Reddit's repeated explanation for removing monster crits is that monsters have recharge abilities which suffices for the randomness.
It's not about randomness - it's about risk and adaptation. Things can go suddenly very wrong, and that's an important part of being an adventurer. Recharge abilities absolutely do not cover that angle, at all.
Level 1-3 is over in the blink of an eye, and it's the DM's job, if they are running from level one, to pitch the content in a way that gets them used to adventuring, and used to their basic skill kit, with a fair risk bracket; it has literally never been a problem before now, and it still isn't one. There is zero need to put fluffy mittens on all the monsters, and I stand by my statement that it is completely stupid. I don't want to play in a world where everything I face is handicapped against the ability to get lucky or be decisive in the ways that I can; that's unfair and unrealistic. IF someone does, that's fair enough, but that's house-rule territory, and DM fiat zone; it's WHY the dm screen exists.
I'm also very strongly against the re-homogenisation of crits into all d20 rolls; either they are wholesale removing contested checks, or they are going to have to make additional fudge rules to account for contested checks in this situation, and that's bad design either way.
monsters aren't designed the way players are to begin with, its never a symmetrical fight. 5e is already very unpredictable due to use of the d20 dice.
Also, with crits limited to weapon attacks, it becomes difficult to determine which monster skills/dice could even crit. Really this isn't about putting fluffy mittens on monsters, in reality they drastically lowered player max damage with the critical changes, if monsters were still rolling crits like before, they would be comparitively stronger than previously. In fact, they are probably still stronger.
biggest player crit in New system is like +1d12. monsters biggest crits on attacks are like +5d10+9
they may change it back, or tweak it more before final, but keep in mind many things are changing, so you can't look at one change in a vacuum.
