Community

I firmly believe that there should be two editions of the game; the core rules released as a "Basic" set and a more complicated expanded rules edition released as an "Expert" set. These two editions would provide separate entry points to the game; one for new players or players that want a more classic D&D game and another entry point for experienced gamers that want more options and all the other things they have come to expect from previous editions.

Also, they must release several rules modules covering the main elements of the game (i.e., classes, races, combat, magic, monsters, etc.) upon launch to further expand the game for those that still need more complexity in a particular element of the game.

Here's a mockup of the Basic Set I created.



(CLICK HERE TO VIEW LARGER IMAGE)
  

Basic Set

This boxed set contains a simple, "bare bones" edition of the game; the core rules. It's for those that want a rules-light edition of the game that is extremely modifiable or for new players that get intimidated easily by too many rules and/or options. The Basic Set contains everything needed to play with all the "classic" D&D races (i.e., Human, Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling) and classes (i.e., Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard) all the way up to maximum level (i.e., 20th Level).

The Basic boxed set contains:

Quick Start Rules
A "choose your own way" adventure intended as an intro to RPGs and basic D&D terms.

Player's Handbook
(Softcover, 125 pages)
Features rules for playing the classic D&D races and classes all the way up to 20th level.

Dungeon Master's Guide
(Softcover, 125 pages)
Includes the basic rules for dungeon masters.

Monster Manual
(Softcover, 100 pages)
Includes all the classic iconic monsters from D&D. 

Introductory Adventure
(Keep on the Borderlands)
An introductory adventure for beginning players and DMs.

Also includes: 

Character Sheets
Reference Sheets
Set of Dice

Expert Set

A set of hardbound rules that contains the core rules plus expanded races and classes, more spells and a large selection of optional rules modules — that is, pretty much everything that experienced players have come to expect. Each expert edition manual may be purchased separately, or in a boxed set. The Expert set includes:

Expert PHB (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus 10 playable races, 10 character classes, expanded selection of spells and rules modules for players.)
Expert DMG (Hardcover, 250 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus expanded rules modules for DMs.)
Expert MM (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes an expanded list of monsters and creatures to challenge characters)

Expansions

These expansion rules modules can be used with both the Basic and Expert sets. Each expansion covers one specific aspect of the game, such as character creation, combat, spells, monsters, etc.) 

Hall of Heroes (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes a vast selection of playable character races and classes, new and old all in one book)
Combat and Tactics (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes dozens of new and old optional rules for combat all in one book)
Creature Compendium (Hardcover, 350 pages.$35 Includes hundreds of monsters, new and old all in one book)
The Grimoire (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes hundreds of new and old spells all in one book)

Shedding Light on Damage and Hit Points

In my personal campaigns, I use the following system for damage and dying. It's a slight modification of the long-standing principles etsablished by the D&D game, only with a new definition of what 0 or less hit points means. I've been using it for years because it works really well. However, I've made some adjustments to take advantage of the D&D Next rules. I've decided to present the first part in a Q&A format for better clarity. So let's begin...

What are hit points?
The premise is very simple, but often misunderstood; hit points are an abstraction that represent the character's ability to avoid serious damage, not necessarily their ability to take serious damage. This is a very important distinction. They represent a combination of skillful maneuvering, toughness, stamina and luck. Some targets have more hit points because they are physically tougher and are harder to injure...others have more because they are experienced combatants and have learned how to turn near fatal blows into mere scratches by skillful maneuvering...and then others are just plain lucky. Once a character runs out of hit points they become vulnerable to serious life-threatening injuries.

So what exactly does it mean to "hit" with a successful attack roll, then?
It means that through your own skill and ability you may have wounded your target if the target lacks the hit points to avoid the full brunt of the attack. That's an important thing to keep in mind; a successful "hit" does not necessarily mean you physically damaged your target. It just means that your attack was well placed and forced the target to exert themselves in such a way as to leave them vulnerable to further attacks. For example, instead of severing the target's arm, the attack merely grazes them leaving a minor cut.

But the attack did 25 points of damage! Why did it only "graze" the target?
Because the target has more than 25 hit points. Your attack forced them to exert a lot of energy to avoid the attack, but because of their combat skill, toughness, stamina and luck, they managed to avoid being seriously injured. However, because of this attack, they may not have the reserves to avoid your next attack. Perhaps you knocked them off balance or the attack left them so fatigued they lack the stamina to evade another attack. It's the DM's call on how they want to narrate the exact reason the blow didn't kill or wound the target.

Yeah, but what about "touch" attacks that rely on physical contact?
Making physical contact with a target is a lot different than striking them, so these types of attacks are the exception. If a touch attack succeeds, the attacker manages to make contact with their target.

If hit points and weapon damage don't always represent actual damage to the target, then what does it represent?
Think of the damage from an attack as more like a "threat level" rather than actual physical damage that transfers directly to the target's body. That is, the more damage an attack does, the harder it is to avoid serious injury. For example, an attack that causes 14 points of damage is more likely to wound the target than 3 points of damage (depending on how many hit points the target has left). The higher the damage, the greater the chance is that the target will become seriously injured. So, an attack that does 34 points of damage could be thought of as a "threat level of 34." If the target doesn't have the hit points to negate that threat, they become seriously injured.

Ok, but shouldn't armor reduce the amount of damage delivered from an attack?
It does reduce damage; by making it harder for an attack to cause serious injury. A successful hit against an armored target suggests that the attack may have circumvented the target's armor by striking in a vulnerable area, thereby forcing the target to exert even more effort avoiding the attack...and thereby reducing their hit points.

What about poison and other types of non-combat damage?
Hit point loss from non-physical forms of damage represents the character spitting the poison out just in time before it takes full strength or perhaps the poison just wasn't strong enough to affect them drastically, but still weakens them. Again, it's the DMs call on how to narrate the reasons why the character avoids serious harm from the damage.

If hit points don't represent actual damage then how does that make sense with spells like Cure Serious Wounds and other forms of healing like healer kits with bandages?
Hit points do represent some physical damage, just not serious physical damage. Healing magic and other forms of healing still affect these minor wounds just as well as more serious wounds. For example, bandaging up minor cuts and abrasions helps the character rejuvenate and relieve the pain and/or fatigue of hit point loss. The key thing to remember is that it's an abstraction that allows the DM freedom to interpret and narrate it as they see fit.

What if my attack reduces the target to 0 or less hit points?
If a player is reduced to 0 or less hit points they are wounded. If a monster or NPC is reduce to 0 or less hit points they are killed.

Why are monsters killed immediately and not players?
Because unless the monsters are crucial to the story, it makes combat resolution much faster. It is assumed that players immediately execute a coup de grace on wounded monsters as a finishing move.

What if a character is wounded by poison or other types of non-physical damage?
If a character becomes wounded from non-combat damage they still receive the effects of being wounded, regardless if they show any physical signs of injury (i.e., internal injuries are still considered injuries).

Ok. I get it...but what happens once a character is wounded?
See below.
 

Damage and Dying

Once a character is reduced to 0 or less hit points, they start taking real damage. In other words, their reserves have run out and they can no longer avoid taking serious damage.

1. Characters are fully operational as long as they have 1 hit point or more. They may have minor cuts, bruises, and superficial wounds, but they are are not impaired significantly. 
2. Once they reach 0 or less hit points, they become Wounded (see below).That is, they have sustained a wound that impairs their ability to perform actions.
3. If they reach a negative amount of hit points equal or greater than their Constitution score, they are Incapacitated. This means they are in critical condition and could possibly die.
4. Characters will die if their hit points reach a negative amount greater than their Constitution score, plus their current level.

Unharmed: 1 hp or more
Wounded: 0 hp or less
Incapacitated: -(Constitution) to -(Constitution+Level)
Dead: Less than -(Constitution +Level)

Wounded
When the character reaches 0 or less hit points they become wounded. Wounded characters receive disadvantage on all attacks and saving throws until they heal back up to 1 hit point or more. This allows for a transitory stage between healthy and dying, without having to mess around with impairment rules while the character still has hit points left.

Incapacitated
Characters begin dying when they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution score. At which point, they must make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw on each of their following turns (the disadvantage from being wounded does not apply for these saving throws).

If successful, the character remains dying, but their condition does not worsen.

If the saving throw fails, another DC 10 Constitution saving throw must be made. If that one fails, the character succumbs to their wounds and dies. If successful, the character stabilizes and is no longer dying.

Finally, if a dying character receives first aid or healing at any point, they immediately stabilize.

Dead
Characters will die if they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution, plus their current level. Thus, if an 8th level character with a Constitution score of 12 is down to 4 hit points then takes 24 points of damage (reducing their hit points to -20) the attack kills them outright.

There's been a lot of discussion on how critical hits should be handled in DnD Next, along with a lot of criticism on how they're currently mentioned in the playtest packet. So I decided to share my thoughts on the topic, offering my own personal preferences and suggestions for this highly subjective game mechanic.
 

Why So Critical?

First off, what should the designers' goals be for a good critical hit mechanic? Here's the criteria I used for mine:

Design Objectives:

1. Must be fun. First and foremost, the mechanic must be fun to use above all else. 
2. Must be rewarding. Players should feel like something epic happened.
3. Must be easy to use without a lot of number crunching or +/- modifiers.
4. Should be realistic enough so as not to seem impossible.
 

Trigger Methods

Ok. We've got our design goals. Now we must decide what triggers a critical hit. Below are some of the most popular methods. There are others, but these are the best of the best...of the best.
 

Method I - "Natural 20" 

With this method, a critical hit is triggered when the player rolls a natural, unmodified 20 on an attack roll. 

The Good: 

1. It's traditional and easy to recognize. Everybody knows that a natural 20 is a good thing when attacking. It's been a part of the D&D game since the beginning, even though it wasn't officially adopted until 2e.
2. It's simple and fast, requiring no number crunching. 
3. It's comfortably rare. There's a 5% chance of rolling a natural 20...that's a perfect probability to work with considering a critical hit is supposed to be something special.

The Bad:

1. It eventually becomes apparent that the only way for lower level characters to hit higher level monsters is with a natural 20. That's a problem for obvious reasons.
2. Not very realistic.

