CRITICAL HITS Weapons and Unarmed Strikes* have a special feature for player characters: Critical Hits. If a player character rolls a 20 for an attack roll with a Weapon or an Unarmed Strike, the attack is also a Critical Hit,which means it deals extra damage to the target; you roll the damage dice of the Weapon or Unarmed Strike a second time and add the second roll as extra damage to the target. For example, a Mace deals Bludgeoning Damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier. If you score a Critical Hit with the Mace, it instead deals 2d6 + your Strength modifier. If your Weapon or Unarmed Strike has no damage dice, it deals no extra damage on a Critical Hit.
Is this a sign that DMs are no longer getting the benefits of a 20 for critical damage?
maybe the mods should sticky some of these posts so we don't get so many of the same discussion. Not just the crits, but EVERY topic pertaining to OneD&D.
maybe the mods should sticky some of these posts so we don't get so many of the same discussion. Not just the crits, but EVERY topic pertaining to OneD&D.
A whole new one DnD space would be good, take it off of general and give it its own space
maybe the mods should sticky some of these posts so we don't get so many of the same discussion. Not just the crits, but EVERY topic pertaining to OneD&D.
A whole new one DnD space would be good, take it off of general and give it its own space
Yes. Per the playtest rules, Dungeon masters do not get the benefit of critical strikes.
You know what players don't get to do?
Breathe a 120-foot cone of elemental devastation that deals 20d6 damage.
The players get to be PCs. The DM gets to be the dungeons and the dragons. People are acting like DMs will never be able to do a cool thing ever again because crits are being monkeyed with and it's simply not true.
Yes. Per the playtest rules, Dungeon masters do not get the benefit of critical strikes.
You know what players don't get to do?
Breathe a 120-foot cone of elemental devastation that deals 20d6 damage.
The players get to be PCs. The DM gets to be the dungeons and the dragons. People are acting like DMs will never be able to do a cool thing ever again because crits are being monkeyed with and it's simply not true.
I think you're gonna need to add another post link to the sig Yurei =P
Heh. Absolutely not. I'm three threads in already trying to get people to think with their eyes and their brains instead of their goddamn knees and we're one whole day into the first of 18+ playtests. There's not enough signature link space in the world for this nonsense.
Heh. Absolutely not. I'm three threads in already trying to get people to think with their eyes and their brains instead of their goddamn knees and we're one whole day into the first of 18+ playtests. There's not enough signature link space in the world for this nonsense.
You are a beacon of light in a dark place my friend ^_^
Yes. Per the playtest rules, Dungeon masters do not get the benefit of critical strikes.
You know what players don't get to do?
Breathe a 120-foot cone of elemental devastation that deals 20d6 damage.
The players get to be PCs. The DM gets to be the dungeons and the dragons. People are acting like DMs will never be able to do a cool thing ever again because crits are being monkeyed with and it's simply not true.
This is the one that jumped at me as a DM, partly because in many combats it is only a monster critical hit that really creates concern for players in an average encounter even when set at deadly. But I realise that indicates a problem with design.
The Crit Hit rules overall are great, I will no longer have to increase all my monsters hit points to account for a critical hit effective ending the encounter in round 1. Monsters won’t need to be huge hit point sinks and it will encourage tactical play for the party to get the martial fighters into combat.
As long as monsters are balanced a bit better and can be more of a threat without needing either loads more of them or one that is buffed well beyond the published stats then this is a change I can get behind.
Yes. Per the playtest rules, Dungeon masters do not get the benefit of critical strikes.
You know what players don't get to do?
Breathe a 120-foot cone of elemental devastation that deals 20d6 damage.
The players get to be PCs. The DM gets to be the dungeons and the dragons. People are acting like DMs will never be able to do a cool thing ever again because crits are being monkeyed with and it's simply not true.
This is the one that jumped at me as a DM, partly because in many combats it is only a monster critical hit that really creates concern for players in an average encounter even when set at deadly. But I realise that indicates a problem with design.
The Crit Hit rules overall are great, I will no longer have to increase all my monsters hit points to account for a critical hit effective ending the encounter in round 1. Monsters won’t need to be huge hit point sinks and it will encourage tactical play for the party to get the martial fighters into combat.
As long as monsters are balanced a bit better and can be more of a threat without needing either loads more of them or one that is buffed well beyond the published stats then this is a change I can get behind.
I'm unconvinced this is the full truth and a hard rule till we actually see the rest of the playtest content or get Word of God that monsters can no longer crit, rather than just extrapolating based on that one sentence. It makes sense for a portion of the rules focused on players to only talk about players.
I'm unconvinced this is the full truth and a hard rule till we actually see the rest of the playtest content or get Word of God that monsters can no longer crit, rather than just extrapolating based on that one sentence. It makes sense for a portion of the rules focused on players to only talk about players.
Crawford explicitly said, in the EXTREMELY IMPORTANT video attached to the document drop that EVERYBODY SHOULD WATCH(!!!!) that this explicitly removed crits from monsters/NPCs. It's a player-only thing.
Seriously, people. Watch the video. It's as important as the actual document, and we can all tell when you haven't.
I'm cool with DMs not critting for the most part. The major thing about critting is the feeling of smashing your foes. That's a cool thing for a player, but for a DM? The goal isn't to smash enemies (ie PCs), but to provide an interesting fight for the players. Crits aren't the same for DMs as they are for Players because their roles ae different.
