PDA

View Full Version : Instant Kill Critical Discussion [3.5/PF]



Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 06:11 AM
Ok i know this isn't practical for the game and they used what i'll discuss because it was simpler to do so.
I can see how a rapier could do criticals more often then a a larger weapon being precise and quick, but don't you think bigger more powerful weapons (perhaps with a bigger crit mod then X2) would have a larger range for when rolling to confirm a crit for the possibility of an instant kill.
I hope my wording isn't confusing, if it was I'll use this example with a rapier and a longspear.

Ok so rapier has a 18-20 2x Crit makes sense that it might crit more than the Long-spear 20 3x Crit. So Aeromyre the ranger rolls a natural 18 to hit rolls again and gets another one, then a roll good enough to hit so it's an instant kill, I'm fine with this. BUT, Geon the barbarian rolls a 20 and then a 19 for his confirm, and does a regular crit, wouldn't it make more sense for the instant kill crit range to be large for a weapon that could impale completely through a human body than one that is quick, light and small?

So what if the 2nd instant kill crit range was based on the times modifier?
And how would it be? 2x = 20 x3 = 19-20 x4 =18-20?

Also if your weapon is keen it should be doubled as well.

Nidogg
2010-06-13, 06:25 AM
The rule is generally 20-20-20 for an instagib, that gives a 1/8000th chance of instagib. If the your interpretation of the rules were used then the rapier/scimitar/falchion would be much more popular. Unfortunatly there not. :smallfrown: Which is a shame, cos I like crit heavy weapons. But if you go into that rulling then picks become popular, and lets face it *4 multiplier is gooood.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 06:31 AM
The rule is generally 20-20-20 for an instagib, that gives a 1/8000th chance of instagib. If the your interpretation of the rules were used then the rapier/scimitar/falchion would be much more popular. Unfortunatly there not. :smallfrown: Which is a shame, cos I like crit heavy weapons. But if you go into that rulling then picks become popular, and lets face it *4 multiplier is gooood.

Yeah :(
I'm a rapier fan simply because DEX is the best stat and weapon finesse is my favorite feat. But i mean if i had more incentive to play heavy damage crit weapons.
So IKCing with a pick would require a 20 then a 18 or greater wear controversly with a rapier it would be an 18 then a necessary 20.

It would balance the weapons out, and give a little more favor to fighters/paladins/barbarians who are strength based vs rangers/rogues/bards who are more dex based.

KillianHawkeye
2010-06-13, 06:34 AM
I don't think that an instant kill should be possible just because you rolled really well. I mean, if the damage is enough to kill the guy outright, that's fine, just no instant kills that ignore hp. At least spells that kill you usually grant a saving throw.

Nidogg
2010-06-13, 06:39 AM
I don't think that an instant kill should be possible just because you rolled really well. I mean, if the damage is enough to kill the guy outright, that's fine, just no instant kills that ignore hp. At least spells that kill you usually grant a saving throw.
The rulling is generally "rulle of cool", you hit him in the nadgers and cause a fatal wound kinda thing... The saving thow on this is ridiculously easy to pass roll less than 20 on one dice then you have no chance to instakill.
In awnser to the above question, then yes it would even things out, perhaps reducing the AC of the crit confirm by 1 or 2 for evry multiplier above 2?

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 06:42 AM
It's an official rule but, there are house rules, and as a DM i am in favor of instant kills. You may do a milfton of damage with a crit and possiblly slice a limb and the person/monster may still have hitpoints. Realistically how long could you survive without a limb. You have blood loss, you won't be thinking straight, and adreniline will be keeping you alive for only a few seconds.

If you stab a longspear into a dragons heart with a crit and assuming you roll a 8 +4 for 18 str or whatever thats 36 damage, if this is the first hit it's definitely not killing the dragon based on hitpoints. but his heart begins to flood and blood doesn't get to his brain and he stops thinking.

I think it's very realistic

KillianHawkeye
2010-06-13, 06:44 AM
The saving thow on this is ridiculously easy to pass roll less than 20 on one dice then you have no chance to instakill.

Uh... that's not a saving throw? :smallconfused:

Claudius Maximus
2010-06-13, 06:46 AM
The instant kill crit model I see most often is threat/20/confirm, followed by threat/20.