 

Method II - "Level of Success"

With this method, a critical hit is triggered when you roll higher than the target's AC by an arbitrary number (usually 5 or more higher than the AC).

The Good:

1. Provides a sense of difficulty scaling; that is, the higher the target's AC, the more difficult they are to score a critical hit against.
2. Takes skill into consideration. Skilled combatants are more likely to score critical hits, since they are more likely to roll higher than their target's AC.

The Bad:

1. Adds an additional element of number-crunching to the attack roll to determine if a critical hit is scored.
2. It triggers more frequently during combat, especially against targets with lower AC. This can slow combat down depending on how you resolve critical damage (see below) and it also makes critical hits less special. 

The Ugly:

1. It lacks that level of excitement that a natural 20 commands when it comes up during battle. Whether a real or perceived issue, it's an issue (for me anyway).

The Verdict: Method I

Both have their strengths and weaknesses, but for our design goals, Method I fits better. Method II works fine and it's a bit more realistic, but it's not as much fun or as easy to use as the Natural 20 method.

Ok. So Natural 20 comes out ahead marginally, but it still has a few drawbacks. How can we fix these and improve upon the mechanic? 

Well, there's...
 

Method III - "Confirmed Critical"

DnD 3e introduced this method (with mixed reception) based on Method I. When a character scores a natural 20 (or sometimes 19 and/or 18) on an attack, they make another attack roll. If that attack hits, then the attack is a critical hit. Otherwise, it's just a normal hit.

What does this bring to the table and why is this a better way of handling critical hits than Method I?

1. Takes skill into consideration. The second attack roll verifies whether the attacker has the enough skill to hit his target normally or if it was just a fluke. 
2. Eliminates the problem of lower level characters only being able to hit higher level monsters with a critical hit. 
3. Provides a sense of difficulty scaling; that is, the higher the target's AC, the more difficult they are to score a critical hit against.
4. Adds realism, without adding number crunching.

So...it basically gets rid of the bad stuff from Method I and adds all the good stuff from Method II? Sounds awesome. Any drawbacks? 

Of course...

1. An extra attack roll is required if triggered. 
2. Makes critical hits exceedingly rare, and it can be a disappointing let-down after getting a natural 20 only to miss an easy confirmation attack roll afterward.

The Perfect Method

Ok. So...none of these methods are perfect. Now what?

Here's where personal preference on the matter really kicks in the most. The payload method used for the critical hit, can really make a difference on what trigger method is best suited for your campaign.

For example, I really, really like the simplicity of Method I and think it works quite well under most circumstances, but it's drawbacks can become kind of silly at times.  

I've used variations of Method II for many years, and it works very well for other d20 game systems with a focus on realism, but it's not quite suited for a casual D&D game. 

I eventually conceded to Method III shortly after 3e...It just makes sense on a lot of levels and I'll explain why below. 
 

Payload Methods: Critical Damage

No matter what trigger method you use, it's time to decide what the payload is. That is, now that you scored a critical hit, what happens next? Well, let's look at the most popular payloads:
 

Double Damage

A classic payload that dates back as far I can remember...and that's a long time. With this method, you do whatever damage you would normally do on an attack (after ALL bonuses, modifiers, multipliers, etc. are applied) then double it. So, if you did 15 points of damage after all modifiers and bonuses, your total damage would be 30. It has a tendency to cause confusion when other multipliers are involved, and often arguments ensue about which multipliers are applied first. I've always treated the critical hit multiplier as the last word, so I fortunately never had to deal with this nonsense.

Maximum Damage

Not nearly as powerful as the Double Damage payload, this lackluster effect tends to make most players very sad...even if critical hits trigger more frequently. I am staunchly opposed to this payload. It's what I refer to as the "Bull Sh*t" effect. Here's why; Your weapon can do maximum damage all by itself. If it wants to do maximum damage, it will roll maximum damage on it's next damage roll. It doesn't need a critical hit for that. A critical hit means your attack does MORE than what is expected or normal. Silly, silly, silly game design right here folks.
 

Additional Attacks

Although I've never really used this method short of a few sessions in the long, long ago, I still think it's interesting. It allows players to make an additional attack every time a critical hit is triggered. Players could theoretically make attacks all day long with this method if they had really lucky attack rolls.

Fatality!

This one is extremely controversial for its seemingly "over-powered" nature. The target must make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw. If they fail, they are reduced to 0 hit points instantly. Otherwise, they take maximum damage. This method, if used properly, can create some extremely dramatic and memorable battles. 

There you have it; The most popular, playable critical hit mechanics used in most D&D campaigns.

My Prescription

Ok, For those that skipped past everything just to see how this article ends, I give you this:

Realistic D&D: Method II with Fatality!
Gritty D&D: Method II with Double Damage
Awesome D&D: Method III with Fatality!
Snappy D&D: Method I with Additional Attacks
Classic D&D: Method I with Double Damage
Pharmaceutical D&D: Method I with Maximum Damage
Care Bear D&D: Method III with Maximum Damage



I like Awesome D&D, personally. Not sure about you guys...