Critical Hits

seasoned is not a big deal mike. for me it just ment i went longer without a shower. some might refer to it as seasoning.

i guess i could agree with the +2d6 straight crit bonus as long as the sheild counts if the defender succeeds. this change will make survivabillity in all but the worst situations possible.

Mike, one more post and you get a "promotion" to Seasoned.

-DC

I think it's a bad idea to have the crit bonus graduated by the user's strength bonus. Just like Jason says, it reintroduces the problem of strong crit = instant death.

I didn't know the book says "Anything over 20 counts as 20", but I see it now. I guess that's more "dramatic", in line with the literature when two excellent knights fight all day to a tie (they each keep rolling modified 20's, not "my 28 beats your 23"...).

Given that, I think just adding +2d6 for all crits is fair. Upon further thought, I don't think 2H weapons need an additional +1d6; their bonus is already built in.

I still like "a crit bypasses the shield", but if you guys don't, no biggie.

-DC

p.s. I think it would be an interesting variant to say that shields block 10 points, instead of 6.

i like the idea of the sheild making a difference. i would like to see a combination of your crit systems. 4d6 str.=+1d6 5d6 str.=+2d6 two handed weapons=+1d6. or just go with a base +2d6. it just seems that with +3 d6 we might get the same problems we were having before. but the idea of sheild sucess will help greatly.

I considered Dave's idea when thinking about this because a feature of the current system I don't like is that there really isn't a gradation of levels of success or failure. This is a shame, because the components of the game system allow for these nuances. It makes me just want to shake my head and use the Savage Worlds or Harnmaster systems

Still, something about not using your shield doesn't feel right. I would be more inclined to do something like this:

Crit vs. Crit: Both rolls treated as 20, use rules for same rolls. This follows the rules in the book that all crits are assumed to be a roll of 20.

Crit vs. Success: High roll gets extra damage, low roll gets shield up

Crit vs. Failure: High roll gets extra damage, low roll doesn't use shield

Crit Damage: Increase the above to +2d6 for 1-h, +3d6 for 2-h. Alternately, base additional crit damage on Strength:
4d6 or less, +2d6
5d6 or more, +3d6

i dont like the idea of crits bypassing sheilds. i like the fact that your sheild use is determined by your success. i think that the idea of crits canceling is silly it should be resolved the way it is now with the higher crit damaging.

thease thoughts assume the addoption of the +1 or 2 d6 crit system

Hey, what happened to my post?... It was here this afternoon...

Well, let me restate, without the math charts.

I think the +1d6 / +2d6 could work, but I suggest the crit automatically bypasses the shield.

If both combatants crit, the crits cancel out, and the lower total still takes normal damage, with benefit of both armor and shield.

-DC

i like the idea. the only problem i see is that late in the campaign armor will be much better. but then again we will swich our knights to tweo handed fun then. i suppose this is a really good idea i think this rule would have stopped all the player deaths or atleast 3 of them. people would take major wounds that could kill them and they would be knocked out of fights but i think that that is more realistic anyway.