The only shame is the narrative prompts that crits currently provide good narrative prompts (at least at higher levels when they don't just behead the PCs), but that's not a massive deal.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I think this whole thing has to do with player options and effects.
none of it has been declared RAW and at the table DM has ultimate say in how the game roles.
example sure the monster that normally does average dmg on a normal hit but maybe on natural 20 does full damage.
or Maybe to get the feel of a monster that goes through phases of damage to show the power decrease as it gets hurt.
just an overall thought.
but from the perspective that 20s are no longer a crit for DMs, is like the dungeon master should not have counter spell or teleport spell prepared in a magic spell list for a bgg. This just does not make sense.
Of course, as this is playtest material for a game that won't be released for another two years, there's no reason to assume that it's even going to make it to the finished product.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Of course, as this is playtest material for a game that won't be released for another two years, there's no reason to assume that it's even going to make it to the finished product.
I wouldn't say no reason. It's here, so it's obviously on their minds. Granted it won't necessarily be in the finished product, but it's obviously being thought about, we're only 18-30 months away from it being released while it's going to have to be wrapped up long before then so it can be formatted, printed and distributed, not to mention that this is one of the foundational aspects of the game (since monster design will have to take this into account). It's not unreasonable to think that it will probably make it in.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
The new rule states
CRITICAL HITS Weapons and Unarmed Strikes* have a special feature for player characters: Critical Hits. If a player character rolls a 20 for an attack roll with a Weapon or an Unarmed Strike, the attack is also a Critical Hit, which means it deals extra damage to the target; you roll the damage dice of the Weapon or Unarmed Strike a second time and add the second roll as extra damage to the target. For example, a Mace deals Bludgeoning Damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier. If you score a Critical Hit with the Mace, it instead deals 2d6 + your Strength modifier. If your Weapon or Unarmed Strike has no damage dice, it deals no extra damage on a Critical Hit.
Is this a sign that DMs are no longer getting the benefits of a 20 for critical damage?
Yes.
That's what is currently in the new test rules, yes.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/149962-the-new-crit-rules-are-better-than-you-think-they
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/149913-nat20-nat1-auto-success-failure-in-the-oned-d
maybe the mods should sticky some of these posts so we don't get so many of the same discussion. Not just the crits, but EVERY topic pertaining to OneD&D.
Those were not exactly direct in the subject post.
A whole new one DnD space would be good, take it off of general and give it its own space
Excellent idea!
Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh.
Yes. Per the playtest rules, Dungeon masters do not get the benefit of critical strikes.
You know what players don't get to do?
Breathe a 120-foot cone of elemental devastation that deals 20d6 damage.
The players get to be PCs. The DM gets to be the dungeons and the dragons. People are acting like DMs will never be able to do a cool thing ever again because crits are being monkeyed with and it's simply not true.
Please do not contact or message me.
I think you're gonna need to add another post link to the sig Yurei =P
Heh. Absolutely not. I'm three threads in already trying to get people to think with their eyes and their brains instead of their goddamn knees and we're one whole day into the first of 18+ playtests. There's not enough signature link space in the world for this nonsense.
Please do not contact or message me.
You are a beacon of light in a dark place my friend ^_^
This is the one that jumped at me as a DM, partly because in many combats it is only a monster critical hit that really creates concern for players in an average encounter even when set at deadly. But I realise that indicates a problem with design.
The Crit Hit rules overall are great, I will no longer have to increase all my monsters hit points to account for a critical hit effective ending the encounter in round 1. Monsters won’t need to be huge hit point sinks and it will encourage tactical play for the party to get the martial fighters into combat.
As long as monsters are balanced a bit better and can be more of a threat without needing either loads more of them or one that is buffed well beyond the published stats then this is a change I can get behind.
This. It reduces the spike potential.
I'm unconvinced this is the full truth and a hard rule till we actually see the rest of the playtest content or get Word of God that monsters can no longer crit, rather than just extrapolating based on that one sentence. It makes sense for a portion of the rules focused on players to only talk about players.
Crawford explicitly said, in the EXTREMELY IMPORTANT video attached to the document drop that EVERYBODY SHOULD WATCH(!!!!) that this explicitly removed crits from monsters/NPCs. It's a player-only thing.
Seriously, people. Watch the video. It's as important as the actual document, and we can all tell when you haven't.
Please do not contact or message me.
I'm cool with DMs not critting for the most part. The major thing about critting is the feeling of smashing your foes. That's a cool thing for a player, but for a DM? The goal isn't to smash enemies (ie PCs), but to provide an interesting fight for the players. Crits aren't the same for DMs as they are for Players because their roles ae different.
The only shame is the narrative prompts that crits currently provide good narrative prompts (at least at higher levels when they don't just behead the PCs), but that's not a massive deal.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I think this whole thing has to do with player options and effects.
none of it has been declared RAW and at the table DM has ultimate say in how the game roles.
example sure the monster that normally does average dmg on a normal hit but maybe on natural 20 does full damage.
or Maybe to get the feel of a monster that goes through phases of damage to show the power decrease as it gets hurt.
just an overall thought.
but from the perspective that 20s are no longer a crit for DMs, is like the dungeon master should not have counter spell or teleport spell prepared in a magic spell list for a bgg. This just does not make sense.
What do you suppose they will do with the adamantine armor?
Get rid of it, re-flavor it or repurpose the idea?
Of course, as this is playtest material for a game that won't be released for another two years, there's no reason to assume that it's even going to make it to the finished product.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I wouldn't say no reason. It's here, so it's obviously on their minds. Granted it won't necessarily be in the finished product, but it's obviously being thought about, we're only 18-30 months away from it being released while it's going to have to be wrapped up long before then so it can be formatted, printed and distributed, not to mention that this is one of the foundational aspects of the game (since monster design will have to take this into account). It's not unreasonable to think that it will probably make it in.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Well spotted. A friend of mine and I were wondering how long it would take someone else to notice that. 😉
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting