Critical Hits/Misses

[zarakstan]

How do you play natural 1s and 20s in your groups. I treat a natural 20 as a result of a 30 and a natural 1 as a result of a -10. To me that makes more sense because there should be no possible way a 1st level commoner can punch pelor . . . it just shouldn't be O.o

[Rhiannon87]

Rolling a 20 on an attack is a critical threat, roll again to confirm. Rolling a 1 is a critical fumble threat; roll again to see if you hit your enemy's AC. If you don't, you're likely to drop your weapon/stab a friend/stab yourself. On saving throws, 20 is an auto-success, 1 is an auto-fail. AFAIK, that's RAW. Is it realistic? No, but it makes things a lot more interesting, for both players and DM... because sometimes the DM rolls a 1 on a save when it really, really counts.

[Artanis]

Rolling a 20 on an attack is a critical threat, roll again to confirm. Rolling a 1 is a critical fumble threat; roll again to see if you hit your enemy's AC. If you don't, you're likely to drop your weapon/stab a friend/stab yourself. On saving throws, 20 is an auto-success, 1 is an auto-fail. AFAIK, that's RAW. Is it realistic? No, but it makes things a lot more interesting, for both players and DM... because sometimes the DM rolls a 1 on a save when it really, really counts.

The part about saves auto-succeeding on a 20 and auto-failing on a 1 is correct. The critical threat part is correct. However, AFAIK the critical fumble threat is NOT RAW.

From the 3.5 SRD:

"Automatic Misses and Hits

A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on an attack roll is always a miss. A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a hit. A natural 20 is also a threat—a possible critical hit."

I don't see anything that mentions a fumble or stabbing yourself or whatever.

[Assassin89]

The part about saves auto-succeeding on a 20 and auto-failing on a 1 is correct. The critical threat part is correct. However, AFAIK the critical fumble threat is NOT RAW.

From the 3.5 SRD:

"Automatic Misses and Hits

A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on an attack roll is always a miss. A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a hit. A natural 20 is also a threat—a possible critical hit."

I don't see anything that mentions a fumble or stabbing yourself or whatever.

I think it is just a house rule. I follow the SRD for a natural 1 and natural 20.

[zarakstan]

I really like the fumbling rule and I use it in my games :smallsmile:

[Darwin]

We play with seperate critical/fumble tables, a threat and then a succesful hit (where a natural 20 is not auto success) you crit, roll a d10 for which body part, then a d100 to determine the outcome. For fumbles you roll a natural 1, and if you miss on a secondary roll (where 1 is not an auto failure) you fumble, you roll a d100 to determine the outcome, and reroll if that outcome is not possible (ex: you throw away your weapon when using natural weapons).

[Sstoopidtallkid]

I really like the fumbling rule and I use it in my games :smallsmile:Why? Does melee really need another nerf?

[Artanis]

I think it is just a house rule. I follow the SRD for a natural 1 and natural 20.

I was replying to Rhiannon87 saying that fumbles were RAW.

[zarakstan]

Why? Does melee really need another nerf?

No it is just fun and it also applies to the enemies . . .

[Skorj]

Why? Does melee really need another nerf?

Yes, even with Pathfinder, melee still does more damage to opponents than to the party. This can be fixed with a good fumble table. This is more important for archers, however: since opponents with the correct feats simply cannot be hit, the archer needs some way to hit and cause damage, even if only to himself, or he'll feel left out of combat entirely (or you can just let the archer roll for all the arrows reflected back at him, of course).

My favorite fumble result, from an ICE table of years gone by: "pulled groin, out 1 day, opponent out 3 rounds laughing".

EDIT: also, the grapple rules need an elaborate fumble system, with at least 27 pages of rules and tables. It's just too simple and boring as is, but add the comic value of a grapple fumble and you'll have something.

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

I really like the fumbling rule and I use it in my games :smallsmile:

Bleagh. Each to their own, but it's to non-realistic to me. Perhaps 2 natural 1s in a row (more likely 3). I'm a competitive, national-level fencer, and I can promise you that I don't drop my weapon or hit a spectator (or myself) once out of every 20 attacks...or every once out of every 200. Nor do I injure myself with that frequency.

Now on 2 natural 1s I might begin to allow it. But that situation, I feel, is rare enough to not merit the extra work.

[jmbrown]

Fumble charts are more disastrous to the players than the enemies. It's nice to have that chance of lopping a dragon's head off in a single swipe but you generally only encounter NPCs once whereas your characters are long term players. You have more chances of harming yourself than your enemies.