I agree with KillianHawkeye in that this is not usually a really great idea. Keep in mind that this favors monsters over players, since the PCs will eat more attacks in the long run.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 06:47 AM
In awnser to the above question, then yes it would even things out, perhaps reducing the AC of the crit confirm by 1 or 2 for evry multiplier above 2?

do you mean for the 2nd or 3rd roll? I think it's the range of the second roll thats important but yes possiblly on the third roll the AC is lowered but then i think High damage crits become a bit overpowered. Plus not all high dmg crit weps are necessarily armor piercing, or easier to hit dodgy opponnents. So if i was to apply that rule it would have to be either to Armor bonus, or to dodge bonus.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 06:48 AM
The instant kill crit model I see most often is threat/20/confirm, followed by threat/20.

I agree with KillianHawkeye in that this is not usually a really great idea. Keep in mind that this favors monsters over players, since the PCs will eat more attacks in the long run.

Players are all optimizing brats so it levels it out.
I say this as both a player and a DM

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 06:50 AM
Uh... that's not a saving throw? :smallconfused:

You don't take saving throws for damage, why would you for a loss of a body function? Unless of course you were a sorcerer of the monstrosity bloodline (PF of course) that have some sort of resistance to critical.

Though in other games such as Mutants and Masterminds there are no hitpoints and taking damage is a DC 15 + damage done Toughness check - bruises/injuries. If you like saving through for resisting damage.

KillianHawkeye
2010-06-13, 06:55 AM
You don't take saving throws for damage, why would you for a loss of a body function? Unless of course you were a sorcerer of the monstrosity bloodline (PF of course) that have some sort of resistance to critical.

Because you would if it were a spell. It's basically equivocable to massive damage (only it's massively precise... I guess), and thus should allow a save. Getting instantly slain with no defense is no fun, amazingly lucky roll or no.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 07:00 AM
Because you would if it were a spell. It's basically equivocable to massive damage (only it's massively precise... I guess), and thus should allow a save. Getting instantly slain with no defense is no fun, amazingly lucky roll or no.

Yes but thats a spell, it is bound to the laws of arcane and we have some resistance to spells (not actual) no matter what, but getting that .125 chance more or less more than enough breaks the bodies resistance to physical damage.

Once again, i don't suggest anyone use this, i just think it's more realistic but not as practical.

KillianHawkeye
2010-06-13, 07:08 AM
I guess we'll agree to disagree then. Ciao!

Greenish
2010-06-13, 07:10 AM
i just think it's more realistic but not as practical.Wrong game.

Anyway, falcions and their ilk are already rather good if you have solid extra damage to multiply. Good Strength, Power Attack and Craven all benefit from high crit ranges, and the slightly smaller damage dice these weapons sport is hardly a drawback when your damage comes from abovementioned sources.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 07:15 AM
Wrong game.

Anyway, falcions and their ilk are already rather good if you have solid extra damage to multiply. Good Strength, Power Attack and Craven all benefit from high crit ranges, and the slightly smaller damage dice these weapons sport is hardly a drawback when your damage comes from abovementioned sources.

wrong game? I'm still talking about D&D 3.5/PF
I mentioned M&M because Killian was talking about making a save to resist a IKC which in masterminds you make toughness saves and take conditions rather than HP

but yeah i like the falcion for my Paladin/kensai

Sliver
2010-06-13, 07:27 AM
If you stab a longspear into a dragons heart with a crit and assuming you roll a 8 +4 for 18 str or whatever thats 36 damage, if this is the first hit it's definitely not killing the dragon based on hitpoints. but his heart begins to flood and blood doesn't get to his brain and he stops thinking.

I think it's very realistic

Except that if it did only 36 damage to a healthy dragon the DM shouldn't describe it as being impaled in the heart just because it's a crit. A crit is not an instantly fatal wound, but simply a more effective one.

If your DM sees a crit and goes on about how impressive it was with it's lethal attack without caring for the damage roll and then sees that it's actually low damage and the dragon is far from dead, it's a situation he put himself into.

It's the same as a player going "I aim for his neck" "you hit for 2 damage" "But it was to his neck! He should be headless now!"

It's not very realistic. It doesn't add nor take away from it. If you want instant kills you use them, if you don't, then you just avoid such descriptions. A crit might as well be a hit in an unarmored or weak point that does more damage. Not all crits have to be heart piercing or mind blowing.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 07:32 AM
Except that if it did only 36 damage to a healthy dragon the DM shouldn't describe it as being impaled in the heart just because it's a crit. A crit is not an instantly fatal wound, but simply a more effective one.

If your DM sees a crit and goes on about how impressive it was with it's lethal attack without caring for the damage roll and then sees that it's actually low damage and the dragon is far from dead, it's a situation he put himself into.

It's the same as a player going "I aim for his neck" "you hit for 2 damage" "But it was to his neck! He should be headless now!"

It's not very realistic. It doesn't add nor take away from it. If you want instant kills you use them, if you don't, then you just avoid such descriptions. A crit might as well be a hit in an unarmored or weak point that does more damage. Not all crits have to be heart piercing or mind blowing.

Well i was explaining that in this case it would make more sense for them to be there, because there i always the chance something will die if you hit it, but my point was if you do a regular crit and roll the best damage possible, then something simply wont die, so instant kill crits compensate for this.
Also It's not the discrepancy of using or not using instants, it's whether weapons with larger times modifiers should have a larger crit threat range for the confirmation for the chance of an instant kill.

Btw i am the DM,

Also if a player aims for a specific body part i simply move the AC up based on size modifiers, so a dragons neck would be small (maybe medium if it's a huge dragon) and i'll treat it as if they rolled a natral 20 if they hit since they are aiming for a specific organ

Sliver
2010-06-13, 07:45 AM
Let's see...

If you are a player and insta-kill a mook, you will be sad that you wasted such a good roll, because now your dice is depleted. If you are combat oriented there is a large chance that you would have killed him instantly anyway.

If you are a DM and one PC insta-kills your BBEG, you will be sad that you wasted a lot of effort on statting him for all of it to go wasted, or at least unused until you use those same stats against someone else.

It's nice to insta-kill some BBEG at the end after a tense combat, but at the beginning it's fairly anti-climatic for a boss to die from one hit. You could describe it awesomely on the killing-blow anyway.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 07:50 AM
Let's see...

If you are a player and insta-kill a mook, you will be sad that you wasted such a good roll, because now your dice is depleted. If you are combat oriented there is a large chance that you would have killed him instantly anyway.

If you are a DM and one PC insta-kills your BBEG, you will be sad that you wasted a lot of effort on statting him for all of it to go wasted, or at least unused until you use those same stats against someone else.

It's nice to insta-kill some BBEG at the end after a tense combat, but at the beginning it's fairly anti-climatic for a boss to die from one hit. You could describe it awesomely on the killing-blow anyway.

Thats a good point i did a test run on a BBEG and substituted my character in for two of my player's and he instakilled twice so i ignored it, i think in those circumstances i can compromise with the player and simply say he did max damage crit, and i'll give him and instant confirm on a roll some other time when he's not fighting the BBEG lol

Morph Bark
2010-06-13, 07:58 AM
So what if the 2nd instant kill crit range was based on the times modifier?
And how would it be? 2x = 20 x3 = 19-20 x4 =18-20?

This is a fair idea, I'd say, though of course you'd have to confirm it afterwards again.

Another idea (though more complicated) would be that if you confirm a critical hit with a weapon, you get to roll again. If the weapon has a x4 modifier and the third roll is a confirmed hit again, it instead does x7 damage rather than instant kill. If the weapon has a x3 modifier you have to roll twice and both must be confirmed hits to make a "greater critical" that deals x5 damage. If the weapon has a x2 modifier you have to roll thrice and all three must be confirmed hits to make a "greater critical" that deals x3 damage.

Alternatively, if you're simply playing a low-level or E6 campaign or so, rather than a "greater critical" it would simply be a OHK.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 08:09 AM
This is a fair idea, I'd say, though of course you'd have to confirm it afterwards again.

Another idea (though more complicated) would be that if you confirm a critical hit with a weapon, you get to roll again. If the weapon has a x4 modifier and the third roll is a confirmed hit again, it instead does x7 damage rather than instant kill. If the weapon has a x3 modifier you have to roll twice and both must be confirmed hits to make a "greater critical" that deals x5 damage. If the weapon has a x2 modifier you have to roll thrice and all three must be confirmed hits to make a "greater critical" that deals x3 damage.

Alternatively, if you're simply playing a low-level or E6 campaign or so, rather than a "greater critical" it would simply be a OHK.

Naturally

That is a truly interesting and more the style of gamers who are iffy on instant kills but do think things like that could happen

Emmerask
2010-06-13, 08:14 AM
Well for one a crit on a charge character (2h weapon) will in most cases kill the enemy anyway, so the only ones that really benefit are 1h weapon users (well if you can call a ~1/8000 chance a benefit ^^ if you use good and unloaded dice this will happen once a campaign maybe :smallwink:).

In my group we also use a fatepoint system (you can spend points for rerolls saves etcetc) if you go into the negatives the dm gets those points to use for bbegs. If you would now insta kill (20, 20, crit) the bbeg, he can spend those points for a reroll and you get those fatepoints. So we practically have a safety net against unwanted early kills.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 08:21 AM
Well for one a crit on a charge character (2h weapon) will in most cases kill the enemy anyway, so the only ones that really benefit are 1h weapon users (well if you can call a ~1/8000 chance a benefit ^^ if you use good and unloaded dice this will happen once a campaign maybe :smallwink:).

In my group we also use a fatepoint system (you can spend points for rerolls saves etcetc) if you go into the negatives the dm gets those points to use for bbegs. If you would now insta kill (20, 20, crit) the bbeg, he can spend those points for a reroll and you get those fatepoints. So we practically have a safety net against unwanted early kills.

In low level adventures like CR 1-3 sometimes 4 but not much after that, my Dad's level 6 Barbarian with rage and magic gauntlets and power attack wit a greatsword can do a lot of damage with a charge but i don't think without a crit he can kill a CR5+ in one hit

Not a bad idea, i know a couple d20s that have that kind of system with points. Whenever the DM uses a Fiat the players get an additional point.
Is that how it works for you?

Also I don't allow outside dice only one's that i've personnel bought and know are sound

Volthawk
2010-06-13, 08:31 AM
Eh, don't really like insta-kill rules. Means that Bob, the gnome commoner 1 with 6 strength can kill a god with 1 punch.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 08:34 AM
Eh, don't really like insta-kill rules. Means that Bob, the gnome commoner 1 with 6 strength can kill a god with 1 punch.

in those type of situations, it doesn't apply

In my opinion you can't kill a god anyway, sure you can knock him to -10 Hp and send him back to his regular plane of resistance and/or he may rest for some time

I would also say God's are immune to criticals

Kylarra
2010-06-13, 08:47 AM
It's worth pointing out that heavy crit weapons already have the advantage in probably forcing the massive damage save which, realistically, has about the same probability of forcing an instagib, just on the other end of the rolling spectrum.


Massive Damage

If you ever sustain a single attack deals 50 points of damage or more and it doesn’t kill you outright, you must make a DC 15 Fortitude save. If this saving throw fails, you die regardless of your current hit points. If you take 50 points of damage or more from multiple attacks, no one of which dealt 50 or more points of damage itself, the massive damage rule does not apply.

Sliver
2010-06-13, 09:45 AM
Thats a good point i did a test run on a BBEG and substituted my character in for two of my player's and he instakilled twice so i ignored it, i think in those circumstances i can compromise with the player and simply say he did max damage crit, and i'll give him and instant confirm on a roll some other time when he's not fighting the BBEG lol

If you are going to negate it when against an important encounter and make up compromises, then why bother with actual rules for it? Just wing it, when players crit and do good damage, make something interesting happen.

I'm trying it now, making descriptions and other stuff actually effect the game. So far it was only minor with "you are pushed 10ft away" but it was underwater and the opponent did a lot of damage (relatively to the HP)

true_shinken
2010-06-13, 10:20 AM
Looks like you need to see the wounds and vitality alternative rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/vitalityAndWoundPoints.htm).

Greenish
2010-06-13, 10:33 AM
wrong game? I'm still talking about D&D 3.5/PFYeah, wrong game to try to force some arbitrary "realistic" rules into the combat system. In the long term, Instant Death crits just mess up the melee PCs.

Besides, even you admitted you wouldn't use it consistently. I don't like houserules that change from one occasion to the other or apply only every other wednesday, and I don't like houserules that complicate the game.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 10:39 AM
If you are going to negate it when against an important encounter and make up compromises, then why bother with actual rules for it? Just wing it, when players crit and do good damage, make something interesting happen.

I'm trying it now, making descriptions and other stuff actually effect the game. So far it was only minor with "you are pushed 10ft away" but it was underwater and the opponent did a lot of damage (relatively to the HP)

Yeah I figure, you're right

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 10:42 AM
Yeah, wrong game to try to force some arbitrary "realistic" rules into the combat system. In the long term, Instant Death crits just mess up the melee PCs.

Besides, even you admitted you wouldn't use it consistently. I don't like houserules that change from one occasion to the other or apply only every other wednesday, and I don't like houserules that complicate the game.

Yeah if you read the first post i said i wouldn't actually use these rule but hypothetically...

