Ok imagine you are a Sourser. 1 lvl you gain 6 + your Constitution mod. If you have 3 then it is 6 -4 = 2hp. Ok now second lvl. You have 66% chance to roll 4 or less. If you do then now you have 0 hp and your death saves are useless
Ok imagine you are a Sourser. 1 lvl you gain 6 + your Constitution mod. If you have 3 then it is 6 -4 = 2hp. Ok now second lvl. You have 66% chance to roll 4 or less. If you do then now you have 0 hp and your death saves are useless
As the previous poster just said, you always get a minimum of 1 hit point on level up, because the rules explicitly say so.
yes you get, but then you minus 4.... K fine Ill better go
No, your minimum after applying all modifiers is 1. So even if you have a -3 Constitution and roll a 1, you gain the minimum 1 hit point, you don't lose 2
Also from a realistic stand point the player may hit the creature but not hit hard enough to injury it threw its armor. So something in chain mail if they don't hit the AC target the sword may have glanced off the armor instead of hurting the thing wearing the armor. Armor in real life would also take more damage from different weapons but thats not a thing here as its trying to make things simple for combat and make it flow easier. Remember this is a game that is suppose to be fun, real world doesn't have magic and dragons. Nothing like the goddess of luck playing with mortals when they are bored... "Oh that mortal is in a jam what happens if I do this" Aka the player rolls a Nat 20 or a 1.
That "OMG I crit" the bad guy moment is a nice thing for players when the chips maybe down too..... It also maybe that clutch moment of the night where the PC's where on death door and the rogue got a lucky back stab crit and saved the party. Or it could also be the point that turns the tides against the PCs if something crit there cleric and now the players are scrambling to save there healer while trying to survive the encounter.
It adds flavor to the story and something that more then just the "I roll my attacks and do x damage"
This is all my opinion so take it with a grain of salt.
That's because the Player's Handbook (same section, Step-By-Step Characters, Beyond First Level) has been errata'd since the first printing. The wording I've linked is the latest/correct wording.
I never said that rules are wrong. Rules cant be wrong but can be unrealistick and (just for my stupied head) dumb. DnD is a very unbalanced and in some places broken game. You can literally loose hitpoints just leveling up if you rolled 3 for Constitution. But still rules arent wrong. They are just dumb in sertain ways
There are some things that are unbalanced and maybe even broken, yes. Being able to critically hit or miss is not one of them.
Because it would be literally the depths of NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BEING REMOTELY SIMILAR TO A FACSIMILE OF FUN to be in a combat, where you literally had zero chance of hitting the other guy.
It wouldn't be much more fun if you were the one who couldn't be hit, either. Not after the first couple rounds, anyway.
I just want to pop in to say, the earlier comment about "well what if they have -1 to hit so 20 is 19" suggests that maybe the DM and you are not realizing that only a natural 20 roll on the dice roll (in other words, the dice face shows 20) is a critical hit. If you're rolling a 17 or whatever and have a +3 attack modifier that brings you to 20... that isn't a critical hit, and would not be enough to hit 25 AC.
I do find it a bit problematic that there are targets where it's impossible to get a non-critical hit, though it's rarely relevant and is more likely to benefit the PCs than the monsters (there might be situations where AC 23+ PCs are facing guards, situations where level 1-3 are expected to deal with AC 25+ are much less likely).
If it bugs you much, there are simple house rules which were used in older versions of D&D. Perhaps say if you need a 20 to hit, you can't crit. Or, if you need a 20 to hit, you must roll the d20 again to see if you roll a 20 to crit?
In classic fantasy, creatures that are almost impossible to hit are also extra-succeptible to the one way they can be hit. See Smaug, Achilles, Vampires, etc etc.... having no chance but a crit, but the crit ends the fight, is a trope.
I do find it a bit problematic that there are targets where it's impossible to get a non-critical hit, though it's rarely relevant and is more likely to benefit the PCs than the monsters (there might be situations where AC 23+ PCs are facing guards, situations where level 1-3 are expected to deal with AC 25+ are much less likely).
On average, Level 1 characters will start with at least +5 to hit for their main attacks(+2 from Proficiency Bonus, +3 from likely having a 16 or higher in their attack stat). So at Level 1, in order for a target to be impossible to hit with a non-critical hit, they'd need an AC of 25. That was the number mentioned in the first post of this thread. Guess how many monsters have an AC of 25? Two. One is Tiamat, the other is the Tarrasque. Both of them are CR 30. If you're facing either of them at Level 1, either your Dungeon Master really doesn't understand the game, or they hate you. It feels like to me that this whole thread is trying to argue whether an aspect of the game is broken based on a situation that is for all practical purposes impossible.
In classic fantasy, creatures that are almost impossible to hit are also extra-succeptible to the one way they can be hit. See Smaug, Achilles, Vampires, etc etc.... having no chance but a crit, but the crit ends the fight, is a trope.
If you prefer such, I think giving your named or special protagonists a high AC, but a weakness of added damage per hit would make more sense then having EVERY enemy combatant, even common ones, having the same trope.
Smaug was actually hard to kill, he was just a drama queen.
Vampires were extremely hard to kill, but they had a severe weakness to wooden stakes and light. It shouldn't be about their high AC, but a spelled out weakness.
