I think the mechanics for degrees of success you're proposing do basically the same thing as what critical hits do in the game now; they make a skilled warrior deal, on average, more damage per successful hit (cause the better you are, the more critical threats you will confirm, and also there is the Improved Critical feat that further boosts this). Also, they give more unskilled warriors the slight chance of rolling well and scoring a high-damage hit. Basically, I think the Brutally Accurate feat you've suggested accomplishes the same thing as Improved Critical.
Granted, criticals and degrees of success aren't exactly the same and depending on what numbers you use (you could calculate the statistics of damage output) you could definitely fine-tune it so that the skill of the warrior plays a much bigger role on damage than it does now (criticals don't happen all that often, after all). But because they essentially do the same thing, I think using both criticals and calculating degrees of success would be a bit superfluous. Degrees of success are, however, something that could
replace the rules for critical hits; many games do this. For example, in the White Wolf games (Exalted, World of Darkness) every success on the attack roll (its a dice pool system) adds directly to damage.
What makes calculation of degrees of success messier and more time-consuming than criticals in d20 is of course that you'd have to do a little math on every roll. As it is now, you just roll and know exactly how much damage you do if the GM tells you that you've beaten your opponents defense. If degrees of success were a factor, you'd also have to throw in a little subtraction. It will add at least a little time to your combats.
Sutek said:
What if it were +1d based on the normal damage die if the to hit roll was >5 above the target DC?
I think that works better.
In other words, if the damage profile for a weapon uses 1d10 for damage, and the wielder rolls DC+5, he then gets +1d10 extra.
If I were to use this, I think I'd actually prefer if the extra damage was independent of the weapon used (for example +1d6 per 5 above defense). This would really make the skill what mattered - a highly skilled warrior with a dagger could be as deadly as a lesser skilled warrior with a bardiche. This is actually something I could like for regular criticals too; perhaps if a successful critical gave +2d6 damage instead of what it does now. Hmmm....
Sutek said:
Another idea could be that such a rule could add bonus to the weapon AP, making it more variable. Right now, with damage random and AP static, combat feels a little too predictable at some level. Maybe, like Finesse to a certain degree, if the wielder rolls DC+ target's armor DR, they get +1d6 to thier AP.
Just thinking...damage in Conan doesn't necessarily have to fall under actual "damage". Increasing AP would be almost more brutal in some ways.
The problem with this would be that rolling high would be an advantage against armoured, but not unarmoured, opponents. Also, a finesse fighter wouldn't get any advantage from it.
geordiekimbo said:
How about if you cause a critical hit if you roll 10 points higher than your opponents defense..just a thought
Pretty nice... This would actually be a very easy way to make the skill of the warrior have a larger impact on damage. I wouldn't use this together with the regular critical rules, though, but instead of them.