[Moriato]

How do you play natural 1s and 20s in your groups. I treat a natural 20 as a result of a 30 and a natural 1 as a result of a -10. To me that makes more sense because there should be no possible way a 1st level commoner can punch pelor . . . it just shouldn't be O.o

That's why there's damage reduction. Every commoner in the multiverse could punch Pelor (or anything with damage reduction 3/anything but bludgeoning or more, or regeneration. Or anything else immune to subdual damage) all day long and he'd never feel a thing

Just because you can hit something doesn't mean you could ever harm it.

[holywhippet]

In my old 3rd edition campaign the DM asked for a confirmation on a critical when rolling a 20. If you rolled a 1 he called for a DC 15 reflex save.

[zarakstan]

Bleagh. Each to their own, but it's to non-realistic to me. Perhaps 2 natural 1s in a row (more likely 3). I'm a competitive, national-level fencer, and I can promise you that I don't drop my weapon or hit a spectator (or myself) once out of every 20 attacks...or every once out of every 200. Nor do I injure myself with that frequency.

Now on 2 natural 1s I might begin to allow it. But that situation, I feel, is rare enough to not merit the extra work.
Oh yeah you have misunderstood :smallredface: sorry for the confusion I caused. The rule is a natural 1 is a threat to a critical miss then if you roll a 4 with a natural weapon you crit miss and do something bad 3 with a normal weapon 2 with a masterwork weapon 1 with a magic weapon

[Claudius Maximus]

In my old 3rd edition campaign the DM asked for a confirmation on a critical when rolling a 20. If you rolled a 1 he called for a DC 15 reflex save.

For what?

In my game, a natural 20 on a confirmation roll calls for a third roll. If that confirms, there is an additional effect. The effects range from instant death for mooks and random encounters to maiming for more important characters like the PCs or major villains. It really does harm the players in the long run, but they really love it when it happens, even when it happens to them, so why not? It can add to the game too, like if a PC loses their eye and swears revenge or something.

[Delaney Gale]

Bleagh. Each to their own, but it's to non-realistic to me. Perhaps 2 natural 1s in a row (more likely 3). I'm a competitive, national-level fencer, and I can promise you that I don't drop my weapon or hit a spectator (or myself) once out of every 20 attacks...or every once out of every 200. Nor do I injure myself with that frequency.

Now on 2 natural 1s I might begin to allow it. But that situation, I feel, is rare enough to not merit the extra work.

Hey, another fencer! *waves hello* I'm out of competition for the time being, but my new university allows grad students to join their team so I'll be back on the piste come September. What's your primary weapon? I fence epee, preferring Hungarian grip. I have to wonder if it's a good model for an actual weapon, since it's precisely designed to be perfect for a very specific style of combat but is pretty much useless outside of "2-dimensional" combat with wired scoring.

That being said, I think my group uses fumbles (on weapons and skill checks) for the drama of it. It's more fun to occasionally play your way out of stepping on a cat while Moving Silently than it is to succeed every time because you have a +40kajillion modifier.

[lsfreak]

Hate fumbles, rolling a 1 is bad enough without having something worse tacked onto it. Nothing is quite as immersion-breaking as someone who's trained their whole life to wield weapons accidentally stabbing himself in the kidneys once every few weeks. Likewise, it's kind of immersion-breaking when you realize any good-sized city of completely untrained commoners can take out high-level BBEG's with the powers of maths (natural 20 always hits).

Natural 20's are treated as 30, natural 1's as -10, and only if it would normally be a success/failure. None of this "you fail your jump check and fall down the cliff, despite your +30 modifier."

[Mastikator]

If you roll 1, then you reroll, and subtract the number you get on the roll. If you roll a 20 on the re-roll then you subtract 20 and reroll to continue subtracting until you don't roll 20.
Anywhere between 0 and -19 is a critical miss, -20 and below is fumble.

You can balance this out by applying the same rules to critical hits, except you simply double the critical hit damage multiplier. So if you roll a 20, then to confirm, a 20 again, then you confirm a third time, only this time it's already a normal critical hit and you're confirming to see if the multiplier is doubled.
And then tripled, and so forth. Natural 20 no longer auto-hit, you simply get the cumulative dice rolls (and all of the modifiers).

This way it doesn't matter that you're level 20, if you get stabbed in the brain, you die. Even if you get stabbed by a commoner, it's just very very unlikely.
I think it adds more flavor.