Achilles was also immortal, except for that one spot. So yep perhaps give Achilles an ability that he always needs a 20 to hit him, but any hit is a critical. That's a unique ability not something that should be generic to the system for high AC's or PC's who are extremely poor at combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ok imagine you are a Sourser. 1 lvl you gain 6 + your Constitution mod. If you have 3 then it is 6 -4 = 2hp. Ok now second lvl. You have 66% chance to roll 4 or less. If you do then now you have 0 hp and your death saves are useless
As the previous poster just said, you always get a minimum of 1 hit point on level up, because the rules explicitly say so.
yes you get, but then you minus 4.... K fine Ill better go
No, your minimum after applying all modifiers is 1. So even if you have a -3 Constitution and roll a 1, you gain the minimum 1 hit point, you don't lose 2
D&D Beyond moderator across forums, Discord, Twitch and YouTube. Always happy to help and willing to answer questions (or at least try). (he/him/his)
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
Site Rules & Guidelines - Homebrew Rules - Looking for Players and Groups Rules
Sorry but can you please say me the page of a book. I cant find it
Also from a realistic stand point the player may hit the creature but not hit hard enough to injury it threw its armor. So something in chain mail if they don't hit the AC target the sword may have glanced off the armor instead of hurting the thing wearing the armor. Armor in real life would also take more damage from different weapons but thats not a thing here as its trying to make things simple for combat and make it flow easier. Remember this is a game that is suppose to be fun, real world doesn't have magic and dragons. Nothing like the goddess of luck playing with mortals when they are bored... "Oh that mortal is in a jam what happens if I do this" Aka the player rolls a Nat 20 or a 1.
That "OMG I crit" the bad guy moment is a nice thing for players when the chips maybe down too..... It also maybe that clutch moment of the night where the PC's where on death door and the rogue got a lucky back stab crit and saved the party. Or it could also be the point that turns the tides against the PCs if something crit there cleric and now the players are scrambling to save there healer while trying to survive the encounter.
It adds flavor to the story and something that more then just the "I roll my attacks and do x damage"
This is all my opinion so take it with a grain of salt.
Basic Rules Chapter 1: Step-By-Step Characters, Beyond First Level
D&D Beyond moderator across forums, Discord, Twitch and YouTube. Always happy to help and willing to answer questions (or at least try). (he/him/his)
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
Site Rules & Guidelines - Homebrew Rules - Looking for Players and Groups Rules
Yeah you are right but in players handbook its diffrent and nothing is said about "minimum 1"
You probably have an older edition of the book. You can view the errata document here. Conveniently, the relevant addition is right at the beginning.
That's because the Player's Handbook (same section, Step-By-Step Characters, Beyond First Level) has been errata'd since the first printing. The wording I've linked is the latest/correct wording.
D&D Beyond moderator across forums, Discord, Twitch and YouTube. Always happy to help and willing to answer questions (or at least try). (he/him/his)
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
Site Rules & Guidelines - Homebrew Rules - Looking for Players and Groups Rules
There are some things that are unbalanced and maybe even broken, yes. Being able to critically hit or miss is not one of them.
Because it said so somewhere else. You do realize that you have to read and apply all of the rules, right?
Wow I didnt know that. Thanks. Thats becouse I play russian version and maybe it is old
Because it would be literally the depths of NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BEING REMOTELY SIMILAR TO A FACSIMILE OF FUN to be in a combat, where you literally had zero chance of hitting the other guy.
It wouldn't be much more fun if you were the one who couldn't be hit, either. Not after the first couple rounds, anyway.
I just want to pop in to say, the earlier comment about "well what if they have -1 to hit so 20 is 19" suggests that maybe the DM and you are not realizing that only a natural 20 roll on the dice roll (in other words, the dice face shows 20) is a critical hit. If you're rolling a 17 or whatever and have a +3 attack modifier that brings you to 20... that isn't a critical hit, and would not be enough to hit 25 AC.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Good catch, Chicken_Champ.
I do find it a bit problematic that there are targets where it's impossible to get a non-critical hit, though it's rarely relevant and is more likely to benefit the PCs than the monsters (there might be situations where AC 23+ PCs are facing guards, situations where level 1-3 are expected to deal with AC 25+ are much less likely).
If it bugs you much, there are simple house rules which were used in older versions of D&D. Perhaps say if you need a 20 to hit, you can't crit. Or, if you need a 20 to hit, you must roll the d20 again to see if you roll a 20 to crit?
In classic fantasy, creatures that are almost impossible to hit are also extra-succeptible to the one way they can be hit. See Smaug, Achilles, Vampires, etc etc.... having no chance but a crit, but the crit ends the fight, is a trope.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
On average, Level 1 characters will start with at least +5 to hit for their main attacks(+2 from Proficiency Bonus, +3 from likely having a 16 or higher in their attack stat). So at Level 1, in order for a target to be impossible to hit with a non-critical hit, they'd need an AC of 25. That was the number mentioned in the first post of this thread. Guess how many monsters have an AC of 25? Two. One is Tiamat, the other is the Tarrasque. Both of them are CR 30. If you're facing either of them at Level 1, either your Dungeon Master really doesn't understand the game, or they hate you. It feels like to me that this whole thread is trying to argue whether an aspect of the game is broken based on a situation that is for all practical purposes impossible.
If you prefer such, I think giving your named or special protagonists a high AC, but a weakness of added damage per hit would make more sense then having EVERY enemy combatant, even common ones, having the same trope.
Smaug was actually hard to kill, he was just a drama queen.
Vampires were extremely hard to kill, but they had a severe weakness to wooden stakes and light. It shouldn't be about their high AC, but a spelled out weakness.
Achilles was also immortal, except for that one spot. So yep perhaps give Achilles an ability that he always needs a 20 to hit him, but any hit is a critical. That's a unique ability not something that should be generic to the system for high AC's or PC's who are extremely poor at combat.