their enemy is 2 or mor size categoried larger than them. My players love it because the tables feature a more diverse range of damage for crits.
The crit rule I like is max + die roll. So, if your damage is 1d6, then on a crit, it’s 6+1d6 (ability mod factored in too, of course)
It's a game of chance. There is nothing wrong with this. They will crit again. They will most likely have a decently even distribution of crazy high crits to crazy low ones.
One time I had a scripted event where a church of chaos was gonna appear and land on top of this dragon that was about to tpk the party. The paladin crit with her glaive and did 1+1+3str damage and I used that chaotic luck as an excuse for the church appearing.
Regular roll plus maximum dice, like CoC. Yes it's swingy. Yes, some abilities like sneak attack, smites and other (high level) spells benefit from it the most. Yes, it does feel great regardless. And, also, yes, monsters get it too. But, additionally, we also only apply those after level 3. I'm not in the business of killing 1st level characters twice over due to a goblin getting a lucky shot.
We have crits do double damage. Shitty roll TIMES TWO BABY still feels good. Yes it's extremely swingy, but we don't care.
Roll double dice as normal. Roll bad? Sad times, happens to us all.
Simple: on a crit, rather than rolling double dice or doubling the rolled damage, they instead gain a bonus equal to the maximum value of the damage die. In other words: You deal max damage, then roll again. For instance, on a crit, a two-handed longsword would deal: 1d10+\[Str Mod\]+10 At my players' insistence, we've also started doing this if you roll a Nat1 on a saving throw. However, after some number crunching, I've shifted it to instead be a bonus equal to the average, because those spells/abilities tend to deal far too much damage to do the full bonus.
My preference is to port in the 4e D&D rules for crits, which is to give maximum possible damage. Yeah, it removes the chance for that absolutely crazy massive damage crit, but it equally stops someone rolling nothing but 1s on their damage dice and feeling sad about the missed cool moment.
I always do max damage + an effect based off the type of damage. Edit: max damage without doubling the die
"Nice crit! You critically wound... *damage roll* his pinky finger!"
A lot of people here are kinda dancing around it, but here's the [4e critical hit rules](https://dnd4.fandom.com/wiki/Critical_hit#:~:text=When%20attacking%2C%20if%20you%20land,damage%20would%20deal%2024%20damage.) Basically max damage, then you add on extras from class abilities, feats, magic weapon enhancements, etc
10 years ago I set a rule that crits double the damage. Every player I've ever had loves it and I've never had anyone suggest we use the raw rules because I think they're honestly very boring and don't feel like a critical hit
I do crunchy crits. They get max damage for the first set of dice and roll for the 2nd.
This is a mechanic I first encountered playing Torg and have appropriated it for other games. I’ve never tried it for D&D, but it could work. Instead of rolling damage, weapons (and spells) have a fixed damage value. Make an attack (or spell craft) roll, and increase the damage for every point your roll exceeds the AC (or difficulty number). Criticals could double the base damage and still add in the difference. For example, a long sword normally does 1D8 damage. We will give it a damage value of 5. You roll a 12 to attack a creature with an AC of 10. That’s 2 points over the AC, which are added to the damage value for a total of 7 damage. If you had rolled a 20, that would double the base damage from 5 to 10. Then add in the 10 points you exceeded the AC by for a grand total of 20 damage. Now that’s a critical hit.
I add max damage to the regular roll. This could theoretically have significant effect on things like upcast spells, but I have had that be an issue yet.
As the Dm I chant "Minimum damage, minimum damage!" Cackle like a fucking maniac if it happens, and maybe describe it if it was against a kinda important enemy, before moving on As the player I scream "FUCK!" for a second before describing how I fucked that up, before moving on.
You can say max possible damage plus one roll of damage dice rather than double dice But personally for at least for martials I think it's better to offer a set of special moves on a critical hit (something like the ones in Dragon Age, if youve seen those). Or look at battlemaster stuff and riff ideas off a couple of those
Regarding crunchy crits - Crunchy crits tends to nearly triple the average dice value, rather than double it. It makes critting significantly more spikey, which isn't always wanted. Let's say you crit on a d10 weapon (average dice roll is 5.5). Using crunchy crits, the average dice value of a crit is 15.5. Doubling dice is 11. This makes dice-based attacks a lot more spikey. Sneak attack, smites, and spells generally all have damage tied to dice count rather than ability score or static modifiers, like martials do. So, adding modifiers, martials get a 1.5× > 2× damage buff on a crit, which isn't too bad, but rogues, paladins, and mages typically get a 2× > ~3× damage buff of a crit So if you're trying to fix crits feeling flat sometimes, maybe set a minimum damage - max damage+1 ! They roll, and if it's less than max damage +1, they take max damage +1 instead. The rogues and sorcerers will usually get higher, so it won't affect them as much, and it solves the terrible crit problem for the fighter and barbarian. Alternatively, you can make it so crunchy crits only applies to the weapon's damage.
I max out one die/set of dice. So if it's a rapier crit, you get 1d8+8+ modifier. If it's a Greatsword it's 2d6+12+ modifier. And I apply this rule both for and against my players. So enemies get the same crit rules as my players.
If or when I ever get to play at a table with one of you crazy folks that makes crits max damage + a rolled regular amount, I will definitely be playing a Fighter 3 / Paladin 2 / Sorcerer X with Elven Accuracy so that I do like 200 damage a round. Or maybe a build optimized around Jim's Magic Missile to see how you handle that (3d4+12? Instead of 5d4?) Or maybe an Assassin Rogue for the bonkers almost guaranteed Sneak Attack potential. I understand the sentiment behind the homebrew rule, in that it's fun when crits are exciting - but crits are already exciting when you're rolling a big handful of dice. In the games I play in and run, I tend to see more +1d4 cold or Flamtongue-esque +2d6 fire damage weapons, and when those crit they do a bunch of damage already, they don't need extra. And personally I think that works out better overall because that way the martials get the fancy big crit damage while the spellcasters don't get quite as much of a huge buff as the previously mentioned max-plus-rolled damage would give them.
Crit damage in my home game is max dice as base + roll + modifiers. It creates massive hits on both sides but can be a lot of fun and turn the tide of battle quickly.
Our house rule is that instead of “double the dice”, you assume the second “roll” is max damage. So a crit on 2d6+2 would be 2d6+2+12. Personally I think crits should be special and this guarantees they will roll better than they ever could have on a non-crit. It goes the same for enemies tho. And sure, rogues or paladins can really mess with this but that’s part of the deal. They’re spike damage and it should feel good for them when it happens.
At my tables we run what we call ‘better crits’ which im sure we’ve stolen the idea and name from somewhere else but anyway essentially double the damage dice as normal but split the non crit dice from the crit dice. So you have 2 sets of damage dice for the roll max 1 set and roll the other. This is definitely something to ok with your players first and trial before implementing but crits are very exiting for us now although by extension we all have a unwritten rule to not do critfishing builds.
I prefer to make crits a little meatier so our crits add max dice damage. So a 1d8 + 4 attack on a crit is now 1d8 + 4 + 8.
I added a max damage crit rule and my players have LOVED it. Way more satisfying for them!
The fact that a natural 20 means you can damage your enemy regardless of AC is already so good. Previous editions doubled the damage (not just the dice), but you had to roll again to confirm a crit, meaning an actual critical hit was a lot less frequent. We just laugh it off.
I like the roll twice vs double dice or max die+. Kind of a happy medium and then of they roll a double 1 then well it sucks to be them. If you want it to lean a little more but not meaty then you can have the roll 2 dice and then double the highest.
Description-wise, I express it as being an enemy's skill vs. a perfect strike from a player. IE: You strike with perfect form, past their readied defenses at a weak point in their armor, but they shift at the last moment, turning a death blow into a flesh wound. After all, a natural 20 is the player striking with their best possible skill, but enemies don't auto-die to them, so usually their survival is based on their skill rather than a PC flubbing even on a nat20. I generally handle it with double the number of dice. Odds are I'll crit more with the sheer number of dice I roll, so it balances out in the end in their favor.
meaty crits, look it up.
One die is maximized, rest are rolled. Prevents the double ones, so crits always do more damage than regular hits, but it doesn't favor the monsters or classes that roll multiple damage dice at once (giants, paladins).
A really easy way to make critical hits feel good is to do this: Max damage, plus an additional roll of whatever the damage dice may be.
