natural 1 or... oopsies! [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

View Full Version : natural 1 or... oopsies!

big teej

2010-09-27, 08:22 AM

Quietus

2010-09-27, 08:33 AM

Make fun of the player, but don't apply actual penalties. For example : Rolling a 1 when attacking with a warhammer might send your warhammer flying off in some other direction. Instead of saying it's hit a friend, however, you could have it slip the character's grip. The opponent hands it back to the player, explaining that you're supposed to actually HOLD ONTO IT. The more crazy-angry the opponent is normally, the more polite they should be when correcting the nat 1's. This becomes particularly amusing when several are rolled in a row, on both sides, and you end up turning what should be a lethal fight into a pair of opponents insisting, "No, YOU go first!"

Snake-Aes

2010-09-27, 08:45 AM

Well, technically natural 1s are just misses in 3.5, and only for saves and attack rolls.

But if you want a fumble chart, here are a few options.
Attack rolls:
1) A ferret leaps out of a bush and bites your <body part>, causing you to miss and fall on the ground in pain.
2) As you take aim, you notice an Euchroma Gigantea flying in the aim's path, so you give up because it'd be a pain to kill the poor insect.
3) You swing with all your might, but the enemy dodges and you spin thrice on the same spot before falling on the ground
4) You lunge forward, and suddenly remember your dead sister. You're too sad to attack.
5) As you take aim, a gust of wind throws something on your eye, and you shoot a nearby pigeon instead.
6) You charge, but suddenly an aroused bear notices you and gives chase.
7) Shifting your stance, you prepare to deal the final blow, but suddenly the enemy assumed sad puppy eyes and you can't bring yourself to swing.

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 08:46 AM

Don't punish them for bad luck?

Seriously, melee classes have it hard enough as-is. Casters don't suffer an offshoot chance of blowing up every time they cast Detect Magic, why should you penalize a noncaster for doing their job?

Rule of Funny isn't justification here. Noncasters (especially those with Full BAB) have a significantly higher chance of backfiring if Crit Fumbles are used. Remember, they typically make between 1-3 attacks/round, usually more if optimized (around 6 attacks for Rogue-level BAB, and easily up to 14 for Full BAB classes). That means they are rolling for Fumbles three times a round with ease.

Now assume 3 attacks/round, 5 rounds/encounter, 4 encounters/day. 60 attacks/day from a Rogue alone (a poorly optimized one at that). Statistically, 3 of those attacks will fumble. Rogues have to deal with crappy attack rolls as is, so that's three more attacks that are going to miss.

Let's up the stakes: 14 attacks/round, 5 rounds/encounter, 4 encounters/day. 280 attacks/day. That's 14 Fumbles, effectively a Full Attack action against a party member.

See a problem here?

arrowhen

2010-09-27, 08:47 AM

Quietus

2010-09-27, 08:59 AM

I won't say they're stupid, but they definitely have problems. Unless you're using some method to "confirm" fumbles, you get the weird thing where higher level characters fumble more often than inexperienced ones, due to their extra attacks per round. Plus, it's another unfair advantage to spellcasters, who never have to worry about accidentally dropping their magic missiles, fireballs, etc.

When I've used them in the past, I tended to have them do things that changed the layout of the fight -- "you stumble ten feet in a random direction", or "you crash into the wall, knocking over a barrel of oil and dislodging a nearby torch from its sconce. There's now a puddle of flaming oil slowly spreading across the floor."

Whiffing in combat is bad enough. Rather than hosing them further on top of that, introduce a complication that makes the fight more interesting and that a clever player might actually be able to use to their advantage.

I like this idea, actually. The rule of funny is what generally works in the group I've played with for a while.. but right now I'm in a new group, where foes get AoO's against nat 1's. The idea of something happening that changes the battlefield - in a neutral way, not one specifically good or bad, or at least not one leaning toward one group or the other - is far more interesting. I'd also only apply that to attacks with the lowest attack bonus a player is going to use that round; A full-attacking Fighter20 would only have a chance of "whiffing" on his very last iterative, that one final attack he really had to stretch himself to attempt in the first place. Unless the spreading flaming oil is interesting enough to do so on another attack. :smalltongue:

Kurald Galain

2010-09-27, 08:59 AM

I like having a critical fumble system.

That said, I find a 5% fumble chance a bit too high, and I agree that it should also apply to spellcasters (i.e. to any system where casting a spell also requires a roll). And yes, this also applies to skill checks, and when rolling a Nature check to forage, a fumble might indeed mean encountering an angry animal.

And no, of course I don't intend fumbles to be lethal. They're intended to be flavorful and potentially embarassing, not crippling. The exception to this is, of course, Paranoia, where anything may gleefully blow up in your face on a fumble. Especially Bouncy Bubble Beverage.

oxybe

2010-09-27, 09:05 AM

my rules?

on a nat 1, you miss.

the end.

PCs are supposed to be trained adventurers and heroes. a 5% chance of random ally slaughter or looney toones style "weapon slips and flies across the room" just doesn't mesh well with either "trained adventurers" or "heroes".

monsters generally have a screen time of 3-5 rounds.

PCs should have a screen time of several episodes/sessions or even seasons/story arcs.

if Random Kobold #265461-56 botches a roll and slips up, it's no skin off anyone's back since he's not really meant to do much other then act as a speed bump to the PCs.

if a PC botches a roll once it's funny. but PCs are meant to last several encounters, sessions & story arcs. it starts losing it's draw after the 4th or 5th time Sir Brickface McCragrock bisects a PCs. at that point the guy shows has skill but truthfully at this point, in virtually any profession he would be considered a liability for nearly killing his co-workers.

Benly

2010-09-27, 09:07 AM

I tend to make nat 1s a particularly dramatic miss, usually a remarkable act of dodging or parrying on the enemy's part (or caroming off the enemy's armor/thick hide for the non-parrying sort).

Starbuck_II

2010-09-27, 09:12 AM

I hated Nat 1 rules which I hada DM merge with Precise shot rules.

You know how there is -4 hit if you are shooting an enemy by an ally? Well, both Nat 1 or missing by 4 made you shoot ally in back/butt.

Luckily I was a Wu Jen so I had spells, but I didn't like wasting spells for weak guys (Kobodl/goblin/rat) so I used my bow (Elven).

But I kept apparently hitting the dwarf in the butt.

