The World of Avlis

Is it better to get x3 multiplier crits, or twice as many at x2?

From a numerical standpoint, the answer seems obvious, since x2 and getting twice as many, will dole out more damage over time.

But lately I've been starting to wonder....

Given the prevalence on Avlis at higher levels, of monsters with good potions and healing (no complaint, makes sense), I'm starting to think of switching to a x3 critter. The reason is because so many times, I'll get the enemy to low health, then they heal up. I was thinking that if I had the bigger multiplier I'd be able to more often put them down before they get off that first heal. Not every time of course, but more often anyways than with the x2. The difference is anywhere from like 30-50 damage between a x2 crit and x3 one so it could be significant. Maybe I could even take an improved crit feat in the x3 weapon, I don't know.

Then again there's that mathematical side of me that's saying, why would you switch to doing less damage overall... when they're not close to getting killed, the x2 with the bigger range would obviously be better. Sure I could switch mid-combat but spellcasters don't usually like to do their enchantments on multiple weapons of the same character.

So I'm really not sure... curious what others think. Any input?

I guess the question really boils down to this:

Will that increased multiplier kill the monster?

If not they will still get off that heal and now you're critting less often.....

Why not switch for a while and play test it?

If you are going to go.

Go Big

Plus, carrying the weapons that have a x3 Crit modifier just looks cooler.

Depends.. do you like tells from people going "OMG!!" or "Holy Shit dude!" after you land a x3 170 crit?

Big numbers are fun to see, but its fun to switch around too.

If you want big crits, drop the shield and grab a two hander with a x3

And if you can add sneak attack on top of that...

Statistically, both numbers do the same amount of damage.

Compare: rolling a 19 and a 20 on a D8 x 3 gives you 4d8 of damage rolls. Rolling a 19-20 on a D8 x2 gives you 4d8 of damage rolls. If you add keen or improved crit to the equation the damages also remain the same.

In other words, overall damage does not need to be a concern in selecting a weapon.

Raise to-hit. Hitting every time >> landing a big one after a couple whiffs.

Vergilius wrote: In other words, overall damage does not need to be a concern in selecting a weapon.

It is a concern when DR and DI come into it. Without going buff crazy, I can average about 300hp a round (not including sneaks)with 12-20 crit ranges and a dex fighter. Add another hundred or more with good buffs and militant stuff. I still have nearly zero chance of scratching a few things around because of high DR and DI, (though it would be a different story if they weren't immune to crits and sneaks).

Being able to do more than 50 in a single hit can make a huge diff if things are immune to crit. if they aren't, then either way works about the same.

I personally think that only going x3, x4, or even x5 multipliers probably would only be really helpfull is if you could get your crit range to 17-20 range via the weapon master route.

I know that ive crossed meny monsters that would be impossible to kill with out ridiculously high crits and a good 25 % chance to crit, on your own.

One of the reasons i went high damage weapon was so i could get over some of the 30/- damage reduction monsters that also have the immunities to crits and sneak attacks, Ofcourse thats what a good fighter is for.

Tigg wrote: So I'm really not sure... curious what others think. Any input? :)

This is not the answer you want, but I use Id Insinuation on them. That way I have four rounds to kill them and steal thier potions.

Gorgon wrote:

Vergilius wrote: In other words, overall damage does not need to be a concern in selecting a weapon.

It is a concern when DR and DI come into it. Without going buff crazy, I can average about 300hp a round (not including sneaks)with 12-20 crit ranges and a dex fighter. Add another hundred or more with good buffs and militant stuff. I still have nearly zero chance of scratching a few things around because of high DR and DI, (though it would be a different story if they weren't immune to crits and sneaks).

Being able to do more than 50 in a single hit can make a huge diff if things are immune to crit. if they aren't, then either way works about the same.

Precisely, that is why I called it "overall damage" meaning the raw number crunching power of the weapon. DR and DI are "situational damage" which means if you face those situations enough times then a x3 or better multiplier would be better suited to the task.

Tigg wrote:Is it better to get x3 multiplier crits, or twice as many at x2?

From a numerical standpoint, the answer seems obvious, since x2 and getting twice as many, will dole out more damage over time.

...

Given the prevalence on Avlis at higher levels, of monsters with good potions and healing (no complaint, makes sense), I'm starting to think of switching to a x3 critter. The reason is because so many times, I'll get the enemy to low health, then they heal up. I was thinking that if I had the bigger multiplier I'd be able to more often put them down before they get off that first heal. Not every time of course, but more often anyways than with the x2. The difference is anywhere from like 30-50 damage between a x2 crit and x3 one so it could be significant. Maybe I could even take an improved crit feat in the x3 weapon, I don't know.

Then again there's that mathematical side of me that's saying, why would you switch to doing less damage overall... when they're not close to getting killed, the x2 with the bigger range would obviously be better. Sure I could switch mid-combat but spellcasters don't usually like to do their enchantments on multiple weapons of the same character.

