Secondary On-Crit Effects

[Frostorm]

So as I was going through some of the skills I've already created/implemented, I decided to add some extra effects that proc upon a Critical Hit. It is usually an extension or enhancement of a skill's existing effect. For example, my Archer class has the skill Crippling Shot, which "Deals x Pierce damage and reduces the target's SPD by (a.agi÷3) for 3 turns". Thus, a Critical Hit could perhaps inflict a root/snare effect instead of (or in addition to) the existing slowing effect:

Ok, now here's my problem... I am VERY tempted to implement similar "On-Crit" effect for every attack skill in the game. Would that be a good idea, or nah? However, if these additional "On-Crit" effects are baked into the skills by default, then there would be no point in designing/implementing separate "talents" (nodes in the skill tree) that upgrade existing skills with these "On-Crit" effects. Are there any other potential downsides to having (almost) all attack skills include extra "On-Crit" effects? Or does anyone think Critical Hits should just deal extra damage?

Spoiler: More examples...

 

[Silenity]

I think the premise of having extra effects attached to crits is cool. Instead of always just a "moar damaj" attack. I love messing with critical hits and altering them to how a character would deem a critical hit.

Would it be a good idea? That's up to you to decide. It would create more dev work as you said having to go back in and change your talents.

Are there downsides? Sure, more dev work for one. Content/complexity-bloat for players to digest and have to remember.

Should criticals do more than just extra damage? It depends on the game but I like it. Eg. giving a frost archer a slow attached when they crit. Or maybe a barbarian would leave you with a bleeding status effect. Maybe you have a honorable duelist who loses crit chance when theres multiple enemies but has 100% crit chance when there is only one enemy left. Or a priest whos spells only crit undead. Etc.

Overall, in my opinion, I like secondary critical effects. But also, it doesn't bother me if it doesn't, since we're all used to it just being more damage. There's upsides by making skills more interesting and investing into stats like crit chance for characters/classes who you would normally not think would want to crit. There's downsides in adding more dev time and feature bloat to the game, which could make it complex for casuals who are already trying to juggle learning the rest of the systems. Though, can be remedied with in-game tutorials/guides/manuals.

 

[Zeireth]

I really like secondary critical effects. I have a skill called Viper Strike. It is a special type skill and it is physical.

It has a 25% chance to apply poison state on the enemy, however if you get a critical with Viper Strike, then it is guaranteed to apply poison state on the enemy. The damage formula for MV and MZ is powerful and can do almost anything with some knowledge.

My Viper Strike damage formula is
if (target.result().critical) b.addState(4); 50

It uses an if statement to check if the result for the skill is a critical. If true, then it will apply poison state 100%, else if false, then no state is added. It will still roll the 25% chance from the effect.

The damage is 50 for noncritical and 150 for critical.

 

[LordOfPotatos]

it depends on what purpose you want the mechanic to serve.

if you want it to be a main system mechanic that defines the game as a whole then put it everywhere.

if you want to make it the defining trait of a class or something like that then keep it limited.

do keep in mind however that there is a limit to how many mechanics define the game as a whole, and going past it makes the game feel cluttered and clunky.
you don't have to worry about that if you keep the mechanic confined to a single class as it's defining trait.

 

[Frostorm]

In addition, it doesn't have to be limited to attack skills. Healing skills, assuming they are allowed to Crit, could also have secondary crit effects as well. For example, a crit could grant the target an absorption shield on top of the healing done.

Another consideration, if I decide to have all dmg/heal skills incorporate on-crit effects by default, is that I would probably run out of unique crit effects for the many skills in the game. There would have to be some overlap somewhere. I don't mind 1 or 2 so-called "duplicates", however. For instance, Crippling Shot normally inflicts a Slow effect but a Critical Hit would inflict a Snare instead (or in addition). So, a melee version of Crippling Shot, which I'll name Crippling Strike for now, would deal similar damage with both the same on-hit Slow effect and on-crit Snare effect as the ranged version. It's situations like this where I don't mind a "copy-paste" of these Crit effects. So do you guys think a bit of overlap is okay? If so, how much is too much? Should I strive to make every skills' Crit effect unique?

Also, do you guys think these secondary Crit effects should always be an extension/enhancement of a skill's existing effects? Like if a skill normally inflicts "Slow" on the target while a Crit would inflict "Snare". Or if a skill normally inflicts "Burn" for 3 turns, then a Crit would make it 6 turns instead. Alternatively, I could make the Crit effects be totally different and have nothing to do with a skill's base effect. And lastly, players may simply want a skill that hits/crits hard w/o any fancy gimmicks or extraneous effects. Thoughts?

