Stacking Criticals

So I can not find anything on this which leads me to believe my answer is no, but I can not find anything definitive.

I play in a group where you can continuously stack criticals.
Example:
Say you have a keen rapier (crits on 15-20) and you roll a 17 - crit threat
Confirmation roll comes up nat 18. confirmed. roll to continue stacking.
Confirmation roll comes up nat 14. Confirmed.

Now we would roll damage x 3 instead of damage x2 for a double crit.

Can crits stack like this if you roll in your critical threat range on the confirmations? and if not can anyone provide a link that I could show my group.

This is causing some serious balance issues as players with high crit range and damage bonuses are shredding through everything, and if I scale the enemies to their damage then no one else's damage is relevant.

You are confirming the attack with the roll. If the second roll hits it is now a critical attack. Deal damage and move on to any other attacks left.

So no, rolling a 20 then a 19 on a rapier doesnt do anything other than likely ensure you crit.

Also keep in mind that a weapon could critical attack and still miss. A 18 on a rapier and you need a 19 on the die to hit means you miss. Just means that any that hit are threats.

So I can not find anything on this which leads me to believe my answer is no, but I can not find anything definitive.

I play in a group where you can continuously stack criticals.
Example:
Say you have a keen rapier (crits on 15-20) and you roll a 17 - crit threat
Confirmation roll comes up nat 18. confirmed. roll to continue stacking.
Confirmation roll comes up nat 14. Confirmed.

Now we would roll damage x 3 instead of damage x2 for a double crit.

Can crits stack like this if you roll in your critical threat range on the confirmations? and if not can anyone provide a link that I could show my group.

This is causing some serious balance issues as players with high crit range and damage bonuses are shredding through everything, and if I scale the enemies to their damage then no one else's damage is relevant.

We have a house rule that crits stack, however, only on a nat20 on the confirmation roll.

For example: You have a keen rapier (crits on 15-20) and you roll a 17 - crit threat
Confirmation roll comes up nat 18. confirmed. (no nat20, so only a confirmed crit)

You have a keen rapier (crits on 15-20) and you roll a 17 - crit threat
Confirmation roll comes up nat 20. confirmed. roll to continue stacking.
Confirmation roll comes up nat 14. Confirmed with crit multiplier 3x

This can continue on untill the roll results in anything other than nat20

We've had instances that were there were triple or even quadriple crits on a single attack.

By the way!! We also do this for fumbles!
You have a keen rapier (crits on 15-20) and you roll a 1 - fumble threat
Confirmation roll comes up nat 1. confirmed fumble. roll to continue stacking.
Confirmation roll comes up nat 9 (i.e. miss). Confirmed dubble fumble!!!

Stacking critical hits is not in the rules. This is a house rule, and should be moved to the house rule forums.

Pg 184 of the core rulebook covers critical hits.

It breaks down like this: Roll to attack, if within threat range you are threatening a critical hit. Roll again to confirm the critical hit. The confirmation roll would be a hit then the attack is a critical hit. [END]

There is nothing in the rules to support critical stacking. Personally, I dislike the stacking crit house rule, because it causes this kind of game imbalance.

So I can not find anything on this which leads me to believe my answer is no, but I can not find anything definitive.

I play in a group where you can continuously stack criticals.
Example:
Say you have a keen rapier (crits on 15-20) and you roll a 17 - crit threat
Confirmation roll comes up nat 18. confirmed. roll to continue stacking.
Confirmation roll comes up nat 14. Confirmed.

Now we would roll damage x 3 instead of damage x2 for a double crit.

Can crits stack like this if you roll in your critical threat range on the confirmations? and if not can anyone provide a link that I could show my group.

This is causing some serious balance issues as players with high crit range and damage bonuses are shredding through everything, and if I scale the enemies to their damage then no one else's damage is relevant.

There's no such thing as what you're describing, it's purely a house rule.

My group does have a somewhat similar house rule, in that if you roll a two nat 20s in a row it automatically one shots whatever you hit.

Aside from that, the relevant rules were quoted by the poster above me. When it comes to critical hits the second roll is merely to confirm the critical hit, rolling better than is needed to confirm (hit the AC of the target) doesn't do anything. If rolling a 2 would confirm the critical hit, rolling higher has no benefit regardless of what your critical range or anything else.

It's also important to note, as another poster said, that rolling in the critical threat range doesn't do anything if it wouldn't already be a hit.

As an arbitrary example, lets say you have a +10 to hit and a weapon with an 17-20 crit range. If the enemy's AC is 30, and you roll a 17 you have a total attack roll of 27. You're 3 short of hitting their AC, regardless of that fact that you rolled in he critical threat range. You fail to hit at all, and don't roll to confirm.

Only natural 20s are automatic hits.

It's also important to note, as another poster said, that rolling in the critical threat range doesn't do anything if it wouldn't already be a hit.

As an arbitrary example, lets say you have a +10 to hit and a weapon with an 17-20 crit range. If the enemy's AC is 30, and you roll a 17 you have a total attack roll of 27. You're 3 short of hitting their AC, regardless of that fact that you rolled in he critical threat range. You fail to hit at all, and don't roll to confirm.

Only natural 20s are automatic hits.

Claxon is correct here. It applies to both the initial and the confirmation rolls, and I glossed over it in my post.

I mean... Claxon is correct in stating that someone else said it already. But whomever that unknown hero is, I'm sure hes comfy in just knowing everyone agrees.

Moved to homebrew.