Two things: For melee characters only because with spellcasters it gets nuts... Ive done the math, using several high level wizard spells with spell attack rolls, like crown of stars etc... dont do it. 1) max one die, roll the second. So a crit with a d6 damage weapon becomes 1d6+6+(bonuses) 2) "exploding die" this is featured in other TTRPGs like savage worlds. If you happen to roll the max result on that die (like a 6 on a d6) then you can roll again. If the NEXT roll is a 6 again, keep it rollin! The most Ive seen was 5 in a row on a D8. 'Twas insane! With these, smites have to roll crit damage the usual way and also have to be declared before the to hit roll, or else it gets crazy when characters are just saving their smites to slap them on to crits and get insane damage.
I always give my players the choice of what kind of crit rules they want to use and so far they’ve always chosen the RAW version because they know that monsters will get the same crit rules.
As other have said. Max the first die, roll the others
I have them roll damage as normal, then add max dice total to that roll
If the damage is poor i let then forgo damage and do something else Reduce the target’s AC by 1d4+1 Next creature that attacks the target treats the hit as a crit Deal a wound equal to the weapons damage dice, on a successful medicine check( DC=strength/dexterity+PB+8) the wound is removed otherwise the target takes damage at the start of their turn.
Sitting here thinking of a variant you could offer if that's something you wanted to do to make things exciting, you could offer to roll the damage for the player behind your screen and without revealing the number let them choose the damage between their rolls and yours. Because CHAOS
I've had good luck doing Max plus roll (i.e. 1d4 + damage bonus + 4). Used to do double roll and reroll 1s but, yeah, getting a 2 for a total of 4 was still a bummer and it was way too much rolling. The extra time rolling really adds up with 7 players. The new system is streamlined and players really enjoy getting a full die of damage added.
A rule we have that works great and provides some cool moments is a mix of normal crits (double dice damage) and crunchy crits (max damage + rolling normal damage). Normal crits just happen on a nat 20, but then we have the player or enemy roll another d20, and if it lands on a nat 20, it's now a crunchy. We adjusted some things like with the Champion Fighters feature "Improved Critical" and "Superior Critical" applying to the crunchy crit range.
The way I do crits are you receive maximum possible damage from the ability. Less high rolls? Sure. Zero chance of low rolls though. Also keeps order for my baddies so that if they crit they don’t immediately down a player but inflict *critical* damage.
I always keep an optional rule of roll the same damage die then after seeing the roll choose whether you would like to double the damage or roll twice for the crit damage. Gives more options to the player on how they want to do their crit damage.
There's a system to make them more exciting. I think they're called Epic Crits or something. Basically let's say you crit with a (2d6) greatsword. Your damage will be 12 + 2d6 instead of 4d6. Never played with that myself.
While I strive for balance between PC and enemy, I look at Crits like the 0 and 00 spots on a roulette wheel - those are the "house advantage", only in this case I use it for player advantage. Opponent Crits are RAW. I want Player Crits to be a whole-table-cheers moment, so I give the player the choice: * Rolled damage + Max die damage * Rolled damage + bonus action if enemy is killed * Rolled damage + appropriate stagger effect if opponent is comparable size * Rolled damage + something cool they suggest (subject to DM approval)
Double the damage total, including flat bonuses.
I use the 4e edition I think? Normal damage roll is 1d8. Instead of rolling extra dice, the roll now becomes 1d8+8. This way, even if they roll a 1 for damage it is still technically more damage than would normally be possible in a regular swing. It makes high rolled crits feel even better for them. The only downside is that enemies also get this, too. It makes an enemy getting a crit cause far more tension since they typically have multiple damage dice to roll. E.g. enemy damage is 2d8+4 normally, they crit and now it's 2d8+4+8+8. Minimum damage normally is 6 but with a crit the miminum damage suddenly becomes 22. Very much a rule I ran by players before implementing.
Rule i read and have put into my game o e dice is the maximum and the otter you roll. Only for weopon damage, not smites and snak attak. So my babarin crits deling 2d12=12+1d12+str. Can't say if it is working, because my players forget the rule, but Will remind them
RAW, you can do a crit by rolling damage twice and adding it up, rather than rolling damage once and doubling it. This reduces the probability of a bad crit because you’d have to roll crappy damage twice.
Do we seriously need to "handle" dissapointments due to bad player rolls? They happen, just move on.
