So 5e has gotten a reputation that combat takes too long. I've seen in in my own group where we have had a single random encounter take the entire session
So I came up with the following house rule. I'd like your opinion.
RULE1 Critical hits or critical fails on saving throws do not allow for a damage roll. Instead damage is automatically changed to double max damage for the weapon type or max damage for a spell.
EXAMPLES: A target is hit by a longsword on a natural 20. That target takes 16+ str damage.
A target is hit by a lightning bolt cast by a 5th level wizard. The target rolls a 1 on their save. 8d6 max damage is 48 points. (Should this be double spell damage too?)
RULE2. New Feats
1. Extended Weapon Critical.
This is open to all classes. Allowing the crit range of a specific weapon type (Longsword, axe, shortbow etc) to be increased by 1. This can be taken multiple times and applied to the same weapon type.
2 Extend Martial Weapon Critical
This is only available to fighters allowing extended crits to all martial weapons. This would be available whenever a fighter is allowed to choose a feat. This can be take multiple times.
3. Extend Spell Criticals
This allows a spell caster to choose 2 spells and increase thier critical threat by one. This increases a targeted spell to a crit range by 1. Or it increases the chance of a critical failure by 1 on a saving throw. This feat can be taken multiple times, and applied to the same spell.
My plan is to speed up combat, by eliminating the need to roll damage on crits and increasing the damage taken in combat. Make combat more deadly so my players will consider circumstances prior to a combat and possibly explore non-combat alternatives. It will also allow fighters to keep up with caster damage at higher levels due to their number of attacks with a potential of a greater chance at a critical hit.
So, for the Lightning Bolt, it's a save, not an attack, so it can't crit. So they would still have to roll the 8d6.
The extended crit rule kinda makes certain class features (champion fighter, and one of the warlocks) increased crit...meh if everyone can get it. Yes they would be able to increase it more, but then the game becomes less about tactics and planning, and more of just hoping they hit x number every attack.
My table has a minimum crit rule, you roll like you normally would (not double dice) and take the dice you would roll, but like you did above, max it. So to use your example, longsword would be 1d8+8+str. Makes crits more meaningful...but less likely to just kill something off the rip.
My players in one of my campaigns have been rolling so many 1s I've had to adjust my fumble rules. (I'm talking EACH character rolling 5-6+ 1s in a 3 hour game session.)
My new system: a character that rolls a 1 has to make a percentile roll. If the roll is equal or less to 20 - their class level, the critical fumble occurs. A second percentile roll determines how bad the fumble is, from "you stubbed your toe" (01) movement -5 this round to "your arrow clips the support for the tunnel roof, droppings it on the entire party." (00)
If the character avoids the crit fumble from their first 1 of the session, they have to roll higher than 2x(20-character level) on their second 1 rolled to avoid that fumble. 3x for the 3rd, 4x for the 4th, until they actually suffer a fumble, when the multiplier drops back down to 1
This has allowed the storyline to progress and still maintain the fumble potential disaster for my clumsy party whom would have tripped over their own feet and all impaled themselves on lethal cutlery in the first round of their first combat encounter against that mouse.
Regarding spell criticals: there arent many RSA/MSA above 2nd level where you actually have to make an attack roll, unless you're using something like the point strike from
So in league play there's less of an opportunity to do massive overwhelming damage by casters against a single target with a single action, compared to a high level rogue whose crit sneak attack add piles of dice to the damage.
So 5e has gotten a reputation that combat takes too long. I've seen in in my own group where we have had a single random encounter take the entire session
Combat shouldn't be this slow.
Is this for a high level party, or a group of inexperienced players?
If you have an experienced group of players, then set a time limit on how long the player is allowed to decide what action(s) they will perform. This will make the players starts considering their possible actions earlier in the round, while the other players are taking their actions.
The added time limit might also heighten tension as players are having to think more quickly.
Fumbles can be fun, add extra challenge to an otherwise unchallenging combat and flesh out the storyline. They can also be devastating. I find they add a better sense of realism to combat, but a DM has to have a quick wit to come up with something on the fly.
Real combat is never just miss/hit/crit. Bowstrings break, people trip and fall down, your axe gets stuck in somebody's ribs. Applying the same to NPCs may allow the party to actually progress in the campaign after making a single major faux pas. (The gate DID have a guard! He charges you...and falls on his sword.)
All stories can be described on the most basic level as challenge resolution. Thus, the fumble provides plot twists to make for a better story.
In addition to adding a level of risk to otherwise unchallenging combat the fumble reduces the tedium of combat vs. High hp opponents where the players just repeat the same actios round after round as they whittle the BBEG down.
The halfling luck RAW prevents them from suffering fumbles almost always. I find this overpowered, so in my games RAP is the halfling gets the reroll, but the fumble still occurs. So an attack roll of 1 followed by a 20 becomes "you trip and your weapon goes flying....right into the BBEG's eye."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So 5e has gotten a reputation that combat takes too long. I've seen in in my own group where we have had a single random encounter take the entire session
So I came up with the following house rule. I'd like your opinion.
