Critical hit damage = max + 1d6?

Page 16 of the how to play chapter of the 10-29 playtest packet states that 1d6 is added to critical hits that cause damage  by monsters with character levels and characters.

Am I reading this correctly to mean that player characters : fighters, clerics, thieves, and wizards add 1d6 to their crits at 1st level, 2d6 at 3rd level, etc.? 
Actually it reads 2d6 not 1d6 and increases over time to a maximum 6d6. However, I believe this was meant to be an optional experimental rule intended to replace the max damage rule but was not labeled properly. Otherwise that could be incredible damage
No at 1st level, you deal 2d6 extra damage on a critical hitand at each odd-­numbered level after 1st, this extra damage increases by 1d6, to a maximum of 6d6.

Level  Damage
1          2d6
3          3d6
5          4d6
7          5d6
9          6d6

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

I think monsters without class level should also be able to deal extra damage on a critical hit though.

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Wow - max and 2d6?  That is a lot of damage.
brutal. Fighting PCs or stuff with levels just got really scary!
Hi level 1 wizard, you take 13 + 2d6...20 dmg.
 
Currently running a playtest, weekly, online D&D Next Session using a virtual table system called roll20.
I don't like the playtest optional crit hit rule.  It is too complicated to remember how many d6 each level gets.   I like the idea of adding an exploding 1d6 to max damage.   If you roll a 6 you roll again and add the damage to your hit.    Or I like applying a "wound" to the target when you crit.  A "wound" makes the creature or PC apply a -1 to all die rolls until healed by magic.  I've been testing both of these in my games, and we like either of them. 

A Brave Knight of WTF

 

Rhenny's Blog:  http://community.wizards.com/user/1497701/blog

 

 

I am okay w/ the crits being freaking devastating. Max + dice makes them crazy lucky. Super useful for the PCs, but really bad when they're hit. That said, I know a few posters have mentioned the number of extra dice being difficult to remember. I think it starting at 2d6 is a bit odd for remembering the progression. I do like the idea of using exploding dice on crits.
"What's stupid is when people decide that X is true - even when it is demonstrable untrue or 100% against what we've said - and run around complaining about that. That's just a breakdown of basic human reasoning." -Mike Mearls
It may be a bit to remember, but I would just write it on the character sheet.

crit = 2d6 and at level 3 I erase the 2 and write a 3.

Maybe not perfect, but good enough for me
It may be a bit to remember, but I would just write it on the character sheet.

crit = 2d6 and at level 3 I erase the 2 and write a 3.

Maybe not perfect, but good enough for me



Heaven forbid someone write something down.  

I like that criticals are devastating.  Not as brutal as the system we used in 2e & 3e.  On a crit, we rolled percentage dice.  On a result of 1-25, damage was doubled.  26-50 resulted in triple damage.  51-75 was triple damage - maiming (usually a penalty to attacks and checks).  If you rolled 76-100, it was instant death.

I think it should not just be for characters and monsters with class levels.  Give it to everybody. 
It may be a bit to remember, but I would just write it on the character sheet.

crit = 2d6 and at level 3 I erase the 2 and write a 3.

Maybe not perfect, but good enough for me



Heaven forbid someone write something down.  

I like that criticals are devastating.  Not as brutal as the system we used in 2e & 3e.  On a crit, we rolled percentage dice.  On a result of 1-25, damage was doubled.  26-50 resulted in triple damage.  51-75 was triple damage - maiming (usually a penalty to attacks and checks).  If you rolled 76-100, it was instant death.

I think it should not just be for characters and monsters with class levels.  Give it to everybody. 




You just rekindled my memory.  When we used to play 1e and 2e, we made all natural 20 crits that did x2 damage.  Then we'd roll a 2nd d20. If the 2nd roll was a 20, we'd make it 3x damage and roll again.  If the next roll was a 20 we'd make it 4x damage and roll again.  If the next roll was a 20 it was an instant kill.
 
In one game, my wizard threw a dagger at a huge T-Rex type beast that was ridden by a super scary bad dude.   I rolled 4 20s in a row...and the T-Rex beast took the dagger in the eye.  He fell and the rider was squished under the beast.   That was a once in a lifetime result.


     

A Brave Knight of WTF

 

Rhenny's Blog:  http://community.wizards.com/user/1497701/blog

 

 

I prefer the elegance of 'max damage' instead of additionally rolling dice, so won't be using this rule. 
Epic fantasy action adventure! - free ebook
What monsters have "class levels?". Reading thebestiary - all monsters have hit points based on one more hit dice.  No mention of class.
What monsters have "class levels?". Reading thebestiary - all monsters have hit points based on one more hit dice.  No mention of class.



At higher levels monsters like orcs, hobgoblins, and goblins are sometimes given a level or two in fighter, rogue, or something to make them more challenging. They rarely if every show up that way in the bestiary
In our Playtest the Players demanded Critical Hit type use so I have bounced between an old Dragon Article Chart for 1E another chart for 2E and the 3E.  One actually has Fumbles which the Players seemed to like as this is for Monsters and Players.