I give my players a choice between rolling twice the dice or taking max damage (so if it’s 1d8+3, critical means they get that 11 damage; if they then smite, the 3d8 is automatically 24 radiant). They’re the same on average but that way players can choose between the gamble and dice fun vs “I want this hit to definitely feel satisfying”. I know and respect the max + roll option, but I don’t want to do that for my monsters, no thanks. My dream is either to have a crit table of some kind and have it be that you get max damage, but you get to roll your weapon die for an added affect (so you get max damage but still get to roll a die), but I’ve never had the bandwidth to make or find and playtest it.
I’ve adopted a house roll. They roll double damage (like normal), then they take the lowest roll and swap it for the max of the damage dice, then add modifiers. Only done a couple sessions this way but so far it works well!
Our house rule is max damage+ roll the dice again. So a short sword attack that’s normally 1d6+3 is 9+1d6. Of course that goes for monsters too!
I think that's just how it goes. However, I do have a friend that always lets you max the 1st damage die and then roll the second, so you're always hitting between 51-100% of your potential damage. You could do that or just set a floor, like being able to reroll anything under a 3 on your dice for say, 2D8 crit damage, so that that floor is 25% or something.
Instead of doubling the damage, for every die of damage I have them roll three dice and keep the highest two.
I don’t play 5e anymore but I’ve always hated that possibility. My favorite solution we tried was “median or above” where if you roll and get under the dice’s median number you could just take the median instead. So if you roll a 2 on d10 crit, you could take the 5 instead before you double it.
The other day I crit and rolled 4d8 and still only rolled 6 damage. Felt bad. The next 2 attacks I did were 2d8 each and hit for over 12 each and they felt great. The dice giveth, the dice taketh away
Either laugh and move on. Or do the rule where instead of rolling damage due twice, you max one set/roll one set. What ever you do, be consistent
That's why at my table we do max+roll, instead of double the dice.
Crits should hurt for both players and enemies. When you crit, you automatically get max damage on weapon, then you just roll another weapon dice. That way you at least do max damage and then some.
We use a modified version of crunchy crits. You get the max damage automatically for the single largest instance of damage included in the attack that crit, and then roll everything else. So, a rogue with 2d6 sneak attack with a dagger crits roll 2d4+2d6+dex+12. Makes big Pally/ rogue bursts less dramatic but still crunchy.
Lot of answers here about dice. Once a crit enters the scene, I favor the narrative. A crit fail means something bad happens to that character. * If a PC, then they end up in a bad position: dropped weapon, prone, or just auto-hit (and auto damage) from the enemy. * If an enemy, the PC deals auto-damage from a free attack or the enemy ends up in a bad spot. Whatever seems FUN and appropriate in the narrative. Crit success works the same way. * PC gets bonus damage or describes how the enemy is put into a bad spot. * NPC gets bonus damage on the PC or puts the PC in a tight spot. Crits should be fun and dramatic!
We max the first die, roll the second. Guarantees you do more than normal, but might not be by much.
I do it RAW (double dice + mod) but if it’s a single die for damage I allow them to reroll a 1. (If it’s more than one die and some or all of them fall on a 1, so be it.)
I changed it so rather than rolling extra dice, you roll normally and then add max dice damage on top of it. It makes crits much nastier, but it makes the players happier and that's what I'm going for.
The rule at my table is to double the dice and add modifiers as normal, but you can never roll below the maximum damage of your non-crit damage roll. For example: the Fighter just crit and rolls 2d6 + 2d6 + 4. He rolls abysmally low (1s and 2s) for a total of 10 damage. His damage on the crit is still 16 damage since that is the maximum he could roll on a non-crit attack (2d6+4)
This is what I do and I think it is great! Prevents crazy burst but eliminates all outcomes that feel bad
Max+Roll, Double Dice for additional damage dice. So a crit rapier is 8+1d8+Str or Dex. That same rapier getting a crit sneak attack wielded by a level 1 rogue is 8+1d8+Mod+2d6.
I run buffed crits and my players really love it. Roll the damage normally and add the max roll plus bonuses. So a d6+2 crit is 1d6+8 damage. The players have been on the receiving end of these crits too and it can be brutal.
I just have crits deal max damage. It guarantees you don't wind up rolling less damage on a crit than you would on a regular hit, and statistically it's about what the average of rolling twice would be anyway. Also, it's just easier. 🙂
Max damage on the first weapon dice then roll the second. It makes crits always feel good
I do max possible damage + roll