Talk:Greater Critical (3.5e Feat)

Balance

This seems a bit too powerful to me. I'd suggest it as an epic feat rather than a regular one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.24.152.196 (talk • contribs) 2007-05-17 17:41:52. Please sign your posts.

Statistically speaking, it's only slightly more powerful than Improved Critical.

Let's take your standard battleaxe. Normal it's 20/×3. With IC, it's 19–20/×3. With GC, it's [3 + (3 − 1)] 20/×5.

Now let's run a scenario: you roll a natural 19 and natural 20 on successive attacks. For the sake of argument we'll assume both rolls represent a successful hit. With IC, the average damage is (4.5 + x) ×3 with the first hit (where x represents total damage bonuses due to Str, magic enhancement, Power Attack, favored enemy, etc.), and (4.5 + x) ×3 with the second. Total damage is (4.5 + x) ×6 = 27 + 6x.

Now let's run that same scenario with GC: First hit is 4.5 + x. The second is (4.5 + x) ×5. Total (4.5 + x) ×6 = 27 + 6x. Exactly the same as it is with IC.

GC slightly greater benefit comes from the fact that there may be instances where a natural 19 is a miss, and that more often that not, if a character has GC, it'll also have IC. —Sledged (talk) 19:04, 17 May 2007 (MDT)

I'm going to start off by stating I suck at math. That being said, I noticed a problem with yours. Increasing the CTR is different from increasing the Critical Multiplier.

If you have a weapon, as you suggested, as a x2 and it is increased to 19-20, you find yourself having a slightly better advantage of scoring a Critical. Let's say you have a weapon of 1d6 and your Strength Modifier is +3. Under a x2 Critical, that would become 2d6 + 6 as the Damage Dice is multiplied, not the Damage Roll. All external modifiers are also multiplied that are a part of the weapon's damage.

When you increase the CTR via GC, you instead get 3d6 + 9. Rolling actual dice for this five times, here are the results;

Non-Critical

1d6 rolled 5 times + 3 Str Mod; 6, 5, 1, 6, 3

Total: 9, 8, 4, 9, 6.

Normal x2 Critical

2d6 rolled 5 times + 6 Str Mod; 4+2, 6+2, 3+2, 6+3, 5+6

Total: 12, 14, 11, 15, 17

GC of x3

3d6 rolled 5 times + 9 Str Mod; 3+2+3, 3+5+4, 4+4+3, 3+1+2, 5+3+1

Total: 17, 21, 20, 15, 18

Remember, it's not the matter of an "average". An average will tell you what to expect, but it's more than that. It's also consideration of what the least amount is that you can get. With a x2, the lowest you can get is [1+1]+6, or 8. With x3, the lowest you can get is [1+1+1]+9, or 12. That is a +4 difference. When compared to the highest, a x2 is [6+6]+6 or 18. The x3 is [6+6+6]+9, or 27, or a +9 difference. So yes, there is a big difference especially when Iterative Attacks stack up or when you begin to apply this toward higher Critical Multipliers, greater Modifiers, and deadlier weapons.

Prerequisites

Shouldn't this feat have Weapon Focus and Improved Critical as prerequisites, to build a feat tree? Also, I'd rather have a feat that can be taken earlier (lower BAB prereq) but only increases the crit multiplier by one, instead of doubling it. This feat gets a bit silly with the pick and the scythe (x7 ??). If the player finds some other sources of additional crit multipliers, he can make a really sick build. --Mkill 11:01, 24 July 2007 (MDT)

I'm not looking to build a feat tree with this feat. This feat was originally conceived as a variant for Improved Critical, but I decided to make a feat it its own right. So Greater Critical has the same prereqs, save that I knocked up the BAB requirement because I thought it'd be a bit much to have both feats by 9th level. I may lower the BAB prereq to +13 so that single-classed characters of a 3/4-BAB class can take it at 18th level.

I don't want IC as a prereq, because I want players to be able to choose either one without forcing them to have the other.

Similar to what I stated above, statistically, a scythe with a with GC is not much different than a scythe with IC (×7 versus 19–20/×4). The difference is the same as the one between a battleaxe and a longsword (×3 versus 19–20/×2) or a heavy pick and a scimitar (×4 versus 18–20/×2).

As far as crit stacking, WotC is careful about creating feats and abilities that increase crit multipliers. The only instance I can think of is a class feature of the master thrower in the Complete Warrior, and it explicitly states that it does not stack with any other effects that increase the crit multiplier of a weapon, as does GC. —Sledged (talk) 13:16, 26 July 2007 (MDT)

The difference being that a scythe at 19-20 has a much lower chance of hitting Massive Damage than a scythe at x7. Lets have a look at the maths: For the x4 scythe, you need to hit 13- at least +5 on the damage roll. At x7, you need only an 8, which, with a reasonably high strength (18 will be fairly common among Level 16 fighters) and a +1 weapon at least, massive damage is certain on any critical. With a strength of 18, a fighter still needs another 7 from enhancement and the roll to hit Massive. MorkaisChosen 11:35, 22 November 2007 (MST)

Ah, yes. Massive damage. Hadn't considered that, but I don't think it's that much more of an issue than with IC. This feat can't be taken until 16th level, even then you'd have to have a fighter bonus feat to take it at that point. Otherwise, it'll be the last feat taken before epic level. At minimum a 16th-level Strength-based build will have a +3 weapon (not including weapon special abilities), a 16 base Strength, and a belt of giant strength +4 for a total of +8 to damage. Take other factors into account like two-handed weapon use, Power Attack, enlarge person, flaming burst/icy burst/shocking burst, inherent bonus (wish/miracle/manual), etc, and massive damage seems as likely with ×4 as it does with ×7. —Sledged (talk) 09:24, 25 November 2007 (MST)

It makes it a lot easier with a pick and shield, too- you can get the shield bonus and you don't even need the extra bonus from 2-handed use. MorkaisChosen 09:29, 1 December 2007 (MST)