Curious though about Class Levels for monsters or how will the Villian NPC match up with the Players. I decided to make a few Characters of Various Levels to inform myself as a DM of all the Player Options and it also provided me with some NPC's who have every right to match up with the Player Characters as they are Rivals.  This might also make a worthy Challenge for my Players who deserve it.  They expect lethal encounters but they also get plenty of slaying the enemy in.  

I haven't seen any rules for NPC's but while encounter building and game designing there should be something.  This is something I am testing to see how balanced this might be or not.  There should be a whole world of adventurers how might the Players stack up?  Not sure yet but Critical hits should match the Level of Character or Creature, though I am not sure x2, x3, xd6 with a max is what is good for your game.  I am really not into severed limbs unless it is the Head.... 
The bestiary doesn't really seem to list any, something I only noticed after you asking this question longtalljohn. If any current enemies are worth of this distinction I would say the ones most like a simple player race like the dark acolyte which is basically just a human cleric or the ones whose name is simply a race + "class" like "human berserker" and "human war chief".  Possibly even the drow.

that is not neccessarily true though, that's just my own idea

how here it would definitely be true is if you roll up your own NPC monster as I often do.  Many times when I am DM and start getting burnt out and just want to play like a regular player for a change I simply roll a couple characters the the same level as the party, essentially making myself my own little PC party to control and make that a boss encounter which often gives it a more PvP kind of feel in an otherwise purely PvE game.  That would be a prime example of a good use for the new crit rule.
Not sure a PvP kind of feel is what I'm looking for.  If five 3rd level Characters are in a location based game around a city.  The Master of the Thieves Guild just happens to be in the same location as the Players who never know all of this NPC's intrigues.  He maybe a friend or foe depending on the Players choices and skill checks.  Maybe one of the players decide the NPC is cocky and threatens or attacks.  Well now here we have the Level 10 Rogue vs Level 3 Fighter.  Who might crit if so what happens to the Players.  They might tread more lightly or suddenly the setting is spun into a Guild War.  

I as a DM might or might not kill the Player even if the Master Rogue Crits but if it came up this would be where the Players feel like they are in a real setting and perhaps eventually the Rogue Player wants to take over or the Master Rogue leaves the Party with a ham strung Fighter and a Character Hook.  I am also fine with a Player killing powerful NPC's makes for interesting game but looking at the monster and thinking about Critical Hits.  

I don't think any Monsters provided would match up to the Level 10 Guild Master, High Priest, Arch Wizard, or Fighter Lord who would probably have alot of control in a location unless it were maybe one of the Dragons which none provided have the Cha, Int, or Wis to rule effectively.  If this NPC joined the Party in an encounter to help defeat some Dragon Destroying the village or city and the Dragon out matched the Party.  Here is where some of the xp values pop into the mind and best for somewhere else.  

I also remember some editions where certain creatures were immune to Critical Hits which would keep the wizard from slaying the dragon with a dagger toss.  If it makes for belief in possibility let it happen.  Should the Halfing slay the Giant with a Crit?  Sure!  Smashed the toe or cut the achilles tenden causing the calf muscle to bunch up behind the giants knee he stumbles and burst his skull upon a sharp boulder.  I guess the Wizard might do something similar with a Crit but there should be somethings in place for these and thats why trying the Playtest Rules as they are set is important and Feed Back about what is working and what is not.
Since most monsters in NEXT are shrimps, I don't really get the appeal. Max damage is usually an auto-kill as it is. The bonus 2d6 just means they can end "boss" type encounters in really anti-climactic ways. I don't really see how it makes the game more fun. When it's came up in the playtest, it tends to cause more mechanics discussion than th older model, which is a shame because a crit should just be a "ooooohhh!" moment.
A few guidelines for using the internet: 1. Mentally add "In my opinion" to the end of basically anything someone else says. Of course it's their opinion, they don't need to let you know. You're pretty smart. 2. Assume everyone means everything in the best manner they could mean it. Save yourself some stress and give people the benefit of the doubt. We'll all be happier if we type less emoticons. 3. Don't try to read people's minds. Sometimes people mean exactly what they say. You probably don't know them any better than they know themselves. 4. Let grammar slide. If you understood what they meant, you're good. It's better for your health. 5. Breath. It's just a dumb game.
Yeah, I'm not a fan of the current Critical Hit rules... currently with my playtest group, we just use 3Es method, except we double everything, so you are essentially just rolling the damage twice as if you hit him twice.

Though I understand the current Critical Hit rules, its just to much extra to keep track of.
I'm not much of a fan of the new rule either. Crits already seem pretty beefy to me. Plenty of the "tough" mobs I've thrown at my players have been made into a joke by big attacks before we ever had these exploding dice. Doesn't really seem necessary. I prefer them as an optional rule to replace the max damage rule
I don't like the extra dice because it gives a huge advantage to players over monsters and, because no confirmation is needed, it allows low level players to deal massive damage on a 1 in 20 chance. I don't think the old system was broken. I haven't seen any discussion about confirmation rolls here, is that something most players wanted to do away with? Also, will weapons have different threat ranges? That would definitely make a rapier or any keen weapon overpowered if you don't need to confirm, especially with the massive extra damage in this packet.
A critical should be just that. Critical. A massive crushing blow. An insanely accurate shot. Something BIG and IMPORTANT happens that defines heroes and crystalises moments in the players' memory. It should be spectacular. 

