Good Hit Table (D&D 3.5 Reworked Critical Hits)

[Perseus]

This is still being worked on, please realize this if/when you reply. Nothing is final and I'm still working on the math, which I could use some help with (Attack Roll Total Above AC table).

This will only be used for PCs, monsters/creatures/NPCs are all over the book in challenge ratings and power so if they were to have this then... Well we would have a ton of dead PCs.

I'll try to adapt this to be used by monsters/NPCs/creatures.

Anyways!

In the current system get rid of critical ranges for the weapons.

Critical hits come in different tiers depending on how high above an opponent's AC the PC rolls.

So a Goblin with an AC of 13 can have a critical hit scored on them when a PC has a total attack of 14 or higher. I'm still working on the tiers which will be shown below. Anytime you can choose a higher tier effect, you may instead choose a lower level effect. A higher tier is worth 2 effects of any lower tier. For example if a Fighter can choose a Tier A effect, that fighter can choose 2 Tier B or 2 Tier C effect. Alternately the same Fighter can choose a Tier B and Tier C effect instead of the Tier A effect.

Depending on the tier the PC gains additional damage and may select a condition from the table below to apply to the target (No Save).

Attack Roll Total Above AC
0 - 5: Normal Hit
6 - 12: Tier C
13 - 22: Tier B
23+: Tier A

Tier C: (Duration 1d4 + 1 Rounds) (X1 Damage)
Blinded
Deafened
Fatigued
Shaken
Prone

Tier B: (Duration 1d4 + 2 Rounds) (X2 Damage)
Bleed 1d2
Confusion
Dazed
Exhausted
Frightened
Staggered

Tier A: (Duration 1d4 + 3 Rounds) (X3 Damage)
Cowering
Paralyzed
Stunned
Nauseated

/very rough draft

[Amnoriath]

This is still being worked on, please realize this if/when you reply. Nothing is final and I'm still working on the math, which I could use some help with (Attack Roll Total Above AC table).

This will only be used for PCs, monsters/creatures/NPCs are all over the book in challenge ratings and power so if they were to have this then... Well we would have a ton of dead PCs.

I'll try to adapt this to be used by monsters/NPCs/creatures.

Anyways!

In the current system get rid of critical ranges for the weapons.

Critical hits come in different tiers depending on how high above an opponent's AC the PC rolls.

So a Goblin with an AC of 13 can have a critical hit scored on them when a PC has a total attack of 14 or higher. I'm still working on the tiers which will be shown below. Anytime you can choose a higher tier effect, you may instead choose a lower level effect. A higher tier is worth 2 effects of any lower tier. For example if a Fighter can choose a Tier A effect, that fighter can choose 2 Tier B or 2 Tier C effect. Alternately the same Fighter can choose a Tier B and Tier C effect instead of the Tier A effect.

Depending on the tier the PC gains additional damage and may select a condition from the table below to apply to the target (No Save).

Attack Roll Total Above AC
0 - 5: Normal Hit
6 - 12: Tier C
13 - 22: Tier B
23+: Tier A

Tier C: (Duration 1d4 + 1 Rounds) (X1 Damage)
Blinded
Deafened
Fatigued
Shaken
Prone

Tier B: (Duration 1d4 + 2 Rounds) (X2 Damage)
Bleed 1d2
Confusion
Dazed
Exhausted
Frightened
Staggered

Tier A: (Duration 1d4 + 3 Rounds) (X3 Damage)
Cowering
Paralyzed
Stunned
Nauseated

/very rough draft
1. What advantages would things like Scimitars, picks, and Kukris have then over their higher base damage cousins?
2. Why would a standard critical inflict emotion based penalties? Also why is Dazed in a lower their than nauseated?
3. This leads to the problem of stacking attack bonuses. As I have pointed out in a similar system a Complete Warrior kensai can use unarmed strike appendages along with the martial discipline weapon to give a 27 attack bonus per maneuver activated. This only requires a one level dip and a stance of your choice.
4. It also puts a much larger gap of resiliency of normal opponents vs. critical immune creatures if every time you hit a normal opponent you get to inflict a condition.

[Perseus]

1. What advantages would things like Scimitars, picks, and Kukris have then over their higher base damage cousins?
2. Why would a standard critical inflict emotion based penalties? Also why is Dazed in a lower their than nauseated?
3. This leads to the problem of stacking attack bonuses. As I have pointed out in a similar system a Complete Warrior kensai can use unarmed strike appendages along with the martial discipline weapon to give a 27 attack bonus per maneuver activated. This only requires a one level dip and a stance of your choice.
4. It also puts a much larger gap of resiliency of normal opponents vs. critical immune creatures if every time you hit a normal opponent you get to inflict a condition.

1: Higher crit ranged weapons will give a effective +1 to confirmation of critical tier... Err essentially this bonus doesn't apply to hitting the creature but to determining what tier you critical in.

2: If you get hit by an incredible attack, you can be scared. Seeing a fighter run across and pierce through your defenses like they are nothing can be quite traumatizing to a person's psyche. I've seen this shown in boxing matches where someone gets in a good hit and it causes the one being hit to be afraid of that attack or type of motion again. Dazed is in a lower tier than nauseated because it is easier to Daze someone with a hit than make them sickened/nauseated... Kinda like punching someone and they are disoriented versus punching them hard enough to make them vomit.