RULE1 Critical hits or critical fails on saving throws do not allow for a damage roll. Instead damage is automatically changed to double max damage for the weapon type or max damage for a spell.
EXAMPLES: A target is hit by a longsword on a natural 20. That target takes 16+ str damage.
A target is hit by a lightning bolt cast by a 5th level wizard. The target rolls a 1 on their save. 8d6 max damage is 48 points. (Should this be double spell damage too?)
RULE2. New Feats
1. Extended Weapon Critical.
This is open to all classes. Allowing the crit range of a specific weapon type (Longsword, axe, shortbow etc) to be increased by 1. This can be taken multiple times and applied to the same weapon type.
2 Extend Martial Weapon Critical
This is only available to fighters allowing extended crits to all martial weapons. This would be available whenever a fighter is allowed to choose a feat. This can be take multiple times.
3. Extend Spell Criticals
This allows a spell caster to choose 2 spells and increase thier critical threat by one. This increases a targeted spell to a crit range by 1. Or it increases the chance of a critical failure by 1 on a saving throw. This feat can be taken multiple times, and applied to the same spell.
My plan is to speed up combat, by eliminating the need to roll damage on crits and increasing the damage taken in combat. Make combat more deadly so my players will consider circumstances prior to a combat and possibly explore non-combat alternatives. It will also allow fighters to keep up with caster damage at higher levels due to their number of attacks with a potential of a greater chance at a critical hit.
Please discuss.
So, for the Lightning Bolt, it's a save, not an attack, so it can't crit. So they would still have to roll the 8d6.
The extended crit rule kinda makes certain class features (champion fighter, and one of the warlocks) increased crit...meh if everyone can get it. Yes they would be able to increase it more, but then the game becomes less about tactics and planning, and more of just hoping they hit x number every attack.
My table has a minimum crit rule, you roll like you normally would (not double dice) and take the dice you would roll, but like you did above, max it. So to use your example, longsword would be 1d8+8+str. Makes crits more meaningful...but less likely to just kill something off the rip.
My players in one of my campaigns have been rolling so many 1s I've had to adjust my fumble rules. (I'm talking EACH character rolling 5-6+ 1s in a 3 hour game session.)
My new system: a character that rolls a 1 has to make a percentile roll. If the roll is equal or less to 20 - their class level, the critical fumble occurs. A second percentile roll determines how bad the fumble is, from "you stubbed your toe" (01) movement -5 this round to "your arrow clips the support for the tunnel roof, droppings it on the entire party." (00)
If the character avoids the crit fumble from their first 1 of the session, they have to roll higher than 2x(20-character level) on their second 1 rolled to avoid that fumble. 3x for the 3rd, 4x for the 4th, until they actually suffer a fumble, when the multiplier drops back down to 1
This has allowed the storyline to progress and still maintain the fumble potential disaster for my clumsy party whom would have tripped over their own feet and all impaled themselves on lethal cutlery in the first round of their first combat encounter against that mouse.
Regarding spell criticals: there arent many RSA/MSA above 2nd level where you actually have to make an attack roll, unless you're using something like the point strike from
https://www.dndbeyond.com/feats/372934-conservation-of-magic
So in league play there's less of an opportunity to do massive overwhelming damage by casters against a single target with a single action, compared to a high level rogue whose crit sneak attack add piles of dice to the damage.
Fair. I generally don't look at fumble tables as I never use them at my table so I glossed over that.
Combat shouldn't be this slow.
Is this for a high level party, or a group of inexperienced players?
If you have an experienced group of players, then set a time limit on how long the player is allowed to decide what action(s) they will perform. This will make the players starts considering their possible actions earlier in the round, while the other players are taking their actions.
The added time limit might also heighten tension as players are having to think more quickly.
Fumbles can be fun, add extra challenge to an otherwise unchallenging combat and flesh out the storyline. They can also be devastating. I find they add a better sense of realism to combat, but a DM has to have a quick wit to come up with something on the fly.
Real combat is never just miss/hit/crit. Bowstrings break, people trip and fall down, your axe gets stuck in somebody's ribs. Applying the same to NPCs may allow the party to actually progress in the campaign after making a single major faux pas. (The gate DID have a guard! He charges you...and falls on his sword.)
All stories can be described on the most basic level as challenge resolution. Thus, the fumble provides plot twists to make for a better story.
In addition to adding a level of risk to otherwise unchallenging combat the fumble reduces the tedium of combat vs. High hp opponents where the players just repeat the same actios round after round as they whittle the BBEG down.
The halfling luck RAW prevents them from suffering fumbles almost always. I find this overpowered, so in my games RAP is the halfling gets the reroll, but the fumble still occurs. So an attack roll of 1 followed by a 20 becomes "you trip and your weapon goes flying....right into the BBEG's eye."