RufusCorvus

2010-09-27, 09:20 AM

Nothing, unless we're playing Three Stooges the RPG.

lsfreak

2010-09-27, 09:21 AM

I use Nat 1 as -10 and Nat 20 as +30 instead of automiss/hit, and I hate critical fumble rules. They make zero sense from a realism standpoint and from a game-balance standpoint. The only times I'd implement them is a) a purposefully goofy game (it's a half-dragon spellscale dragonfire adept!), or b) if I switched to 3d6, I'd possibly do fumbles on a natural 3, which would probably simply be provoking from your target.

big teej

2010-09-27, 09:35 AM

for starters, we have no squishy casters, and if we did, we'd be using the spell roll varient

they're just as liable to snafu their attacks as mister fighter over there

2nd, I like the idea of changing the environment, once they leave the module I may implement this.

3rd, I LOVE the idea of the enemy calmly picking up their weapon and handing it too them... the fact this is a teaching module makes the idea even more appealing

4th, its not ALWAYS thrown at a party member, its determined quasi randomly by the direction the character was attacking, the warhammer example merely came up last night due to poor positioning. and we had a hobgoblin nearly skewer his buddy on a 1, so it works both ways

last
I am aware many people hate the critical fumble rules, however, I stated in my original call for help that we ARE using them, telling me how much you hate them doesn't help me come up with something to use aside from "your weapon goes flying across the room" which is the point of this thread.

nor am I really looking for variants (though as I said before, the idea of changing the battle ground with them is very nice)

thankyou all for your helpful suggestions

continuing on with the thread...

does anyone else have suggestions for a fumble chart? (the more generalized the better, anything involving animal shennanigans relies rather heavily on being out of doors)

/ramble/response

Snake-Aes

2010-09-27, 09:44 AM

does anyone else have suggestions for a fumble chart? (the more generalized the better, anything involving animal shennanigans relies rather heavily on being out of doors)

If a ferret comes out of nowhere to bite your face on a roll of 1, why should the fact that your character is inside a space station without air impede the ferret from showing up anyway?

Lhurgyof

2010-09-27, 09:49 AM

How we used to do it is if you rolled a 1, you'd roll a confirmation, if you missed their AC on that attack then you unreadied your weapon and lost the rest of your round- at least I think so. Or maybe that something bad happened.

Nonetheless, it shouldn't just be a nat. 1 that does it. After all, a nat 20 isn't an auto-crit.

big teej

2010-09-27, 10:00 AM

If a ferret comes out of nowhere to bite your face on a roll of 1, why should the fact that your character is inside a space station without air impede the ferret from showing up anyway?

that..... is an excellent point.

How we used to do it is if you rolled a 1, you'd roll a confirmation, if you missed their AC on that attack then you unreadied your weapon and lost the rest of your round- at least I think so. Or maybe that something bad happened.

Nonetheless, it shouldn't just be a nat. 1 that does it. After all, a nat 20 isn't an auto-crit.

it does for our group. :smalltongue:

Snake-Aes

2010-09-27, 10:01 AM

that..... is an excellent point.

it does for our group. :smalltongue:

as far as playing for hilarity goes, I see little reason to bother with something as silly as "making sense".

Then again I enjoyed Highschool of the Dead.

UserClone

2010-09-27, 10:07 AM

These are the droids you're looking for. (http://paizo.com/store/gameAids/gameMasteryProducts/itemPacks/v5748btpy89mn)

big teej

2010-09-27, 10:11 AM

as far as playing for hilarity goes, I see little reason to bother with something as silly as "making sense".

Then again I enjoyed Highschool of the Dead.

the only issue I'd ever take with it is in a 'serious' campaign moment or a horror campaign or something similar, but those are easier to plan around... I think....

These are the droids you're looking for. (http://paizo.com/store/gameAids/gameMasteryProducts/itemPacks/v5748btpy89mn)

hello my new super-best friend
you are my hero =D

as soon as class lets out I'm going to try and order those
:smallbiggrin:

Thinker

2010-09-27, 10:19 AM

This is D&D. Things should be deadly. Fighting is dangerous. I support anything that drives this point home even more. Also, spell-casting should be just as (if not more) dangerous than regular fighting. I use spell failure chance, starting at 10% and increasing for various things: wearing armor, holding things in their hands, moving during the same turn, casting using metamagic, and casting with the highest available spell-slots. For melee, I roll on a pair of tables that look something like this:

Roll a d6 to determine a target. Only rolls that actually do something to hurt the fumbler or his allies count:
{table]Result | Target
1 | Self
2 | Creature adjacent right.
3 | Creature adjacent left.
4 | Creature adjacent forward.
5 | Creature adjacent back.
6 | Self
[/table]

Roll a d% to determine an outcome:
{table]Percent | Outcome
1 - 15 | Impaled; take max damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and take 1d6 bleeding damage per round for 1d6 rounds.
16 - 25 | Crushed; take max damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and take 1d6 bleeding damage per round for 1d6 rounds.
26 - 35 | Slashed; take max damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and take 1d6 bleeding damage per round for 1d6 rounds.
36 - 50 | Gashed; take max damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and take 1d6 bleeding damage per round for 1d6 rounds.
51 - 65 | Demolished; take max crit damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and roll Fort Save (DC damage dealt) or else die.
66 - 75 | Crumpled; take max crit damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and roll Fort Save (DC damage dealt) or else die.
76 - 85 | Crippled; take max crit damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and roll Fort Save (DC damage dealt) or else die.
86 - 100 | Battered; take max crit damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and roll Fort Save (DC damage dealt) or else die.
[/table]

lsfreak

2010-09-27, 10:30 AM

The Glyphstone

2010-09-27, 10:35 AM

Those fumble cards...are kinda harsh. Geez.

EDIT: That table, on the other hand...wowza. Murderous. Literally.

Serpentine

2010-09-27, 10:37 AM

I've enjoyed using the 2nd Edition Critical Success/Failure charts, albiet with lots of tweaking and common sense.
If you just want general ideas, there is:
Overreaching and being thrown off balance.
Getting your weapon stuck in something.
Breaking your weapon (rather harsh).
Whacking yourself (not necessarily to take damage).
Losing your grip on your weapon or shield.
Getting in an ally's way.
Tripping over your own feat.
Catching your weapon in the light and blinding yourself/an ally.