If it is safe to assume that you wish to maximize damage per round, x2 seems about the same or slightly better than x3. As an example, with all things equal, on average a weapon with a 19-20x3 crit range will do the same damage per round as a weapon with a 18-20x2 crit range, and a weapon with a 19-20x2 crit range will (roughly and not by much) do more damage per round than a weapon witha 20x3 crit range (at least according to this nifty tool: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/nwn/).

Regarding DR and DI: Should DR and DI make a relative difference on average, per round when considering using an x2 critting weapon or x3 critting weapon? Isn't it just an offset (reduction in the amount of average damage one can do).

krackq wrote: Depends.. do you like tells from people going "OMG!!" or "Holy Shit dude!" after you land a x3 170 crit? Big numbers are fun to see, but its fun to switch around too.

All of the stats aside, I love seeing those huge crits!

Well quite simply, if your up front against somthing where your worreid about a full heal, and several crits not kiling it.. your high level, its high level. So you should have 3-4 attacks per round... given your ability in melee with a x2 you should get off about 2 crits of anywhere from 50-70 dmg...before you could get off 1 of say150... so with more attacks per round youl get crits quick enough theoretically.

analgesia wrote:a weapon with a 19-20x2 crit range will (roughly and not by much) do more damage per round than a weapon witha 20x3 crit range

I think you may be missing a key point in your calculations. Basicly, on the hits that don't do criticals, you still do normal damage. This is what Verg was getting at above.

Say you have 2 weapons, with the same base damage 'X'
1) has a 19-20 x 2 crit
2) has a 20 x 3 crit

You will roll 19 just as often as you roll 20, and we can ignore rolls below 19 which are the same for both weapons.

Weapon 1 - does 2X damage on a 19 & 2X damage on a 20
Weapon 2 - does X damage on a 19 & 3X damage on a 20
Total damage of 4X is the same from both.

Now where damage resistance comes into it, is if you can't easily hurt your opponent without a crit. For example, assuming enemy DR is equal to 1.5X
Weapon 1 now does 0.5X damage on a 19 and 0.5X damage on a 20
weapon 2 now does 0 damage on a 19 and 1.5X damage on a 20.

Of course, the DR is normally a constant, whereas weapon damage is a die roll. So sometime a max damage non crit will do some damage. Wheras a low roll x2 damage crit will do none. So for precise calculations involving DR and weapon damage, you need to calculate all the possibilities for the particular weapons and DR involved, which is rather more complex.

gwydion2 wrote:

analgesia wrote:a weapon with a 19-20x2 crit range will (roughly and not by much) do more damage per round than a weapon witha 20x3 crit range

I think you may be missing a key point in your calculations.

More than likely! The complexity of hitting a defender and how damage is applied typically confounds me. I didn't do the calculations -- I used the NWN melee damage tool (which could be bugged, it will show calculations but it doesn't show enough to see exactly how it is accounting for crit dmg). It is limited in that it can only look at average damage per round as a function of the abilities/modifiers/crit specs for the weapons you specify and and the defender's AC.

Basicly, on the hits that don't do criticals, you still do normal damage. This is what Verg was getting at above.

Say you have 2 weapons, with the same base damage 'X'
1) has a 19-20 x 2 crit
2) has a 20 x 3 crit

You will roll 19 just as often as you roll 20, and we can ignore rolls below 19 which are the same for both weapons.

Weapon 1 - does 2X damage on a 19 & 2X damage on a 20
Weapon 2 - does X damage on a 19 & 3X damage on a 20
Total damage of 4X is the same from both.

I agree with what you (and Verg) state above, but how does the following come into play? Somewhere in the NWN manual, it states a roll in the crit range only qualifies for a critical hit (rolling a 19 or 20 in the case of Weapon 1, or a 20 in the case of 2). Once "qualified", one has to roll again with the same modifiers to see if the critical hit actually lands. If the second roll is a hit, critical damage is then calculated (by rolling 2x, 3x, etc) and applied. If the second roll is a miss, only normal hit damage is applied without additional critical damage (i'm uncertain of this -- see below).

My interpretation is that rolling a 19-20 for Weapon 1, or a 20 for Weapon 2 does not mean that critical damage is always applied. Maybe this isn't implemented? I've never actually verified it.

A second issue that confuses me -- does rolling a d20 in the crit threat mean you actually hit a defender with a high AC? Is it the first roll that determines if you actually hit? I.e., for a 19-20/x2 weapon: BAB + modifiers + [a 19 or 20 roll]. So a BAB of 5, a d20 roll of 20, and modifiers of 5 would give 30, which would mean a hit only if the defender's AC is <= 30? Because the first roll (20) was in the crit range, now go on to see if the critical hit is actually applied.