Harperfan7
2010-06-13, 11:06 AM
I use an instakill houserule in my games. It's 20/20/confirm the third and they die. I like lethal combat, because sometimes you get shot in the eye with an arrow and it lodges in the back of your skull. Hit points just shouldn't cover things like that.

I also use more lethal massive damage rules. Massive damage is size related (small is 40, med is 50, large is 60, etc.) and when something is hit beyond that threshold (so 50+ damage for a med) they must make a fortitude save vs. DC 1/2 of damage dealt (so at least 25) or die.

Aeromyre
2010-06-13, 11:14 AM
I use an instakill houserule in my games. It's 20/20/confirm the third and they die. I like lethal combat, because sometimes you get shot in the eye with an arrow and it lodges in the back of your skull. Hit points just shouldn't cover things like that.

I also use more lethal massive damage rules. Massive damage is size related (small is 40, med is 50, large is 60, etc.) and when something is hit beyond that threshold (so 50+ damage for a med) they must make a fortitude save vs. DC 1/2 of damage dealt (so at least 25) or die.

Finally someone on my page! lol

The Glyphstone
2010-06-13, 11:40 AM
I use an instakill houserule in my games. It's 20/20/confirm the third and they die. I like lethal combat, because sometimes you get shot in the eye with an arrow and it lodges in the back of your skull. Hit points just shouldn't cover things like that.

I also use more lethal massive damage rules. Massive damage is size related (small is 40, med is 50, large is 60, etc.) and when something is hit beyond that threshold (so 50+ damage for a med) they must make a fortitude save vs. DC 1/2 of damage dealt (so at least 25) or die.

You must not allow charge-based builds then (or at least heavily work to nerf them), cause I can't imagine anything surviving past the first round of combat. Rocket tag indeed.

true_shinken
2010-06-13, 11:42 AM
You must not allow charge-based builds then (or at least heavily work to nerf them), cause I can't imagine anything surviving past the first round of combat. Rocket tag indeed.

This should help (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/massaveDamageThresholdsAndResults.htm).

The Glyphstone
2010-06-13, 11:44 AM
This should help (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/massaveDamageThresholdsAndResults.htm).

I'm sorry, how is that helpful, or even relevant?



(so 50+ damage for a med)




they must make a fortitude save vs. DC 1/2 of damage dealt (so at least 25) or die.


Chargers with only moderate optimization can put out 100+ damage per swing. That's multiple DC50+ Fort saves or death in the first round.

true_shinken
2010-06-13, 11:53 AM
I'm sorry, how is that helpful, or even relevant?

You were saying Harperfan7's houserules were too lethal because of the high save DC against massive damage; the UA alternative rules present variant (and less lethal) save DC rules; it's 15 +2 for each 10 damage above the massive damage threshold. Your 100 damage attack, in a 50 point threshold game, would be a DC 25 save.
I once DMed a low-level game that used vitality & wound points and the Con-based massive damage threshold. Very gritty.

Milskidasith
2010-06-13, 12:11 PM
You were saying Harperfan7's houserules were too lethal because of the high save DC against massive damage; the UA alternative rules present variant (and less lethal) save DC rules; it's 15 +2 for each 10 damage above the massive damage threshold. Your 100 damage attack, in a 50 point threshold game, would be a DC 25 save.
I once DMed a low-level game that used vitality & wound points and the Con-based massive damage threshold. Very gritty.

But that's not the rules the person was using, meaning it's still irrelevant... that's like saying "This might help!" and showing the statblock for an elder wyrm force dragon when somebody says monks are weak, and then saying that proves that monks aren't weak because this force dragon is really tough.

The Glyphstone
2010-06-13, 12:23 PM
You were saying Harperfan7's houserules were too lethal because of the high save DC against massive damage; the UA alternative rules present variant (and less lethal) save DC rules; it's 15 +2 for each 10 damage above the massive damage threshold. Your 100 damage attack, in a 50 point threshold game, would be a DC 25 save.
I once DMed a low-level game that used vitality & wound points and the Con-based massive damage threshold. Very gritty.

As Milk said (though with a very confusing analogy)....those aren't Harperfan7's rules, so it's not actually applicable in any way to my point - which, now that I think of it, applies to casters as well as charging meleers, 50+ is trivially easy to get on blasting spells, and turns them into save-or-dies with incredibly high DC's....an Empowered Fireball will do, on average, 52 damage to a group of enemies who fail their Reflex saves, and thus forcing a DC26 save against death. To match this, you'd need to cast Wail of the Banshee (a 9th level spell) with a casting stat of 24 - easily doable, but we're comparing to a 5th level spell.