[mroozee]

We house rule both fumbles and critical hits.

For fumbles, we call a 1 an auto-miss and all subsequent attacks for that round are lost.
After rolling a 1 on a d20, roll a d6. If this is also a 1, you drop your weapon.
Continue rolling d6's and each consecutive 1 represents a "worse" fumble - meaning it will take an additional round to retrieve your weapon.

Thus, if your second (of 3) attacks with your sword is a 1 on a d20, you miss with that attack and lose your third attack. If you then roll two consecutive 1's on d6's, you have lost your grip on your weapon and it is now somewhere that you can't get to for 2 rounds.

Critical hits are similar, except that we use the "threat" first. So a 20 is an auto-hit, and any hit in the threat range is a threat. If confirmed, a d6 is rolled with a 6 adding another multiplier to the damage, continuing until a 6 is not rolled.

So if you attack with your sword and hit with a 19, you then confirm your critical (to get x2) and then roll a d6 to increase your multiplier further.

[Sinfire Titan]

Yes, even with Pathfinder, melee still does more damage to opponents than to the party. This can be fixed with a good fumble table. This is more important for archers, however: since opponents with the correct feats simply cannot be hit, the archer needs some way to hit and cause damage, even if only to himself, or he'll feel left out of combat entirely (or you can just let the archer roll for all the arrows reflected back at him, of course).

My favorite fumble result, from an ICE table of years gone by: "pulled groin, out 1 day, opponent out 3 rounds laughing".

EDIT: also, the grapple rules need an elaborate fumble system, with at least 27 pages of rules and tables. It's just too simple and boring as is, but add the comic value of a grapple fumble and you'll have something.

So you are saying that every single PC should have a 1 in 20 chance to harm their allies? And that a player who deals damage to himself should feel that he has contributed something to the encounter other than a quick laugh and a resource investment?







Please tell me you are being sarcastic. If not, then you should be aware that people like you are the kind who I feel make for a horrible DM. I played under such a DM for a full 10 months, and I hated every second of those BS house rules. There's a long list of reasons for me to hate DMs who rule towards enforcing fumbles. The first reason on that list is Snake (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6579167&postcount=6)Napalm. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1550.msg48275#msg48275) These lists are still incomplete.

[AstralFire]

Please tell me you are being sarcastic.

Good god, he's being sarcastic.

[Sinfire Titan]

Good god, he's being sarcastic.

It's hard to tell. This is the internet, after all.

[AstralFire]

He opens up with the statement that "Melee still does more damage to the opponent than to the party" as if that were a bad thing.

:smallsigh:

[PairO'Dice Lost]

He opens up with the statement that "Melee still does more damage to the opponent than to the party" as if that were a bad thing.

:smallsigh:

Completely agreed. The notion that an archer is better off shooting himself than missing enemies makes no sense whatsoever.

[Sinfire Titan]

Completely agreed. The notion that an archer is better off shooting himself than missing enemies makes no sense whatsoever.

To sane people. There's a large niche of maniacs who would listen to such illogical statements.

[Skorj]

Reading the post I was replying to might have been a clue. :smalltongue:

Fumble tables reduce melee damage, but not the power of wizards, exaggerating D&D's biggest problem. This is especially bad for archers, who can already encounter opponents that are not only immune to arrows, but use the archer's attacks to harm the party. A fumble table is really just rubbing salt in the wound in that case.

And for some reason, people keep suggesting new ways to nerf melee. Hey, why not add a fumble table, heck, even that house rule where sometimes crits are really fumbles - go all the way!:smallfrown:

[Kaihaku]

How do you play natural 1s and 20s in your groups. I treat a natural 20 as a result of a 30 and a natural 1 as a result of a -10.

One of my DMs does that as well. It works out alright though it removes some of the randomness.


To me that makes more sense because there should be no possible way a 1st level commoner can punch pelor . . . it just shouldn't be O.o

Sure it's possible...but the probability of it happening shouldn't be 1/20. Now if that commoner rolled five 20s in a row...though it's not like they'd deal any damage anyway.

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

Hey, another fencer! *waves hello* I'm out of competition for the time being, but my new university allows grad students to join their team so I'll be back on the piste come September. What's your primary weapon? I fence epee, preferring Hungarian grip. I have to wonder if it's a good model for an actual weapon, since it's precisely designed to be perfect for a very specific style of combat but is pretty much useless outside of "2-dimensional" combat with wired scoring.

