I would encourage any DM to grant some kind of bonus to an unarmed critical hit, wouldn't you? Force a save vs. some condition?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Admin on MeWe's Conservative D&D Players group, but I believe that no matter what our differences are, our love of D&D is something that should bring us together. So, if you don't start something I won't either. Fair enough?
Method Actor, Storyteller, Tactician type who plays peacemaker at the table. This fall will be my 39th year playing D&D, Gamma World, Car Wars, Talisman, Serenity and Traveller.
More and more of J.C.'s calls are striking me as not really all that great. Dunno why he is intentionally creating a circumstance in which the normal rules don't apply, rather than letting the normal rules apply as directly is possible. Especially when it's only 1-2 damage difference, so it isn't stopping an abuse to make it worth the remembering to handle things differently than the usual.
More and more of J.C.'s calls are striking me as not really all that great. Dunno why he is intentionally creating a circumstance in which the normal rules don't apply, rather than letting the normal rules apply as directly is possible. Especially when it's only 1-2 damage difference, so it isn't stopping an abuse to make it worth the remembering to handle things differently than the usual.
Well, it doesn't actually say 1d1.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
More and more of J.C.'s calls are striking me as not really all that great. Dunno why he is intentionally creating a circumstance in which the normal rules don't apply, rather than letting the normal rules apply as directly is possible. Especially when it's only 1-2 damage difference, so it isn't stopping an abuse to make it worth the remembering to handle things differently than the usual.
A critical hit lets you roll twice as many damage dice. There are no dice rolled on a normal unarmed strike. "1d1" doesn't even make sense.
These are just official rules interpretations. What a DM decides at his or her table, of course, is the only interpretation that actually matters.
A critical hit lets you roll twice as many damage dice. There are no dice rolled on a normal unarmed strike. "1d1" doesn't even make sense.
These are just official rules interpretations. What a DM decides at his or her table, of course, is the only interpretation that actually matters.
I know that critical hits are worded with rolling additional dice, and that a die is not normally rolled for an unarmed strike. I also know that treating the damage an unarmed attack does do as though it were a die that only ever generates the number 1 (which is what 1d1 means - 1 die with 1 side, just like 1d2 means 1 die with 2 sides or 1d6 means 1 die with 6 sides) would be more consistent with the rest of the system, and not a measurably less intuitive thing than there effectively being no such thing as a critical hit with an unarmed strike.
And yes, these are just the official rules interpretations... but in the earlier days of this edition, when Mr. Crawford starting making official rules interpretations, I found myself constantly and consistently in agreement with those official calls - and now there are a small handful of calls that have been made which have completely shaken my confidence the things are even being thought through (among which this ruling is counted, but is nowhere near the most severe).
A critical hit lets you roll twice as many damage dice. There are no dice rolled on a normal unarmed strike. "1d1" doesn't even make sense.
These are just official rules interpretations. What a DM decides at his or her table, of course, is the only interpretation that actually matters.
I know that critical hits are worded with rolling additional dice, and that a die is not normally rolled for an unarmed strike. I also know that treating the damage an unarmed attack does do as though it were a die that only ever generates the number 1 (which is what 1d1 means - 1 die with 1 side, just like 1d2 means 1 die with 2 sides or 1d6 means 1 die with 6 sides) would be more consistent with the rest of the system, and not a measurably less intuitive thing than there effectively being no such thing as a critical hit with an unarmed strike.
And yes, these are just the official rules interpretations... but in the earlier days of this edition, when Mr. Crawford starting making official rules interpretations, I found myself constantly and consistently in agreement with those official calls - and now there are a small handful of calls that have been made which have completely shaken my confidence the things are even being thought through (among which this ruling is counted, but is nowhere near the most severe).
Jeremy gives answers based on what ended up in the books, not the way he'd handle it, what he thinks would be most intuitive, or what he would've written now in hindsight. He won't even give a ruling without looking at the books first.
If you expect him to say something that directly contradicts the books, you're going to be disappointed.
I can see how the fact that unarmed strikes don't do extra damage on a crit would bother some people, but I can also see why the left it that way. Bumping them up to 1d4 isn't an option since it would make them too strong relative to weapons and improvised weapons. They could've made them do 1d2 or 1d3, but now you need a coin or some weird, uncommon, irregularly-shaped die just for unarmed strikes, when the game uses enough kinds of dice already. They could've wasted extra ink adding an exception to unarmed strikes, but that's not a good option either since one of their design goals is to keep the rules simple. Unarmed strikes are still going to suck whether they do 1 + STR or 2 + STR on a crit.
Stunning might be a bit much. It's a strong condition with very few ways to inflict it, and if a critical from a hammer doesn't stun, why would an unarmed strike from an untrained person?
Personally I'd give them a free shove with the hit and narrate it as a takedown or throw.
For reference, here's the things in the Player's Handbook that can stun:
Stunning Strike (Level 5 Monk class feature). The bread and butter way to stun. Costs 1 ki point.
Contagion (5th-level necromancy). The Slimy Doom disease causes the target to be stunned until the end of its next turn whenever it takes damage. The target has to fail three Con saves without first succeeding on three saves to be affected, and they can be cured with anything that removes diseases like Lay on Hands or Lesser Restoration.
Divine Word (7th-level evocation). Blinds, deafens and stuns the target for 1 hour if it has 30 HP or less.
Power Word Stun (8th-level enchantment). Stuns the target until it succeeds on a Con save if it has 150 HP or less.