Greenish

2010-09-27, 10:37 AM

It makes perfect sense that professional warriors are more likely to crit themselves and/or their allies than the enemy. Really, with those rules, I'd just leave some greataxes lying around, boost my AC and take total defense each round.

Kurald Galain

2010-09-27, 10:38 AM

What... how... agh! This is not a bunch of 3-year-olds playing with daddy's switchknives! :smalleek: Professional soldiers, highly trained people, and yet statistically almost everyone will kill either themselves or a friend before ever hitting level 2?
Come on, nobody plays with a fumble rule that if you roll a 1, your nearest ally dies.

There is a huge difference between "playing with fumbles" and "playing with ridiculously common and/or ridiculously harsh fumbles", and I don't think anyone is seriously considering the latter for a heroic fantasy game.

big teej

2010-09-27, 10:39 AM

Those fumble cards...are kinda harsh. Geez.

EDIT: That table, on the other hand...wowza. Murderous. Literally.

I concur.....

those cards were... kinda.......

more than I was expecting
but thats what I get for posting before looking at them in more detail.:smallredface:

I think I may just stick to the rule of hilarity.

I've enjoyed using the 2nd Edition Critical Success/Failure charts, albiet with lots of tweaking and common sense.
If you just want general ideas, there is:
Overreaching and being thrown off balance.
Getting your weapon stuck in something.
Breaking your weapon (rather harsh).
Whacking yourself (not necessarily to take damage).
Losing your grip on your weapon or shield.
Getting in an ally's way.
Tripping over your own feat.
Catching your weapon in the light and blinding yourself/an ally.

this. I like. this :smallbiggrin:

this is actually a perfect example of the sorts of things I'm looking for as alternatives to flying weapons. :smallbiggrin:

Come on, nobody plays with a fumble rule that if you roll a 1, your nearest ally dies.

There is a huge difference between "playing with fumbles" and "playing with ridiculously common and/or ridiculously harsh fumbles", and I don't think anyone is seriously considering the latter for a heroic fantasy game.

also this, I'm not out to completely obliterate my players over something that WILL eventually happen.

more 'mildy and humrously inconvience and potentially endanger'

such as the party rogue suddenly fighting a skeleton without a weapon.

also, for the record
my group has yet to take issue with flying metal objects. even gotten a few laughs out of it due to hirelings throwing waraxes around iddy biddy rooms. it is merely my discomfort as the DM to keep using the same thing over and over led to this thread.

Greenish

2010-09-27, 10:43 AM

Come on, nobody plays with a fumble rule that if you roll a 1, your nearest ally dies.Especially at lower levels, this is pretty close:

Roll a d6 to determine a target. Only rolls that actually do something to hurt the fumbler or his allies count:
{table]Result | Target
1 | Self
2 | Creature adjacent right.
3 | Creature adjacent left.
4 | Creature adjacent forward.
5 | Creature adjacent back.
6 | Self
[/table]

Roll a d% to determine an outcome:
{table]Percent | Outcome
1 - 15 | Impaled; take max damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and take 1d6 bleeding damage per round for 1d6 rounds.
16 - 25 | Crushed; take max damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and take 1d6 bleeding damage per round for 1d6 rounds.
26 - 35 | Slashed; take max damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and take 1d6 bleeding damage per round for 1d6 rounds.
36 - 50 | Gashed; take max damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and take 1d6 bleeding damage per round for 1d6 rounds.
51 - 65 | Demolished; take max crit damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and roll Fort Save (DC damage dealt) or else die.
66 - 75 | Crumpled; take max crit damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and roll Fort Save (DC damage dealt) or else die.
76 - 85 | Crippled; take max crit damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and roll Fort Save (DC damage dealt) or else die.
86 - 100 | Battered; take max crit damage (from all sources, including sneak attack) and roll Fort Save (DC damage dealt) or else die.
[/table]

Dr.Epic

2010-09-27, 10:44 AM

I don't do anything special with naturals 1's. I just say that's an auto miss.

Serpentine

2010-09-27, 10:50 AM

I think something bares repeating.
please refrain from "natural 1's are stupid" posts, my group has decided to play with them, so being told repeatedly that one of our rules is stupid doesn't help solve our problem.He wants ways to make his system better, not insistance that his system is wrong.

Mystral

2010-09-27, 10:51 AM

Usually I let my players roll another d20, and the higher they roll, the worse the results are. A 1-8? You just miss, no problem. 9-12? You lose your balance, penality on AC. 13-16? You loose the rest of your attack. 17-20? In close combat, you provoke an opportunity attack from the enemy you were attacking, in ranged combat, you hit an ally that's conceivably in the way. If there is none.

The warmage in the party tends to kill his own cohort with the orb spells from complete arcane, but other then that, everyone seems to be fine with it.

Kylarra

2010-09-27, 10:57 AM

What we've done on the rare times that we've wanted fumble chances is roll a second d20, and on another 1 it's a critical fumble of some sort, if the second roll would've hit, it's an ineffective attack, and if the second roll missed but wasn't a 1, then they miss comically, but don't have to fumble. It lowers the chance of the critical fumble to 1:400, which is a lot less debilitating than 1:20.

Tyndmyr

2010-09-27, 11:23 AM

Come on, nobody plays with a fumble rule that if you roll a 1, your nearest ally dies.

There is a huge difference between "playing with fumbles" and "playing with ridiculously common and/or ridiculously harsh fumbles", and I don't think anyone is seriously considering the latter for a heroic fantasy game.

I've seen them. Well, technically, they were effects like triple normal crit damage, but in practice, they were death.

The scale of fumble charts only determines how annoying they are. They are always bad in heroic fantasy. In comedic games, go nuts. The more random, the better. You can also use them on gritty games, where you're using <generic ancient forgotten technology>, in a more serious role.

But they do not work in D&D.

Serpentine

2010-09-27, 11:26 AM

They don't work in your D&D. They work fine in mine, and in the OP's, and that is not helpful to him.

UserClone

2010-09-27, 11:33 AM

To be fair, those cards are meant to be "confirmed fumbles," not just any natural 1.

Also, they're meant to be used in conjunction with the Critical Hit Deck, which is only meant to be used by PCs and major NPCs. So on the whole, all bad guys can fumble (and the PCs as well), but only PCs and BBEG-types can use the nasty crit cards. So it works in PCs favor.