Foil primary, but I can handle an Epee in a pinch. And I'm basing my observations on competition fencing AND goofing off, which is usually (for us) a no-strip, 6+ man melee. :smallbiggrin:

[Teron]

Hate fumbles, rolling a 1 is bad enough without having something worse tacked onto it. Nothing is quite as immersion-breaking as someone who's trained their whole life to wield weapons accidentally stabbing himself in the kidneys once every few weeks. Likewise, it's kind of immersion-breaking when you realize any good-sized city of completely untrained commoners can take out high-level BBEG's with the powers of maths (natural 20 always hits).

Natural 20's are treated as 30, natural 1's as -10, and only if it would normally be a success/failure. None of this "you fail your jump check and fall down the cliff, despite your +30 modifier."
By RAW, only attack rolls and saving throws automatically fail/succeed on a 1/20, so you don't have to worry about improbably catastrophic jump checks and the like.

[Zeful]

How do you play natural 1s and 20s in your groups. I treat a natural 20 as a result of a 30 and a natural 1 as a result of a -10. To me that makes more sense because there should be no possible way a 1st level commoner can punch pelor . . . it just shouldn't be O.o

A first level commoner could hit Pelor (and in fact very likely can, after all, what would Pelor have to fear from a first level commoner?) but it won't do anything which is the important distinction.

[Worira]

Yeah, fumbles are absurd. If it's on two natural ones in a row, trained fighters start dropping their weapons or impaling themselves about once every 40 minutes. If it's just a natural one, it's once every two minutes. Unless you're playing Stooges and Simpletons, it's completely ridiculous.

[Green Bean]

Yeah, my old DM was going to use a fumble system, right up until we pointed out that a level 20 Fighter is four times more likely to accidentally stab himself than a 1st level Commoner.

[deuxhero]

There is also the argument that fumbles hurt fighters for getting better at fighting (bad) as you have 4 chances of failing if you have 4 attacks. .

[tyckspoon]

On a side note, isn't there something about autohitting adjacent targets if you roll a 1 while shooting at something?


Not in the standard rules, there isn't. D&D 3.x contains no rules whatsoever about hitting the wrong targets/breaking your weapon/hurting yourself with a bad attack roll, not even as an optional rule. If you roll a 1, you miss with that attack. That's it. The closest thing is the random selection of who you actually hit if you're crazy enough to shoot into a grapple.

[Sinfire Titan]

Not in the standard rules, there isn't. D&D 3.x contains no rules whatsoever about hitting the wrong targets/breaking your weapon/hurting yourself with a bad attack roll, not even as an optional rule. If you roll a 1, you miss with that attack. That's it. The closest thing is the random selection of who you actually hit if you're crazy enough to shoot into a grapple.

Or the rules for missing with a splash weapon, but that's limited in range.

[Human Paragon 3]

At my table we tweaked the critical rules significantly. They're a little unbalanced, but a lot more fun.

A roll of a natural 20 is always a critical, no need to roll the confirmation. We did this because it was anti climactic and just not fun to roll a 20 then have to re-roll for the crit. If you have a wider threat range, 19-20 for example, you still have to confirm on non-20 threats. So if a long sword wielder rolls a 19, he would have to confirm the threat.

A roll of a natural 1 is an automatic miss and also provokes an attack of opportunity from anyone who threatens you with a mele weapon.

[lsfreak]

By RAW, only attack rolls and saving throws automatically fail/succeed on a 1/20, so you don't have to worry about improbably catastrophic jump checks and the like.

I know, but there's a lot of people out there who like to rule that natural 1's and natural 20's on skill checks are also automatic successes/failures. Which means that with a couple minutes of time - even with a negative modifier - you can do stupid things like turn the BBEG into your laundry bitch, jump to the other side of the planet, and instakill everyone under level 50 via Blasphemy.

[Hurlbut]

Why? Does melee really need another nerf?It apply to the casters too...it's fun especially when you have Paizo's Critical Fumble deck.

[Delaney Gale]

Foil primary, but I can handle an Epee in a pinch. And I'm basing my observations on competition fencing AND goofing off, which is usually (for us) a no-strip, 6+ man melee. :smallbiggrin:

Ohhh I love goofing off. However, my old coach is a SCAdian, so he'd bring in his rapiers/daggers/cloaks for us to mess around with instead of the foils. Good times.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

It apply to the casters too...it's fun especially when you have Paizo's Critical Fumble deck.How? There are only a tiny fraction of the spells that require attack rolls. A wizard is going to make one or 2 attacks per combat. A Fighter, at level 11, is making 4-6 per round.

