Goodman Games

The chart for two weapon fighting specifies that a natural 20 is needed to score a critical in some cases in which the dice rolled cannot roll a 20.

I'd say "Oh well" in that case.

It says that, for those that you roll other than a d20, an exact result only (i.e. total) of 20 results in a crit (and only with the primary hand/weapon.) And that's if a 20 even hits. So it's basically really tough, but possible, to crit when 2-weapon fighting.

Grognardia will get a kick out this. (see his post from yesterday: http://grognardia.blogspot.com/2011/06/im-no-fun.html )

_________________
Reverend Dakota Jesus Ultimak, S.S.M.o.t.S.M.S., D.M.

(Dungeon) Master In Chief of Crawl! fanzine. - http://www.crawlfanzine.com/

"[...] there is no doubt that Dungeons and Dragons and its imitators are right out of the pit of hell." - William Schnoebelen, Straight talk on Dungeons & Dragons

Crits should be the highest number on that dice type, e.g. a 16 on a d16 or a 14 on a d14. While this improves the chance of getting a crit with smaller dice types, it also improves the chance of getting a fumble.

_________________
Marv / Finarvyn
DCC Minister of Propaganda; Deputized 6/8/11

DCC RPG playtester 2011, C&C playtester 2003,T&T since 2003,
ADRP Since 1993, OD&D player since 1975

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own."
-- Gary Gygax
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!"
-- Dave Arneson

That doesn't work though. The chart CLEARLY states that Agility of 11 or less CAN NOT CRIT. The rest give a variable die (d16 or d14) and states "Primary hand crits on attack result of exactly 20*; off hand cannot crit."

So...what is it? Do you need to roll high and, with modifiers, get a 20? Do you need to roll a 16 (on a D16)? If the former, what if you roll over a 20?

Since I wrote that Marv pointed out the dichotomy that having a worse chance to hit (rolling d16 or d14 instead of d20) improves the chance you score a critical (max die roll) AND improves the chance of a fumble (natural 1). I'm not sure it makes sense but I can't figure out any better system that doesn't suck the air out of combat.

Or, on a natural 16, roll a d5, a 2 or better confirms a critical hit. Why? 80% of 6.25% is 5%. And thus it maintains the fact that citicals happen 5% of the time. Heck, you can expand that to 15-16 for fighters to yield 10% chance of critting but is it worth the extra die roll? It really doesn't add anything to combat in general. And the gyrations to get 5% on a d14 are just as weird (on a natural 14, roll 4 or better on a d10 to confirm since 7/10 of 1/14 is 1/20).

That just seems...awkward. I'd probably let a crit go off on the "highest die" myself--if it get's overpowering (and two weapon fighting is unbalanced already in most games) I might include a penalty to the crit--either roll a reduced die, or roll on the next table down or the like.

In either case, I think the section needs to rewritten to make the rules clearer, regardless of what house rules come about.

The increased fumble chance should compensate sufficiently.

I actually don't like the idea of fumbles (or crits) becoming more frequent. Especially if using a smaller die intends on making the chances of hitting lower.

Remember you will see more crits and fumbles over time than any NPC will in their lifetime (i.e. an NPC will see 5 to 10 d20 rolls over their existence, while a character will see 100s or 1000s.)

I don't think it would be that much of a burden to rely on an exact result of 20 to get a crit (on a die other than a d20.) I think only an exact result of 1 (if at all) should result in a fumble. It shouldn't be that awkward, the number 20 or 1 should stick out. I know it would for me.

_________________
Reverend Dakota Jesus Ultimak, S.S.M.o.t.S.M.S., D.M.

(Dungeon) Master In Chief of Crawl! fanzine. - http://www.crawlfanzine.com/

"[...] there is no doubt that Dungeons and Dragons and its imitators are right out of the pit of hell." - William Schnoebelen, Straight talk on Dungeons & Dragons

That doesn't change the chance. Getting a 20 on d16+strength+attack bonus is still a 1 in 16 chance. Just because the total is 20 doesn't change the odds. So what if you only need a 13 to get a 20. 13 comes up 1 in 16 on a d16 and is a 6.25% chance of a crit rather than 5%. My post above explains how to "Fix" the odds back to 5%. But is it really worth having an extra die roll to make sure you aren't taking advantage of that extra 1.25%?

Whoa, you're right. I'm glad you pointed that out. Anywhere where an "exact roll of..." shows up should be changed to reflect that.

_________________
Reverend Dakota Jesus Ultimak, S.S.M.o.t.S.M.S., D.M.

(Dungeon) Master In Chief of Crawl! fanzine. - http://www.crawlfanzine.com/

"[...] there is no doubt that Dungeons and Dragons and its imitators are right out of the pit of hell." - William Schnoebelen, Straight talk on Dungeons & Dragons

Frankly I'm not 100% satisfied with the two-weapon fighting rules as written. I really like the use of Zocchi dice...that part works out great. I'm not totally satisfied with the scaling of crit possibilities. It still feels, well, awkward -- not intuitive or easy to remember. I'm open to elegant solutions...