Arbane

2010-09-27, 12:12 PM

Come on, nobody plays with a fumble rule that if you roll a 1, your nearest ally dies.

Never played RuneQuest or Rolemaster, I see.

I say go with "On a roll of a natural 1, your character spontaneously combusts". It'll be less painful and humiliating that the alternatives. :smallmad:

Tyndmyr

2010-09-27, 12:18 PM

They don't work in your D&D. They work fine in mine, and in the OP's, and that is not helpful to him.

I submit that they likely do not work as well as you think in either of them.

For instance, without confirmations, fumbles are demonstratably ludicrous, with silly things like having to explain why X happens 5% of the time. The OP is apparently running into exactly this issue.

Now, if you add things like confirmation rolls and tables, you're slowing combat by adding a significant number of die rolls. Possibly also lookup time. This, combined with the already lengthy nature of D&D combat, is not a good thing.

UserClone

2010-09-27, 12:27 PM

Hence the simplicity of drawing a card.

Also, you can save a critical hit card to cancel out a confirmed fumble's effect, and instead simply miss.

OldTrees

2010-09-27, 01:12 PM

My rules

Attacks:
Nat 1 on attack: Auto miss and roll again
2 Nat 1s on attack: You hit yourself. Roll damage. [happens rare enough that none have die to this] And roll again.
3 Nat 1's on Attack: You hit yourself in a critical area. You hit is a critical. Roll again. [Happened once]
4 Nat 1's on Attack: You suffer a mortal wound. Die for now.

Others:
Nat 1: normal result as per rules but see below.
After a nat 1 I try to think of an appropriate funny permanent consequence.

Examples that have happened
Nat 1 on Spot check: The character now sees 6 birds (of various kinds) that hover orthogonally to the character's head and talk to him occasionally.

2 Nat 1s on a repeated Sleep trap: The character is now permanently sleepwalking. They see a skewed version of reality.

Nat 1 on a search check: The character can never find what they are looking for. Instead they find something else of equal value to there search check result.

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 01:14 PM

This is D&D. Things should be deadly. Fighting is dangerous.

...We are talking about characters able to break down solid steel walls just by hitting it hard enough. Hell, some of the skill checks alone are capable of beating World Records.

WHY THE **** DOES IT MAKE SENSE FOR A FIGHTER CAPABLE OF SNIPING A FLY FROM 500ft AWAY TO CRIT FUMBLE?!

He wants ways to make his system better, not insistance that his system is wrong.

THe problem is his system will be better if he takes fumbles out.

Double Edit:

Examples that have happened
Nat 1 on Spot check: The character now sees 6 birds (of various kinds) that hover orthogonally to the character's head and talk to him occasionally.

2 Nat 1s on a repeated Sleep trap: The character is now permanently sleepwalking. They see a skewed version of reality.

Nat 1 on a search check: The character can never find what they are looking for. Instead they find something else of equal value to there search check result.

NAT 1S DO NOT AUTO-FAIL SKILL CHECKS!!!!!!

For the love of Tzeentch, I'm all for a little chaos, but fumbles are absurd.

And don't point out the obvious fact that the Orks would have taken over the universe if it weren't for fumbles, because the Necrons can kick their collective green asses.

Another_Poet

2010-09-27, 01:42 PM

please refrain from "natural 1's are stupid" posts, my group has decided to play with them, so being told repeatedly that one of our rules is stupid doesn't help solve our problem.

That's fair enough. Can I at least suggest you have them "confirm" their fumbles?

What I mean is, in 3.5 when you roll a nat 20 it isn't a critical. You have to roll again and if that roll is at least a hit, then it's a critical.

If I was going to use fumbles, a nat 1 wouldn't be a fumble. I'd make the player roll again and if that is at best a miss, then it's a fumble.

That way fumbles are somewhat more rare, which helps keep them in the realm of amusing rather than annoying.

aquaticrna

2010-09-27, 01:48 PM

I usually run fumbles in a situational way, but since you're looking for a list here is one based on a d8

1- you miss and hit your/allies foot for 1 damage
2- you stumble and save or fall prone
3- you provoke an attack
4- you hit the wall/ground, kicking up a small dust cloud insert effect here
5- you drop your weapon (locking gauntlet negates)
6- you get an odd, foreboding sense that none of this is real, spend the rest of your turn lost in philosophical thought
7- you stumble and move in a random direction 5'
8- just a miss

JonestheSpy

2010-09-27, 01:59 PM

I generally have players roll to confirm a fumble, and make up something that seems appropriate depending on how the roll turns out. Usually it involves weapons being dropped or some such thing, not killing your buddy.

big teej

2010-09-27, 02:07 PM

I submit that they likely do not work as well as you think in either of them.

For instance, without confirmations, fumbles are demonstratably ludicrous, with silly things like having to explain why X happens 5% of the time. The OP is apparently running into exactly this issue.

Now, if you add things like confirmation rolls and tables, you're slowing combat by adding a significant number of die rolls. Possibly also lookup time. This, combined with the already lengthy nature of D&D combat, is not a good thing.

no, this is exactly NOT the issue I"m having, I am having trouble with alternatives to "your weapon flies across the room". finding such alternatives is the point of this thread, examples include things such as
-weapon becoming stuck in a piece of scenery
-tripping over yourself
and other very helpful alternatives suggested so far.

not "explaining why 5% of the time, bad stuff happens"

...We are talking about characters able to break down solid steel walls just by hitting it hard enough. Hell, some of the skill checks alone are capable of beating World Records.

WHY THE **** DOES IT MAKE SENSE FOR A FIGHTER CAPABLE OF SNIPING A FLY FROM 500ft AWAY TO CRIT FUMBLE?!

THe problem is his system will be better if he takes fumbles out.

Double Edit:

NAT 1S DO NOT AUTO-FAIL SKILL CHECKS!!!!!!

For the love of Tzeentch, I'm all for a little chaos, but fumbles are absurd.

And don't point out the obvious fact that the Orks would have taken over the universe if it weren't for fumbles, because the Necrons can kick their collective green asses.

for starters, in regards to making my system 'better' by removing critical failures

dungeons and dragons is a game, the object of which is to have "fun". as a dungeon master, it is your perogative what rules to play with, and which to leave out. as a dungeon master it is my perogative to use the critical fumble rules if I so choose.
I have done so.
debating the use of such a mechanic is not the purpose of this thread, and does not contribute to the topic at all.

second, I have never once mentioned using natural 1's or 20's on skill checks, this is purely an attack roll discussion.