Max damage with a d6 or two isn't special enough for me. Max damage can occur quite readily without throwing a natural 20 already, effectively making throwing a 20 a "meh, well at least I know I hit". I'd like to see the damage dice doubled... in other words add another d12 if you were using a great sword. 2d12+strength is better than max of 12+strength. Add another d8 for a longsword... just double the damage dice.

If that's too complicated, just double the roll... this adds further tension in the player really not wanting to throw really low on the damage dice. 

Should monsters get crits on players? No. The heroes are the players. 

Should the main antagonist get crits on players? Maybe. I'd never cheat that the dragon got a crit on a player when it didn't, but I might cheat that the dragon didn't get a crit on a player when it actually did, if the crit would result in the player's death right up front, or otherwise seem un-fun or arbritrary. The fun stops for the player when they cannot participate or fel their participation was meaningless (died in the first round for example). So I wonder if this wouldn't be judged by DMs on a case by case basis anyway. shrug?

 
The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules. -Gary Gygax
I am using the K.I.S.S. rule for critical hits: roll you damage, add any pluses for strength, magic, etc and then double the result. Simple to remember and minimal math needed.

I had a PC last weekend roll a 1 for their damage, added 2 for Str bonus for a total of 6 damage after doubling. Very bad luck since he was fighting an Orc Leader who still had LOTS of hit points. (FYI the party ended up captive because of bad rolls like this)
I've been playing with the rule that a critical hit is max weapon damage + standard damage roll. So a critical on a longsword (with no bonuses) would be 8 + 1d8 damage. It doesn't have the disappointing critical rolls as you always do at least as much damage on a non critical hit, and it isn't as unbalancing as double damage.
I was okay with 3.5's double damage, but after playing Pathfinder I like their version of rolling double damage dice and doubling the bonuses, then it's less likely you get 6 damage on a crit.

But whatever system we get, if it's going to be massive bonus damage it needs a confirmation roll.

But whatever system we get, if it's going to be massive bonus damage it needs a confirmation roll.



gack...please no confirmation roll.....the biggest fun sucking rule in gaming! ....rolls "a 20...yeah crit....oh wait I have to confirm....nah missed so just a regular hit". That and time is wasted with a second roll. 
I've enjoyed no confirmation rolls and the 'static' extra damage for heroes (or things with levels) only.
Currently running a playtest, weekly, online D&D Next Session using a virtual table system called roll20.
My group never liked the confirmation die roll, very anti-climatic. 

We prefer to use critical hit charts that are readily available in Dragon articles, home-brew rules, and there was even a 3ed critical hit card system that was based on your damage type. Great product! 

You get great roll-playing scars and memorable moments from crit charts, instead of extra d6s of damage. 
I like it.  And it's only a 5% chance of it happening, so I'm all for it.

Besides, one of the biggest problems I've had with recent D&D is how unheroic it's been seeming.  Everyone focus fires on one mob, kills it.  Then everyone switches target.  It's very efficient, yes, but I remember watching movies and reading books where the heroes come in and slaughter groups larger than themselves.  3 to 5 on 1 odds.  That's 'heroic' in terms of literature, comics and movies.  And I think that D&D should be allowed to reflect that, instead of 4-5 guys ganging up on one unnamed Hobgoblin Soldier, kills him, while the other 3-4 beat on the PCs.

There should be 20 Hobgobbies and although, yes, they SHOULD be a THREAT to the players, but as a GROUP.  Not individually.  That should be reserved for named bad guys, Chiefs, head lieutenants and the like, not greeblies. 
I prefer the elegance of 'max damage' instead of additionally rolling dice, so won't be using this rule. 



The problem our group had with max damage is that it's not really that different from a solid hit, heck it actually happens less often it seems.

Critical hits about 5% of the time (20 on a d20).  Max damage with a longsword happens 12.5% of the time (8 on a d8).  So why do you even need critical rules then?

I do like the idea of simply doubling the dice OR and this is a novel idea...why not apply advantage to the damage of a critical hit?  Roll twice and take the best?  I love the advantage idea and apply it with abandon instead of trying to figure out modifiers.  I've used it for healing rolls, I've used it for initiative.  Anything where the PCs through action or description have a clear advantage.  There's no reason a critical can't apply the same effect to damage.

New Packet - new rules.


It looks like this rule is gone and now critical hits do max damage plus an extra weapon damage die.


Carl
The new crit riles are just what I thought they should be. Just what I mentioned earlier in the thread.
I think it works best. You are guarenteed to get the damage of a good hit +1, and can get up to double damage.
Does this apply to spells that have an attack roll? Hmm. That's why +xd6 was nice. Casters could chip in.
Currently running a playtest, weekly, online D&D Next Session using a virtual table system called roll20.
I'll admit this new crit seems a little underwhelming to me, but with lower monster hp it might work out okay. I just want a crit to feel powerful and dangerous