_________________
Joseph Goodman
Goodman Games
www.goodman-games.com

I would have to say that I'm comfortable with non d20 attacks not being able to crit as I would be with them having a higher chance of crit/fumbles. But jmucchiello is right-on that exact result numbers are mathematically the same as rolling the highest number. And that it would have to hit to be a crit should balance it out a bit.

_________________
Reverend Dakota Jesus Ultimak, S.S.M.o.t.S.M.S., D.M.

(Dungeon) Master In Chief of Crawl! fanzine. - http://www.crawlfanzine.com/

"[...] there is no doubt that Dungeons and Dragons and its imitators are right out of the pit of hell." - William Schnoebelen, Straight talk on Dungeons & Dragons

Max result on the die is a crit. 1 on the die is fumble. The added chance of critical hits is balanced by the added chance to fumble. Don't over think it. The d10-d16 based on agility for attack rolls is brilliant.

As written many characters will be unable to crit with a weapon in each hand at all. I think. That is fine and reflects the difficulty of the task.

I might have the numbers a bit off but a 5th level Thief or a 4th level Elf with 14s in both STR and DEX won't be able to roll higher than 19 without some situational modifiers ( or a magic weapon ). Getting two 14s on a randomly rolled character isn't that shabby either.

_________________
Magic: 40% of the time it works every time.

Nice analysis. That's why max die value is simpler.

I assumed that the dual wield crits were written this way to purposely deny crits ( and the automatic hits that come with them ) to less skilled fighters.

If that's not the intended effect then I agree that max die value would be the way to go.

_________________
Magic: 40% of the time it works every time.

I had a thought this morning; instead of needing to achieve a specific result that lies outsid of the die, why not use rolling doubles on the attack dice as a crit as long as both attacks hit successfully and the doubles are not both 1s. It uses the numbers generated on all the dice (unless the character has a good enough agility to use two d20s), reduces probability of a crit (should it be high if your agility is low?), and is easy to remember.

In theory the odds of that are the same assuming the same dice type and if you are using much lower dice the odds of getting hits is going to be very low. Also, I believe you should be able to crit with one attack and miss with another.

Making it max value for the dice as long as that is a hit isn't too bad. It really does balance with the fumble chances which makes sense when whipping around lethal weapons in your off hand.... who all had 'played' with duel wielding nunchuks like Bruce Lee?!?

I think the only flaw in that is most dual wielders will be halflings and RAW say they only fumble on double 1s which is basically never.

Isn't it simpler to just remove the rule that says "if it crits it hits"? In fact, I'd favor "If the only way to hit is also to crit, it only hits and doesn't crit."

The RAW actually say only a natural 20 is automatically a crit and a hit. When warriors have higher crit ranges say 18-20... an 18/19 is only a crit IF it hits.

And I'm saying, weapons attacking that cannot roll 20 just don't automatically hit on their max die roll. The can crit on their max die roll but the opponent's AC still has to be overcome.

possible solution #1:
Consider the following: your character just scored a critical hit on his foe... why worry about whether the second hit is a critical until you know that the F**ker is still alive! Determine the result of the crit; which is likely to leave your foe at your mercy, then have the second attack score a crit if you roll beats their AC by 3+?

Possible solution #2:
In essence, the entries on the critical hit charts are really just "interesting & gruesome" forms of damage: why not make the the crit check a function of damage. Any weapon that strikes and does max damage allows for a roll on the appropriate crit chart. To cut back on the number of crits just have a row or 2 added in the right spots on the charts that say: "no extra damage," or "no further effect."

Also:
I don't particularly like the zocchi dice... especially considering their price. Next Sat. I'm going to go down to a game shop and will have to convince strangers to go buy some zocchi dice: just to properly beta test a new game system... that'll be a hard sell, assuming the game shop even has any for sale.

Given that:

1d6/2 = D3
2d3-1 = D5
2d4-1 = D7
2d6-1 = D11
2d8-1 = D15
2d10-1 = D19
2d12-1 = D23
2d20-1 = D39

Is it acceptable to use the old die conventions?
Example: Ive been using D39 in place of a D30...
where a roll of 31-39 = 1-9 (respectively) on the applicable chart.

Using two dice as you are completely alters the probabilities. If you are going to use two dice, use them in d% form: d30 = d10 plus (d6 -- 1-2: +0, 3-4: +10, 5-6: +20).

I've seen these sorts of examples a few times on these playtest forums in just a few days so far. Since this is both tempting, the sort of thing lots of players will try, and wrong, I strongly suggest a page in the final rules that explains exactly why rolling dice like this doesn't give the same results ranges.