 

[Silenity]

Also, do you guys think these secondary Crit effects should always be an extension/enhancement of a skill's existing effects? Like if a skill normally inflicts "Slow" on the target while a Crit would inflict "Snare". Or if a skill normally inflicts "Burn" for 3 turns, then a Crit would make it 6 turns instead. Alternatively, I could make the Crit effects be totally different and have nothing to do with a skill's base effect.

I, personally, wouldn't always have it be an extension/enhancement of the skill's effects. But it does make thematic sense and would probably be a good general rule of thumb for most skills. Here's some examples I could think of. Perhaps you have an evil necromancer whos charging a powerful raise undead spell. Maybe only a critical hit would be able to cancel channel/charge up moves? Perhaps size is taken into account? A small creature hit by a critical hit would instantly be felled. Or maybe a large creature would be staggered and be pushed back 1 row/square/tile/etc. Maybe you have critical grazes/hits/supercrits. Grazes would deal half damage of a normal attack. Hits would do double damage. Supercrits would do 2.5x+ damage and apply secondary effects. Or maybe landing a critical would add a secondary scaling? Maybe Swift Strike normally just deals ATK dmg but if you critical it scales off ATK+AGI. etc. etc.

And lastly, players may simply want a skill that hits/crits hard w/o any fancy gimmicks or extraneous effects. Thoughts?

That's also fine too. Sometimes you want just more damage. For example if Big Bad Boss has 100 HP. And Flame skill does 50 damage or 50 damage+burn if crit. Either way if you crit or not you aren't in kill range. But if you have Strong Attack that does 50 damage or double damage if crit. I'll probably take that risk and use Strong Attack for a chance at lethal.

 

[NamEtag]

Flip it around. Make secondary on-crit effects the primary purpose of crits, while damage is secondary or even not present at all.

 

[Willibab]

You could have themed ones that span several abilities.

Like all of hunter's utility like skills (even if it damages too) does the immobilize effect if critical.

But all of his skills that are meant more for dps could do like a hunter's mark effect (or something else).

So if you get/use mostly utility ones you become a more tanky ranged class (by preventing the enemy from doing anything)

While the other doubled down on dps.

 

[Frostorm]

Flip it around. Make secondary on-crit effects the primary purpose of crits, while damage is secondary or even not present at all.

Hmm, I actually considered this, but how come most RPGs don't do this? Is it mere indolence, or is there some fundamental drawback I'm not seeing? It seems like a good idea since Critical Damage for physical attacks scale off of Strength (ATK) in my game and thus starts off somewhat low. Making on-crit effects the main focus of a Critical Hit would certainly alleviate that concern.

 

[NamEtag]

Is it mere indolence

There are kinder ways of saying it, but yes.

Surely you've been in other threads about this: damage is easy. Any boss can be a meatsponge and it doesn't matter because the only important math is between damage party takes vs. healing party receives. DPS is significantly less important without gimmicks like temp shields or damage thresholds, and is thus easier to design.

Adding elemental and status components to crits make every attack matter, and most people screw up the standard status ailments already, so nobody is really eager to balance even more states on top of that.

Don't forget that rng frequently sucks. The vast majority of games I've played that made use of degrees of success and/or opposing stats for crits got a lot of balance mileage out of it.

 

[freakytapir]

The biggest problem I have with this is the swinginess it introduces in battles.
If a boss can go one way or the other dependant on a crit, it might make me feel like my choices aren't that impactfull, and I'm just sitting there hoping for a crit.

 

[Frostorm]

The biggest problem I have with this is the swinginess it introduces in battles.
If a boss can go one way or the other dependant on a crit, it might make me feel like my choices aren't that impactfull, and I'm just sitting there hoping for a crit.

Yea, that is my main concern as well, especially since my game is a Tactical RPG. Hence my apprehension about implementing such a mechanic across the board. Sigh, what do?...

 

[freakytapir]

Yea, that is my main concern as well, especially since my game is a Tactical RPG. Hence my apprehension about implementing such a mechanic across the board. Sigh, what do?...

I've known it to work in aRPG games like Diablo III, where you can boost your crit rate by a lot, and you're always doing a lot of attacks, so they average out nicely. But in a tactical game, yeah, they might be too swingy.