Symbol (7th-level abjuration). One of the effects stuns creatures that fail a Wis save for 1 minute. Can't be used directly, and costs 1000 gp to cast.
Stunning might be a bit much. It's a strong condition with very few ways to inflict it, and if a critical from a hammer doesn't stun, why would an unarmed strike from an untrained person?
Who says it doesn't? Well, except for the official rules. All right, you got me; I just like crits.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
That's the good thing about 5E. The rule as written keeps play moving, but a DM has options to reward a critical hit if he wants to.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Admin on MeWe's Conservative D&D Players group, but I believe that no matter what our differences are, our love of D&D is something that should bring us together. So, if you don't start something I won't either. Fair enough?
Method Actor, Storyteller, Tactician type who plays peacemaker at the table. This fall will be my 39th year playing D&D, Gamma World, Car Wars, Talisman, Serenity and Traveller.
That's the good thing about 5E. The rule as written keeps play moving, but a DM has options to reward a critical hit if he wants to.
Very much this - you can play RAW and have a fun game, but for me, the game works way better when the DM assists the heroic narrative by rewarding the players for trying interesting things or when things are going badly and a player gets suddenly lucky.
I always feel crits should be rewarded an punished in kind. A little extra damage and some fun bonus is always in order. I like the Stunned idea. Temple-hit.
I always feel crits should be rewarded an punished in kind. A little extra damage and some fun bonus is always in order. I like the Stunned idea. Temple-hit.
Exactly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
I don't like auto-stun from a narrative point of view because it leads to silly results when fighting large monsters that wouldn't be fazed by a crit to their leg for 1/10 of their HP, and treats all monsters the same regardless of CON.
The massive damage rule in the DMG handles this better. If the target loses 50% of its HP from one source of damage, it makes a DC 15 CON save. On a failure, there's a 30% chance it drops to 0 HP, 20% chance it's stunned, 20% chance it can't take reactions and has disadvantage on attacks/ability checks, and 30% chance it just can't take reactions. Crits naturally have a higher chance of triggering massive damage, and this still works with non-attack spells.
The DMG also has rules for inflicting lingering injuries (lose an eye, gain a limp) if a target is reduced to 0, takes a crit or fails a death saving throw by 5 or more.
I think it's smarter to take advantage of rules that are already there, have already been tested and players might already be familiar with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Forum Infestation (TM)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
As you dont roll for damage on an unarmed attack. On a hit its 1 + str mod, my question is? What happens if you roll a natural 20 to hit?
i understand monk rules are different!
On a critical hit with an unarmed strike, you'd deal 2 + strength modifier. Think of the "1" as short-hand for "1d1".
There's nothing to reroll, so a critical hit still does 1 + STR damage.
"An unarmed strike deals 1 + Str. modifier damage, even on a critical hit." -Jeremy Crawford
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Ah ok man thanks!
I would encourage any DM to grant some kind of bonus to an unarmed critical hit, wouldn't you? Force a save vs. some condition?
Admin on MeWe's Conservative D&D Players group, but I believe that no matter what our differences are, our love of D&D is something that should bring us together. So, if you don't start something I won't either. Fair enough?
Method Actor, Storyteller, Tactician type who plays peacemaker at the table. This fall will be my 39th year playing D&D, Gamma World, Car Wars, Talisman, Serenity and Traveller.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I like save throw for stunned. I think il reward a crit unarmed, thats gotta feel good for the player, an thats what its all about.
Thanks for all the input, i will have many more quitions haha
Stunning might be a bit much. It's a strong condition with very few ways to inflict it, and if a critical from a hammer doesn't stun, why would an unarmed strike from an untrained person?
Personally I'd give them a free shove with the hit and narrate it as a takedown or throw.
For reference, here's the things in the Player's Handbook that can stun:
The Forum Infestation (TM)
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
That's the good thing about 5E. The rule as written keeps play moving, but a DM has options to reward a critical hit if he wants to.
Admin on MeWe's Conservative D&D Players group, but I believe that no matter what our differences are, our love of D&D is something that should bring us together. So, if you don't start something I won't either. Fair enough?
Method Actor, Storyteller, Tactician type who plays peacemaker at the table. This fall will be my 39th year playing D&D, Gamma World, Car Wars, Talisman, Serenity and Traveller.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersPun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
I always feel crits should be rewarded an punished in kind. A little extra damage and some fun bonus is always in order. I like the Stunned idea. Temple-hit.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
Maybe make em do a save throw agaisnt stun, or knock em prone.
Sumin fun, thanks guys.
I don't like auto-stun from a narrative point of view because it leads to silly results when fighting large monsters that wouldn't be fazed by a crit to their leg for 1/10 of their HP, and treats all monsters the same regardless of CON.
The massive damage rule in the DMG handles this better. If the target loses 50% of its HP from one source of damage, it makes a DC 15 CON save. On a failure, there's a 30% chance it drops to 0 HP, 20% chance it's stunned, 20% chance it can't take reactions and has disadvantage on attacks/ability checks, and 30% chance it just can't take reactions. Crits naturally have a higher chance of triggering massive damage, and this still works with non-attack spells.
The DMG also has rules for inflicting lingering injuries (lose an eye, gain a limp) if a target is reduced to 0, takes a crit or fails a death saving throw by 5 or more.
I think it's smarter to take advantage of rules that are already there, have already been tested and players might already be familiar with.
The Forum Infestation (TM)