Or is it calculated this way? Roll a 20 to qualify for a critical hit. Immediately go on to the 2nd roll to determine hit or miss -- the 2nd roll w/ modifiers (say BAB of 5, a d20 roll of say 15, and modifiers of 5) would give 25, which would mean a hit only if the defender's AC <= 25. If it is a hit, now determine crit dmg. If it is a miss, then no damage.

Now where damage resistance comes into it, is if you can't easily hurt your opponent without a crit. For example, assuming enemy DR is equal to 1.5X
Weapon 1 now does 0.5X damage on a 19 and 0.5X damage on a 20
weapon 2 now does 0 damage on a 19 and 1.5X damage on a 20.

I think in this scenario, my PC would run regardless of whether his weapon was 2x or 3x. Again, if the above system is in play, then it is not guaranteed to do 0.5x dmg or 1.5x damage when a 19 (2x only) or 20 (2x or 3x ) is rolled, unless there is a large difference between the attacker's modified attack bonus and the defender's AC.

Be a weapon master. nuff said

Now I remember why I dislike math so much...!

analgesia wrote:How does the following come into play? Somewhere in the NWN manual, it states a roll in the crit range only qualifies for a critical hit (rolling a 19 or 20 in the case of Weapon 1, or a 20 in the case of 2). Once "qualified", one has to roll again with the same modifiers to see if the critical hit actually lands. If the second roll is a hit, critical damage is then calculated (by rolling 2x, 3x, etc) and applied. If the second roll is a miss, only normal hit damage is applied without additional critical damage (i'm uncertain of this -- see below).

That's correct. If you roll in the crit range, you have to roll again (threat roll) to see if this is an actual crit. This is a to hit roll against target AC and if it fails, you only get an ordinary hit not a crit.

I didn't include this in the original calculation as it simply adds complexity, without affecting the relative damage of the weapons. I'll repeat my example from above, making allowance for this. Lets assume, that you need 11 to hit the enemy, meaning you will succeed in the threat roll half of the time.

Weapon 1 - does an average 1.5X damage on a 19 & 1.5X damage on a 20 (half the time doing X damage, half the time doing 2X damage)
Weapon 2 - does X damage on a 19 & an average 2X damage on a 20 (half the time doing X damage, half the time doing 3X damage)
Total damage of 3X is the same from both.

The only situation in which this creates a small difference in average damage is if you need exactly 20 to hit. In this case :-
Weapon 1 - does 0 damage on a 19 & 1.05X damage on a 20 (95% of the time doing X damage, 5% doing 2X damage)
Weapon 2 - does 0 damage on a 19 & an average 1.1X damage on a 20
(95% of the time doing X damage, 5% doing 3X damage)

Note that the only automatic hit is a 20 regardless of crit range and there is never an auto crit. So if you need 21 to hit an enemy, you can still hit them by rolling 20 but rolling another 20 on the threat roll, will not produce a crit.

I'm not a big fan of DR, since it effectively eliminates dex-based melee fighters. It does change the crit calculus also, favoring the higher multiplier. I've been in combats where *only* the weapon master could harm the monster. Another factor often overlooked in crit comparison is the ability to kill and cleave, which increases with the increased crit multiplier, thus providing extra attacks.

Did anyone else read this as Big tits or More tits? Because thats a much better question, and one I have yet to come to an answer for.

gwydion2 wrote:
I didn't include this in the original calculation as it simply adds complexity, without affecting the relative damage of the weapons. I'll repeat my example from above, making allowance for this. Lets assume, that you need 11 to hit the enemy, meaning you will succeed in the threat roll half of the time.

Weapon 1 - does an average 1.5X damage on a 19 & 1.5X damage on a 20 (half the time doing X damage, half the time doing 2X damage)
Weapon 2 - does X damage on a 19 & an average 2X damage on a 20 (half the time doing X damage, half the time doing 3X damage)
Total damage of 3X is the same from both.

Got it! Thanks

Talwin Hawkins wrote:Did anyone else read this as Big tits or More tits? Because thats a much better question, and one I have yet to come to an answer for.

big boobs are overrated.

Darkfire wrote:big boobs are overrated.

Darkfire wrote:

Talwin Hawkins wrote:Did anyone else read this as Big tits or More tits? Because thats a much better question, and one I have yet to come to an answer for.

big boobs are overrated.

You can tell you are just a youngster

Thanks everyone for all their input!

I guess I should have said a couple more things- like, the weapons I'm trying to decide between are the double scimitar (crit 15-20 x 2 when keened) and the double axe (crit 19-20 x 3 when keen). Complicating the issue is the fact that pretty much everything I fight that's a challenge to me these days (28th level) has 10 DR to all melee attacks. That link leads to a nice utility, that I've used before, but unfortunately I don't know the AC of what I tend to battle. Maybe I'll try to get that data together and then use the utility. I could just try out the double axe, and I still might, but I feel like I won't be giving it a fair shot without taking improved crit in it, and I was planning on giving myself my next feat for Christmas, heheh.