*a note to all readers/comments

please the purpose of this thread is to find creative and (occaisionally) slightly comical alternatives to 'your weapon flies across the room' when a player rolls a 1 on a d20
the purpose of this thread IS NOT to argue/debate/vehemently discuss the pros and cons of such a system

if you cannot contribute beyond something that can essentiall be boiled down to "I hate/don't use/etc critical failures", I am asking you to please not contribute to the discussion, as that discussion is not the one being held here

big teej

2010-09-27, 02:10 PM

(I'm assuming someone else is going to reply while I type this, if not, I apologize for the double post)

That's fair enough. Can I at least suggest you have them "confirm" their fumbles?

What I mean is, in 3.5 when you roll a nat 20 it isn't a critical. You have to roll again and if that roll is at least a hit, then it's a critical.

If I was going to use fumbles, a nat 1 wouldn't be a fumble. I'd make the player roll again and if that is at best a miss, then it's a fumble.

That way fumbles are somewhat more rare, which helps keep them in the realm of amusing rather than annoying.

this is something I may indeed implement, as it would prevent fumbles from becoming patently ridiculous, and I appreciate the suggestion.

I usually run fumbles in a situational way, but since you're looking for a list here is one based on a d8

1- you miss and hit your/allies foot for 1 damage
2- you stumble and save or fall prone
3- you provoke an attack
4- you hit the wall/ground, kicking up a small dust cloud insert effect here
5- you drop your weapon (locking gauntlet negates)
6- you get an odd, foreboding sense that none of this is real, spend the rest of your turn lost in philosophical thought
7- you stumble and move in a random direction 5'
8- just a miss

I think I'll be adding these to my table of 'uh oh' :smallsmile:

thankyou greatly

Gravitron5000

2010-09-27, 02:16 PM

Tripping over your own feat.

I know you are trying to keep things fair, since you have no feet, but if I trip over Improved Toughness one more time ... grumble mumble :smalltongue:

big teej

2010-09-27, 02:22 PM

I know you are trying to keep things fair, since you have no feet, but if I trip over Improved Toughness one more time ... grumble mumble :smalltongue:

I see what you did there.
-funnyfunnyfunny-

Techsmart

2010-09-27, 02:26 PM

In our group, a nat 1 on attack rolls is usually something small, like you hit something nearby/yourself for a minimal amount of damage, or you make a balance check to not be left flat-footed. They are trained adventurers, but in combat, slip-ups are still possible. I usually don't make them kill a player, but something that may make the next attack hurt a little more or something like that would apply. At the same time, I do run a campaign where spell-casters have a curse that gives spells a 5% chance of blowing up their spells in their faces (which stacks with armor penalties). They are more humiliated than hurt, especially when a prestidigitation blows up, turning their face green.

Flail_master

2010-09-27, 02:56 PM

Tyndmyr

2010-09-27, 02:57 PM

no, this is exactly NOT the issue I"m having, I am having trouble with alternatives to "your weapon flies across the room". finding such alternatives is the point of this thread, examples include things such as
-weapon becoming stuck in a piece of scenery
-tripping over yourself
and other very helpful alternatives suggested so far.

not "explaining why 5% of the time, bad stuff happens"

Go back, reread what I said. I said you had trouble explaining why, 5% of the time, the same thing(X) happens.

And that the alternative, a LIST of bad things, had problems of it's own, which I then detailed.

Depending on what system you use, you get to pick what flaws you have, but the key point is, they are all flawed. All of them suffer from issues such as slowing down gameplay, or fighters becoming increasingly likely to dramatically fail the more skillful they become. These problems are specific to D&D 3.5, and do not necessarily arise in other combat systems.

big teej

2010-09-27, 03:17 PM

Hey teej :smallbiggrin:

now i apologise for the obscurity of the following post but i thought i could help

my DM (Scareynerd) use the melee fumble chart from "Exodus" its quite good actually, no serious 'you kill self' ones, mostly just, you stun yourself for 2 rounds orrr you go off balance and provoke an AoO or maybe get dust in ur eyes

tis pretty good, if you can find it i suggest u use it, it changes things up a bit :smallbiggrin:

I will begin searching for said list immidietly.

Go back, reread what I said. I said you had trouble explaining why, 5% of the time, the same thing(X) happens.

And that the alternative, a LIST of bad things, had problems of it's own, which I then detailed.

Depending on what system you use, you get to pick what flaws you have, but the key point is, they are all flawed. All of them suffer from issues such as slowing down gameplay, or fighters becoming increasingly likely to dramatically fail the more skillful they become. These problems are specific to D&D 3.5, and do not necessarily arise in other combat systems.

my sincerest apologies if I misread something.
however, my main point stands, I have decided to run a system that includes natural 1's and 20's equalling automatic failures or successes.

and the purpose of this discussion is not a critique on that decision, but to expand what could occur as opposed to the same thing over and over.

Scarey Nerd

2010-09-27, 03:32 PM

For the record, I don't use the chart from Exodus, as it isn't D&D appropriate. I use this (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/corey.sonnenberg/Faerun/Critical%20Fumble%20Table.htm) chart, which the lovely people at Google helped me to find.

Edit: It generally works, but there was an occasion where a Medium Viper swung its head around a Goblin and headbutted it.

Yeah.

big teej

2010-09-27, 03:42 PM

that table is very helpful, .... and will most likely be incorporated into the fumble chart I'm going to be putting together.

I think I may go make a thread titled 1001 fumbles...... :xykon:

Scarey Nerd

2010-09-27, 03:44 PM

that table is very helpful, .... and will most likely be incorporated into the fumble chart I'm going to be putting together.

I think I may go make a thread titled 1001 fumbles...... :xykon:

Should you make such a thread, I'm sure I shall post on it. Fumbling is known as "The norm" with me.