3: This isn't a problem with the Good Hit Table. 3.5 D&D is inherently flawed in the attack bonus vs. AC department. Besides you still have to hit a creature to get a critical and the stacking of Keen enhancement (+1 to crit tier confirmation) with Improved Critical feat (+1 to critical tier confirmation) isn't a problem. Assuming not everyone is a internet optimizer I don't see a problem since these bonuses don't actually help with hitting the target just how well your critical will be unlike the current system where improving your critical range does help you to hit the creature (well sort of).

Stacking attack bonuses is already a thing, however a player shouldn't be rewarded for luck but for skill. The D20 roll is luck and attack bonus is pure skill, why should a critical hit be based on luck? Why can't a level 10 Fighter critical hit a CR 1 Kobold every attack? That Fighter should be like 1990's Jackie Chan and the Kobold should be me... Every hit would shatter my defenses and be a "critical hit"

4: Totally been thinking about that... Being immune to criticals means that the attacker takes a penalty the tier they hit. Some could be -1 Tier, -2 Tier, or even completely immune -3 Tier. My reasoning is that sometimes a critical isn't hitting a vital spot but just hitting really really hard (i.e hulking hurler throwing the moon at someone is a very critical hit ;p )

All good questions, and I need to work on what tiers do what... But I don't think I can explain that well right now since I'm still roughing it all out.

[Amnoriath]

1: Higher crit ranged weapons will give a effective +1 to confirmation of critical tier... Err essentially this bonus doesn't apply to hitting the creature but to determining what tier you critical in.

2: If you get hit by an incredible attack, you can be scared. Seeing a fighter run across and pierce through your defenses like they are nothing can be quite traumatizing to a person's psyche. I've seen this shown in boxing matches where someone gets in a good hit and it causes the one being hit to be afraid of that attack or type of motion again. Dazed is in a lower tier than nauseated because it is easier to Daze someone with a hit than make them sickened/nauseated... Kinda like punching someone and they are disoriented versus punching them hard enough to make them vomit.

3: This isn't a problem with the Good Hit Table. 3.5 D&D is inherently flawed in the attack bonus vs. AC department. Besides you still have to hit a creature to get a critical and the stacking of Keen enhancement (+1 to crit tier confirmation) with Improved Critical feat (+1 to critical tier confirmation) isn't a problem. Assuming not everyone is a internet optimizer I don't see a problem since these bonuses don't actually help with hitting the target just how well your critical will be unlike the current system where improving your critical range does help you to hit the creature (well sort of).

Stacking attack bonuses is already a thing, however a player shouldn't be rewarded for luck but for skill. The D20 roll is luck and attack bonus is pure skill, why should a critical hit be based on luck? Why can't a level 10 Fighter critical hit a CR 1 Kobold every attack? That Fighter should be like 1990's Jackie Chan and the Kobold should be me... Every hit would shatter my defenses and be a "critical hit"

4: Totally been thinking about that... Being immune to criticals means that the attacker takes a penalty the tier they hit. Some could be -1 Tier, -2 Tier, or even completely immune -3 Tier. My reasoning is that sometimes a critical isn't hitting a vital spot but just hitting really really hard (i.e hulking hurler throwing the moon at someone is a very critical hit ;p )

All good questions, and I need to work on what tiers do what... But I don't think I can explain that well right now since I'm still roughing it all out.

1. Yeah, I understand, it treats the roll higher on the chart of the effects only. However you didn't explain Picks or Scythe's who have high critical damage. Possibly add a percentage of damage to tier 2 and 3 charts?
2. Except it shouldn't happen all the time and experienced characters should be able to get past the emotional trauma(PTSD is very different than what is being done here).
3. Yes, there are certain abilities that can be reapplied in a way not intended. However, you do realize that as a one level dip this character is automatically stunning any relatively challenging enemy it hits. You got rid of critical threat ranges so there is no chance nor anyway to fight it. Even the defending trick of the same type has a hard time scaling against what I put down.
4. So, what exactly are you saying? Is their a penalty to the effect table or do they ignore the extra effects while still taking extra damage?

[Perseus]

1. Yeah, I understand, it treats the roll higher on the chart of the effects only. However you didn't explain Picks or Scythe's who have high critical damage. Possibly add a percentage of damage to tier 2 and 3 charts?
2. Except it shouldn't happen all the time and experienced characters should be able to get past the emotional trauma(PTSD is very different than what is being done here).
3. Yes, there are certain abilities that can be reapplied in a way not intended. However, you do realize that as a one level dip this character is automatically stunning any relatively challenging enemy it hits. You got rid of critical threat ranges so there is no chance nor anyway to fight it. Even the defending trick of the same type has a hard time scaling against what I put down.
4. So, what exactly are you saying? Is their a penalty to the effect table or do they ignore the extra effects while still taking extra damage?

1: Good notice and I only took into account crit ranges and not multipliers. I think I'll leave the multiplier and let that be the base extra damage at tier 1. Then higher tiers could give extra base weapon damage or increase the base weapon damage die. Thanks for pointing that out!

2:I'm not touching PTSD and real world examples of military personnel with a 10 foot pole. Just take it at face value and I'll work it out later when I have a longer pole.

3: later, I'm on my phone and the reply is to long Lol.

4: I've thought about your comments and I like the idea of ignoring the status effects but doing extra damage.

I'll edit my initial post later.

Thanks!