Cogidubnus
2010-06-13, 12:32 PM
Don't forget that HP isn't lifeblood. It's like...fate. Your loss of HP represents how that last blow spectacularly failed to do more than graze you. When you run out, you're out of luck, take a blow that drops you, and start bleeding out. After all, most people go down with one decent bullet/stab. Pain and shock incapacitate you. Hence why -10 HP is dead, rather than -anything else. 10 HP is a small gap, as that's all you can survive.

Volthawk
2010-06-13, 12:36 PM
10 HP is a small gap, as that's all you can survive.

One word: Rageclaws.

Tavar
2010-06-13, 12:42 PM
But at that point you're using magic to alter natural laws.

ScionoftheVoid
2010-06-13, 04:56 PM
But at that point you're using magic to alter natural laws.

Extraordinary abilities break the laws of physics, and they're the least amazing form of ability. Making real world common sense completely useless in the gameworld is what D&D does best.

Tavar
2010-06-13, 05:08 PM
You're point is...what? How does that even tie into what I'm saying?

Sliver
2010-06-13, 05:11 PM
Maybe that magic makes sense because logic isn't logical in D&D?

(I really have no idea)

ScionoftheVoid
2010-06-14, 04:54 PM
You're point is...what? How does that even tie into what I'm saying?

You didn't have a quote so I assumed you were responding to Rageclaws, which have less of an effect on the laws of nature than several Extraordinary abilities. There isn't much point in pointing out whether or not something is magical or not because it will have roughly the same effect on natural laws.

In fact I'm not sure what I meant. I posted it whilst sleepy yesterday in response to something I found quite unclear to begin with, which probably wasn't the most wise of things to do. I'm not known for my wisdom however so I'll just say this: That can be ignored completely, it's only confused myself and others. The only reason I hesitate to delete it is that it's been referenced by other people and it looks weird when a post that has been noted by other posts disappears.

Aeromyre
2010-06-14, 08:52 PM
You didn't have a quote so I assumed you were responding to Rageclaws, which have less of an effect on the laws of nature than several Extraordinary abilities. There isn't much point in pointing out whether or not something is magical or not because it will have roughly the same effect on natural laws.

In fact I'm not sure what I meant. I posted it whilst sleepy yesterday in response to something I found quite unclear to begin with, which probably wasn't the most wise of things to do. I'm not known for my wisdom however so I'll just say this: That can be ignored completely, it's only confused myself and others. The only reason I hesitate to delete it is that it's been referenced by other people and it looks weird when a post that has been noted by other posts disappears.

"OH NO! THAT"LL SET OFF A CHAIN REACTION!!!" hahaha I'm not sure what thats from but definitely an old movie from the 70s or 80s
Flash Gordon maybe?

Yeah but i think everyone has missed the point of this thread anyway, i wanted to discuss a more realistic, but not practical to the game, theory that more lethal weapons (like those with larger crit multipliers) would have a better chance at instant killing a target.

SethFahad
2010-06-14, 11:40 PM
The rule is generally 20-20-20 for an instagib, that gives a 1/8000th chance of instagib.

I think you are wrong. The rule for instant kill is 20-20-*hit*.

Kylarra
2010-06-14, 11:46 PM
I think you are wrong. The rule for instant kill is 20-20-*hit*.Being a variant rule, there is no absolute on what the rule is.

lsfreak
2010-06-14, 11:53 PM
I think you are wrong. The rule for instant kill is 20-20-*hit*.

The variant laid out in the DMG does state as such. I prefer 20-20-20 for instakill, making it much rarer. 20-20-hit instead becomes a max-damage crit, with all dice maxed out (including sneak attack, though it's still not multiplied by the crit).

SethFahad
2010-06-14, 11:54 PM
Being a variant rule, there is no absolute on what the rule is.

DMG 28



I prefer 20-20-20 for instakill

Everyone is free to prefer whatever he likes, and even make his own new rules. I'm just stating the variant rules of DMG. :smallsmile:

Kylarra
2010-06-15, 12:00 AM
DMG 28 blablablabla*shrug*

My point still stands, albeit on more of an anecdotal stance than I had initially intended. Every DM I've played under that has discussed OHKO shots like that uses 20-20-20, and apparently a fair number of people in here do too, so I'd say that while "generally" from the initial post you responded to may not apply, since that implies a majority, the statement that there is no absolute with a variant rule is obviously applicable.