Flail_master

2010-09-27, 03:56 PM

I agree wholly with this statement

mangosta71

2010-09-27, 03:57 PM

Why is fumbling a bad thing? For the most part, combat isn't so down-to-the-wire that a fumble (which generally results in a one-round delay) makes the difference between a win and a loss. The standard "you slip and fall prone" or "you lose your grip on your weapon" or "you take -2 AC" can be altered to "you step in close and your opponent trips you" or "he parries your attack with such force that it numbs your hand for a moment" or "your opponent draws you forward, causing you to overextend yourself". It really comes down to story-telling, which can be hard to keep in mind during the rush of combat. As long as it happens to the guys the PCs are fighting too, it's all good and adds to the chaos surrounding any real combat.

And we won't talk about the time I was DMing, the ranger rolled a 1 on his charge and went sprawling, and then the NPC rolled a nat 20 on her attack with a vorpal scimitar...

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 04:11 PM

Why is fumbling a bad thing? For the most part, combat isn't so down-to-the-wire that a fumble (which generally results in a one-round delay) makes the difference between a win and a loss.

PCs are generally better equiped, and damage-dealers are especially prone to being able to 1-shot other PCs.

Think about it: Would you want to party up with the guy who can rape reality with 3rd level spell slots, or the guy who has a 5% chance of being able to kill any friendly character within reach/range? I don't know about you, but I'd rather have another Wizard in those situations.

It's the same reason people decry Frenzied Berserker. Except FB can be controlled far easier than Fumbles can be.

The final reason is that DMs don't care about the mooks, who are most likely to both Crit and Fumble. Thus no one cares if one of 20 Kobold archers somehow shoots himself in the face with his 19-20 Crossbow, but everyone cares when the PCs get hit by the two who happen to Crit.

Enemies (especially random encounters) tend to start battle at full HP with no expended resources (spell slots, wand charges, etc). This is only true for the PCs during the first encounter each day. The enemies also have a lower damage output than the PCs do, and tend to survive their own fumbles.

In other words, PCs are the ones who will experience the worst side of the d20. The enemies will never care. EVER.

Edit: To add to this: One fumble from the party's Fighter can spell a minimum of 100ogp (Revivify), all the way up to 25K (True Rez) or even a TPK. One fumble from the enemies usually means the encounter is that much closer to being over. It hurts the PCs.

big teej

2010-09-27, 04:19 PM

PCs are generally better equiped, and damage-dealers are especially prone to being able to 1-shot other PCs.

Think about it: Would you want to party up with the guy who can rape reality with 3rd level spell slots, or the guy who has a 5% chance of being able to kill any friendly character within reach/range? I don't know about you, but I'd rather have another Wizard in those situations.

It's the same reason people decry Frenzied Berserker. Except FB can be controlled far easier than Fumbles can be.

The final reason is that DMs don't care about the mooks, who are most likely to both Crit and Fumble. Thus no one cares if one of 20 Kobold archers somehow shoots himself in the face with his 19-20 Crossbow, but everyone cares when the PCs get hit by the two who happen to Crit.

Enemies (especially random encounters) tend to start battle at full HP with no expended resources (spell slots, wand charges, etc). This is only true for the PCs during the first encounter each day. The enemies also have a lower damage output than the PCs do, and tend to survive their own fumbles.

In other words, PCs are the ones who will experience the worst side of the d20. The enemies will never care. EVER.

Edit: To add to this: One fumble from the party's Fighter can spell a minimum of 100ogp (Revivify), all the way up to 25K (True Rez) or even a TPK. One fumble from the enemies usually means the encounter is that much closer to being over. It hurts the PCs.

okay, so don't use it in your games (which you've made it clear that you don't"

but I didn't ask "should I use critical fumbles" I asked "what else can I use for the result of a critical fumble"

usage is a foregone conclusion, I have decided to use it, so anything from the stance that USE is open to discussion in this thread is well.....

derailing, to say the least.

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 04:23 PM

okay, so don't use it in your games (which you've made it clear that you don't"

but I didn't ask "should I use critical fumbles" I asked "what else can I use for the result of a critical fumble"

usage is a foregone conclusion, I have decided to use it, so anything from the stance that USE is open to discussion in this thread is well.....

derailing, to say the least.{Scrubbed}

mangosta71

2010-09-27, 04:26 PM

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 04:29 PM

That's only if you rule that characters hit allies for full damage on fumbles (which doesn't even make sense most of the time). I like the table presented a few posts ago. Some of the effects seem a bit harsh (particularly the stunned for 2 rounds one), but striking allies is nicely absent.

Have you ever been hit by a 6th level Power Attacking Fighter? Or 12th? Or 15th? No? Then don't say "it requires full damage". Even average damage from a Charger build is enough to kill most PCs if they aren't prepared.

Really, the only ones with a reliable defense against fumbles are the same people who always thrash melee classes anyway.

UserShadow7989

2010-09-27, 04:29 PM

Nothing, unless we're playing Three Stooges the RPG.

...why do I suddenly want to make a Berserker named Curly, who only rages when he hears the Bard named Larry play pop go the weasel?

On topic, I'd say that Nat 1s should either have to be 'confirmed' like a critical would normally be, have a non harmful but comical description, and/or do something really minor like provoke an AoO from the target because you overextended yourself. Minor, doesn't REALLY hurt, but is still noticable.

Benly

2010-09-27, 04:34 PM

Have you ever been hit by a 6th level Power Attacking Fighter? Or 12th? Or 15th? No? Then don't say "it requires full damage". Even average damage from a Charger build is enough to kill most PCs if they aren't prepared.

Pretty sure from context by "full damage" he means "the normal amount of damage they deal on attacks", as opposed to "crit means your nearest ally takes 1d6 damage".

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 04:36 PM

Pretty sure from context by "full damage" he means "the normal amount of damage they deal on attacks", as opposed to "crit means your nearest ally takes 1d6 damage".

Full damage means maxed out rolls+whatever other bonuses you have. {{scrubbed}}

Benly

2010-09-27, 04:41 PM

Full damage means maxed out rolls+whatever other bonuses you have. {{Scrubbed}}

The context is that he said he liked the tables a few pages ago where fixed damage or negative conditions were applied independent of the character's normal attack damage. I'm just trying to clarify an apparent misunderstanding but hey, go ahead and insult me at random, that's "awesome".

Edit: Ah, I see the confusion, there were both the Paizo critcards which are as I described and a completely insane table on the first page which dealt ridiculous damage.

