rules change: bonuses for very successful hits?

[rangerjeff]

Just worked up some spreadsheets to calculate % damage change given different crit threat weapons when applying bonuses or penalties to attack, and one thing I knew but which was made starkly apparent, is that buffs don't make much difference once you're hitting on a 10 or better.

This idea popped into my head to address that.

How about on a hit where you beat the AC by 8 or more you automatically threaten a crit? Or Fort save DC 10+CMB with a penalty equal to how much more than 8 you beat the AC by with staggered for 1 round if fail.

And if you beat the AC by 15 or more you auto-confirm a crit? (Negating even the 5% fail chance if you had rolled a 1 to confirm.) Or fort save DC 15+CMB with penalty equal to how much more than 15 you beat the AC by with stunned for 1 round if fail, plus the above save for staggered.

This way, there's a little more reason to buff the BSF that already has +21/+16 vs AC 28-30 for example. And the BSF has more reason to keep pumping his bonus to attack.

I guess a way of rewarding a build that goes full into maximizing to attack bonuses. Maybe at +10 and +20 over AC... would want to be careful of over enabling a x4 crit monster.

And it would make combat a little more interesting for those guys that hit 4 out of 5 times already, instead of just counting up the damage, they'd be checking for hits at +8 and +15 to see if they could add an effect to their great attack rolls.

[Lincoln Hills]

I considered something virtually identical, and even worked up a "Superior Hits" table, before deciding that the mechanic - while workable - would slow play by adding math. But just because it wouldn't enhance my table doesn't mean it might not work at yours. I do suggest +10 as the first cut-off point, not for mathematical reasons but because people know at a glance when they've beat the number by 10 - very little math required.

[Mojorat]

First, players are already rewarded for maximizing attack and damage they skill monsters faster. This would also require the removal of true strike as it would be broken under this system.

Second alot of what you want to do seems to be done by the critical feats already.

[Arssanguinus]

Mojorat wrote:

First, players are already rewarded for maximizing attack and damage they skill monsters faster. This would also require the removal of true strike as it would be broken under this system.

Second alot of what you want to do seems to be done by the critical feats already.

Ten you can say that true strike adds twenty ... Just for purposes of incurring a hit but not for purposes of other effects.

[Artanthos]

You would be granting pure melee auto-criticals on their first or even second iterative attacks once they reach mid level, making weapons with large multipliers far superior. Heavy Picks and Scythes would immediately become the preferred weapons for fighters and barbarians.

[CalethosVB]

I haven't told my players yet, but I've been running my most recent game like so:

Player rolls for attack, doesn't come up a natural 20 (or threatens a critical), but the attack roll is double the target's AC exactly. I treat that as a critical threat. No modifiers to swing a threat in either direction (19-20), just exactly double AC.

[Mojorat]

If they are rolling double the targets ac you probably need to rethink your enemies.

[The black raven]

Power Attack and similar feats do that already. You trade to hit bonus for better damage.

[Stereofm]

There is also a logical problem : if you give a bonus for fighting differently, it means that you are not fighting to your best in normal time. And that makes no sense - when in a life or death situation, you will goive your best to survive - you had better. That is the basic attack assumption : the best of what you can balance.

Power attack is okay, in the sense that you lose something in exchange for more damage : that is a trade, and take your chances.

It could be better if you traded AC for force : you swing a mightier blow, but can't parry as effectively as you otherwise could, since you are out of balance afterwards.

[CalethosVB]

Mojorat wrote:

If they are rolling double the targets ac you probably need to rethink your enemies.

Favored Enemy, Smite, a whole slew of Fighter related stuff, and an unhealthy amount of 3.5 material. The players I've got have been playing longer than I have, have had access to the material for far longer, and have built characters to be powerhouses. The only thing they really haven't done yet is learn to take what they are able to give. At level 11 the lowest AC character is the Paladin at 26, but she can crank out the DPRs (around 150-175, and she's not even "optimized"). So my creatures I've built to be killable in 3 rounds by not increasing their AC because I know they're going to be hit regardless, but they are equally deadly in the same 3 rounds.

[Marthkus]

The black raven wrote:

Power Attack and similar feats do that already. You trade to hit bonus for better damage.

One of the great things about 3.5 power attack was that you chose your penalty, it wasn't fixed.

[rangerjeff]

Well, since there's been some more conversation here...

I'd say yeah, the situation where both good guys and bad guys are hitting a lot and taking damage is pretty common at mid-high tier. And every once in a while your front line fighter will run into something he can only hit on a 14+ or 16+, but mainly he's looking at 5+ to hit if he's fairly optimal and the GM isn't fiddling with the AC of CR appropriate monsters.

Now consider my proposal with the 5+ to hit situation. First, buffing him with +2 to hit changes it from 80% hit to 90% hit (and you'll therefore do 12.5% more damage.) Not much of a buff, considering if you do it to a guy that only hits on like +14, his hit goes from 35% to 45%, an increase in damage of about 29%, so buffing this guy is more than twice as effective as buffing the buy hitting on a 5+. In the same way, the guy building the fighter may look at the effect of getting a +1 to hit from Weapon Focus and say, "a feat for only 6.25% more damage? I can do better." So he takes another feat. My point here is, there's a point of diminishing returns with going for very high attack bonuses. I'm looking for a way to not totally erase that fact, but to make a certain build possible, yet not overpowered. The guy that goes straight for the highest to attack possible.

Imagine his attack. Currently, everybody always power attacks, which is stupid. Now picture the guys whose certain hits frustrate and infuriate the opponent, as the character effortlessly slices in for blood on every attempt.

And I know that 20 and 1 give everybody a 5% chance to hit or miss anybody, but come on. Maybe if you hit by 10+, but rolled a 1, instead of it being an auto-miss, you roll a second attack roll, against AC+10, and if that misses, then you missed. I've always though the auto-miss rule becomes absurd at some point. Note that this would only happen if, say, your +24 attack was against an AC 15 mook, or somebody CR appropriate that's been seriously debuffed (prone, stunned, etc.) The mook should not have been standing in the way.

Hmm... touch attacks throw a wrench into this, I just realized.