[Sir Homeslice]

Dear god no. Critical misses are incredibly stupid. In pretty much every system imaginable. Especially in D&D. To this date I have never seen a good critical miss houserule.

[Cieyrin]

The only reason to include Fumbles of any sort is if the players find amusement in dropping weapons and stabbing your buddy.

On the same note, the concept of Critical Hits are also more detrimental to PCs, since the vast number of NPCs are vastly numerically more likely to crit on the PCs. So wouldn't it be more beneficial to remove the concept of either from the system, as the orcs of the world have taken enough lives w/ lucky criticals through sheer numbers? :smalltongue:

[Hawriel]

Alot of peaple have the idea that fumbles automaticly mean that a person stabls themselves or drops their weapon. Not very imaginative. I think Id hate to play inside the small box of such a GM.

Yes it is very silly for a person to stab themselves with a longspear. However a dagger is possable. An axe more likley and a flail is a distinct possibility. Dropping a weapon is less likely to happen in my games.

This is what my group does for crits and fumbles.

on a roll of a nat 1 roll again on a 1-3 somthing happens. roll %. on 1-60 at most a minor complication, 60-89 somthing bad, 90-100 hilarity insuese.

At first we based them off of dndadventure.com's crits and fumbles table. It has a variety of possibilities. Even drop weapon or hit friend/self. Thats ok because there are only 5 of thoughs out of a 100 scale chart. Its not a perfect chart. Some results just dont make sence for what is actualy happening in game. Thats why I use rule 0.

Fighing is not a static activity. The actions of the peaple invalved and the enviornment should be considered when ruling on a fumble result.

These are some that I use. I'll give a number of possiblities.

Over extend: The attacker over extended her self roll dex/balance or the fallowing may occer; lose remaining attacks and AoO for the rest of this round, DC 10-15 check or become flat footed untill your next turn, take a -2 to AC for bad possitioning.

Stumble: The character lost its footing do to a misstep or tripping over the terrane. make a balance/dex check DC 10-15 or; lose shield bonus for one apponents attack, lose -2 AC for stumbling, lose remaining attacks, tumble/dex DC 10-15 or fall prone, fall prone. Fall prone dex/str check DC 10 drop weapon.

Here is an example of crits and fumbles that happened this past sunday. It includes a damage self.


Sequence of events of the first round of combat vs a red adult dragon.

mounted charge, charge attack fumbled (confermed), AoO hits and crits, mount hits, defender attacks fumbles, result damage self.

The players are attacking an adult red dragon. Their plan is to buff themselvs then charge in to attack. Hay they stopped to buff their making progress. The half-ork barbarian armed with spear and shield pulls a rino out of his bag of tricks. Mounts the rino and charges. Why not its fun.

The barbarian fumbles his attack roll. I let the player roll persentiles to see how bad a fumble occered. He rolled a 95. one result is hit friend. I give him a balance check or fall. He has no ride skill, the rino is not a standard mount, there is no saddle. balance check is a 2 on the die failing the DC by 10+. The play sais 'oh crap I think I planted the spear in the ground' I grin happily.

The barbarian wile sliding off the rino and thrusting at the same time plants the spear tip into the ground. he then pole valts himself over the charging rino's head. Right into the AoO of a red dragons bite attack.

The barbarian player yells out "Im leading with my shield!!". A +1 heavy steel shield. The Dragon rolls a crit. They also get to hold onto their victum with a bight attack. The dragon bights down on the now pole valting barbarian leading with a steel shield. The dragon does 62 points of damage with the crit and rolls an enjury. The barbarians arm would have been ripped off save for the shield. The shield is now destroyed (save failed badly) and is ripped inside the dragons mouth. The barbarian is now a chew toy.

The dragons action is next. It attacks the barbarian with a bight. I roll a 1. a 1 to conferm. I roll crit self on my chart. This was of corse a bight attack. There is a large mangled magical steel shield with sharp edges stuck in this dragons mouth. I roll damage its very high. I rule that the dragons tongue is caught between the shield and its teeth. The dragon bit his tongue off and drops the barbarians in a shower of blood. The dragon cannot cast verbal spells untill it is healed.

The rest of the fight was just as nasty. The dragon ended up putting down two characters (one death), and almost killing every one els.