DonEsteban

2010-09-27, 04:42 PM

please refrain from "natural 1's are stupid" posts

Dear OP,

This (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/corey.sonnenberg/Faerun/Critical%20Fumble%20Table.htm) (Miscellaneous section), or a web search (http://www.google.com/search?q=critical+fumble+table) is what you are (http://www.dndadventure.com/dnda_dm_resources.html) looking for (http://www.mazrim.com/jstarlight/CriticalHits3e.html) (though the last one might be a bit over the top).

In our group, true fumbles only occur on a confirmed natural 1, i.e., two 1s in a row.

Though I very much like the "change the battlefield in a neutral way" idea and would love to hear more examples. I have little hope though, this thread is tainted. Start a new one.

Sincerely yours

A Friend

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 04:43 PM

The context is that he said he liked the tables a few pages ago where fixed damage or negative conditions were applied independent of the character's normal attack damage. I'm just trying to clarify an apparent misunderstanding but hey, go ahead and insult me at random, that's "awesome".

That's only if you rule that characters hit allies for full damage on fumbles

That was the part I was referring to.

And if you are complaining about me trolling, you clearly missed something.

kladams707

2010-09-27, 04:45 PM

Surfing HalfOrc

2010-09-27, 04:45 PM

I bought the Paizo "Critical Fumble deck, and let them draw a card. It's usually good for a laugh, and so far hasn't led to anything to drastic against the players.

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 04:48 PM

We have a d4 of fate thing going in our group for critical failures when it comes to attacks, where there are 3 bad things (drop your weapon, hit a friend, hit yourself for example), only one of which occurs. Each is assigned a number. The 4th thing gives the character a bone and their attack goes off. So whatever number you roll, that's the result of the action.

Ok, this makes no sense at all. How the hell does a 10th level Fighter (established by WotC to be nothing less than Legendary) hit himself without magic being involved?

I'm ignoring the whole paradox of a 10th level Fighter for now.

kladams707

2010-09-27, 04:52 PM

Who said D&D always had to make sense?

Benly

2010-09-27, 04:53 PM

That was the part I was referring to.

And if you are complaining about me trolling, you clearly missed something.

"full damage" is not always used to mean "maximum possible damage". For example, if a monster description says "The monster takes half damage from non-blessed weapons but full damage from blessed weapons", one would normally read "full" as being "not reduced" rather than "maximum possible dice roll".

Since tables were discussed which dealt reduced damage on critfails as well as rules which dealt normal damage on critfails, "full" to mean "non-reduced" is a reasonable reading of this statement. Tables were also discussed which caused the character to strike an ally for maximum possible damage, but since he said the table he liked was one that did not include striking allies we may presume from context (there, again, is that baneful word) that this is not the table he meant.

Just, y'know, clarifying what I meant by context since apparently you don't like the idea.

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 04:58 PM

"full damage" is not always used to mean "maximum possible damage". For example, if a monster description says "The monster takes half damage from non-blessed weapons but full damage from blessed weapons", one would normally read "full" as being "not reduced" rather than "maximum possible dice roll".

That terminology died with 3.0 for exactly this reason. It shows that the afore-mentioned table was not designed with 3.5.

Benly

2010-09-27, 05:05 PM

That terminology died with 3.0 for exactly this reason. It shows that the afore-mentioned table was not designed with 3.5.

And yet sometimes when one is reading message board posts that are not setting forth specific rules statements one must bear in mind that they are not written with the precision of a technical writer but rather with the vernacular usage of natural communication.

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 05:08 PM

And yet sometimes when one is reading message board posts that are not setting forth specific rules statements one must bear in mind that they are not written with the precision of a technical writer but rather with the vernacular usage of natural communication.

The wording was ambiguous, so I went with my best interpretation as a technical writer.

Benly

2010-09-27, 05:10 PM

The wording was ambiguous, so I went with my best interpretation as a technical writer.

Without paying attention to the sentences surrounding the statement, on the apparent justification that you hate context and whoever invokes it must be high. Great job there, technical writer.

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 05:24 PM

Without paying attention to the sentences surrounding the statement, on the apparent justification that you hate context and whoever invokes it must be high. Great job there, technical writer.

I hate figuring out context. Thinking make troll brain hurt.

Another_Poet

2010-09-27, 07:45 PM

Actually having read more of the other responses I would just suggest this:

Every tine you confirm a fumble, it means you provoke an AoO. All enemies who threaten you may take an AoO if they have one left for the round.

It just seems simpler than the weird charts. After all when you confirm a crit you don't roll on some chart to see if you cut the ear, the toe or the throat. It's just a mechanic for extra damage and the GM or player can describe as they see fit. I'd do the same with the fumble; it just provokes an AoO and describe as you see fit.

As an added benefit it doesn't make your warrior look incompetent. Even a skilled swordsman can occasionally leave an enemy a brief opening. It's much less embarassing than dropping your halberd on your johnson.

Serpentine

2010-09-27, 10:12 PM

I submit that they likely do not work as well as you think in either of them.And I submit that you are no more justified in making that claim than I would be to say "well if you tried them you'd find they work great". You do not know what goes on in my games. I tell you: fumbles work fine in my games, and are a positive factor, from which many of our best stories come. You don't believe me? Fine, whatever. But your baseless disbelief is absolutely no basis by which you can pass judgement over it.

For instance, without confirmations, fumbles are demonstratably ludicrous, with silly things like having to explain why X happens 5% of the time. The OP is apparently running into exactly this issue.I do use confirmation. The OP I don't believe has said he doesn't, but if so I do suggest that he do so, but that is not what he started this thread for. Oh, and I am fine with "bad luck" or "momentary distraction" or whatever explaining it.

Now, if you add things like confirmation rolls and tables, you're slowing combat by adding a significant number of die rolls. Possibly also lookup time. This, combined with the already lengthy nature of D&D combat, is not a good thing.Outweighed by the benefits of extra fun contributed by the fumbles. Maybe it wouldn't for you, but it does for us. I don't usually use a table nowadays, anyway, cuz I make it up depending on the specific circumstances.

I know you are trying to keep things fair, since you have no feet, but if I trip over Improved Toughness one more time ... grumble mumble :smalltongue:Arg spelling fail >.<

Unfortunately, like I said, I go on a case-by-case basis nowadays, so I can't really think of any other fumbles to offer. Although I did come to the conclusion yesterday that, as rolling the d20 represents luck in the D&D world anyway, that simple bad luck can be involved... So:
- The sun comes out from behind a cloud just as you swing your weapon, momentarily blinding you to your target.
- A passing eagle mistakes your arrow for a tasty meal and flies off with it.
- A breeze catches your arrow, throwing it off course.
- You trip over a mole hill.
- A piece of masonry falls on your head.
- A passing eagle mistakes your bald head for a good hard rock and drops a tortoise on you.
- You haven't been taking care of your bow properly, and the string breaks.

mangosta71

2010-09-27, 10:30 PM

Have you ever been hit by a 6th level Power Attacking Fighter? Or 12th? Or 15th? No? Then don't say "it requires full damage". Even average damage from a Charger build is enough to kill most PCs if they aren't prepared.
Apparently I need to clarify.

Fumbling is only a major problem if you rule that a character hits an ally on a fumble, and that the attack deals damage as if it had hit its intended target (many DMs that I've played with rule that, even if you do hit your friend, you only deal base weapon damage without any bonuses). And when I said that I liked the chart, I was referring to this (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/corey.sonnenberg/Faerun/Critical%20Fumble%20Table.htm) one, posted by Scarey Nerd, which does not include an entry for striking an ally at all - it's just minor temporary status effects (and often provoking an AoO).

Chipp Zanuff

2010-09-27, 11:03 PM

Apparently I need to clarify.

I don't say this often, as it is OOC for me, but THANK YOU. :smallsigh:

Benly

2010-09-27, 11:18 PM

A little late but it amused me: I finally got around to actually searching the 3.5 SRD for the term "full damage" and they do still use it. So Chipp, you might want to be careful about standing too close to Explosive Runes; they still deal "full damage" to anyone next to them. :smallwink:

Also, Heat Metal deals "full damage" when you don't meet the condition that causes you to take minimum damage from it, Energy Current deals "full damage" each round the target fails its save for half, and under the effects of Blink you take "full damage" from area effects that extend into the ethereal plane, but I thought Explosive Runes was the funniest. I'm not trying to restart a fight or anything, I just thought it was amusing.

Tyndmyr

2010-09-28, 12:18 AM

And I submit that you are no more justified in making that claim than I would be to say "well if you tried them you'd find they work great". You do not know what goes on in my games. I tell you: fumbles work fine in my games, and are a positive factor, from which many of our best stories come. You don't believe me? Fine, whatever. But your baseless disbelief is absolutely no basis by which you can pass judgement over it.

If you believe they would work for me, you can post reasons why if you wish.

It's not baseless if you include reasons.

I do use confirmation. The OP I don't believe has said he doesn't, but if so I do suggest that he do so, but that is not what he started this thread for. Oh, and I am fine with "bad luck" or "momentary distraction" or whatever explaining it.

Well, technically, he requested something that could be easily handled in a very small fraction of a second in a google search. It's a discussion board, discussion is going to happen about the topic.

Outweighed by the benefits of extra fun contributed by the fumbles. Maybe it wouldn't for you, but it does for us. I don't usually use a table nowadays, anyway, cuz I make it up depending on the specific circumstances.
Arg spelling fail >.<

I don't really know of an objective way to measure fun, Im afraid, so it's unlikely that there's any way to prove that statement either way. Hence my preference of sticking to rather more provable claims like showing the additional time spent rolling confirmations and rolling on charts, or the damage to verisimilitude inherent in a world class fighter dropping his weapon every few seconds.

Unfortunately, like I said, I go on a case-by-case basis nowadays, so I can't really think of any other fumbles to offer. Although I did come to the conclusion yesterday that, as rolling the d20 represents luck in the D&D world anyway, that simple bad luck can be involved... So:
- The sun comes out from behind a cloud just as you swing your weapon, momentarily blinding you to your target.

This doesn't arrive at anything more than a miss. In 3.5, not seeing the target and missing ARE strongly related. However, not seeing the target doesn't traditionally add penalties like dropping weapons, hitting friendlies, etc.

- A passing eagle mistakes your arrow for a tasty meal and flies off with it.

This is, again, merely a fluff description for a miss. It's also a bit damaging to verisimilitude to anyone familiar with eagles or archery.

- A breeze catches your arrow, throwing it off course.

Again, just a miss.

- You trip over a mole hill.

Just a miss, probably. Only really applies when moving.

- A piece of masonry falls on your head.

Vaguely possible, but there are existing rules for falling objects all over D&D 3.5.

- A passing eagle mistakes your bald head for a good hard rock and drops a tortoise on you.

Amusing as Small Gods is, the idea of this happening by mistake really pushes the limits of plausibility.

- You haven't been taking care of your bow properly, and the string breaks.

Bow strings don't break much, and letting them wear out makes little sense. Adventurers have the funds to replace inexpensive mundane items essentially at will.

It appears that the majority of your events are merely descriptive of a miss and describing in detail how a miss or hit happens is just a DM elaborating on combat to prevent it from being an endless chain of "I roll a d20". Descriptions are encouraged, but they are not typically what is referred to by a fumble chart. Traditionally, they are a table that is rolled on to determine what negative mechanical effect happens to the player. The Pazio cards linked earlier fit such a description.

Serpentine

2010-09-28, 12:40 AM

If you believe they would work for me, you can post reasons why if you wish.

It's not baseless if you include reasons."I think you're lying or totally clueless about what goes on in your own games" isn't much of a reason. You listed a couple of reasons why you don't like them in your games, not reasons why they must not work in mine despite my statements to the contrary.

I don't really know of an objective way to measure fun, Im afraid, so it's unlikely that there's any way to prove that statement either way. Hence my preference of sticking to rather more provable claims like showing the additional time spent rolling confirmations and rolling on charts, or the damage to verisimilitude inherent in a world class fighter dropping his weapon every few seconds.Your preference is valid and understandable. That doesn't mean you have a right or a justification in making blanket statements as though they are fact when even a single example - which I have already given you - proves it to be blatently wrong.

Amusing as Small Gods is, the idea of this happening by mistake really pushes the limits of plausibility.1. So what? A lot of things in D&D push the limits of plausibility. Why does it have to be plausible to be valid or fun?
2. Not just Small Gods. Also a CSI episode, and the instance they both refer to (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeschylus).

Bow strings don't break much, and letting them wear out makes little sense. Adventurers have the funds to replace inexpensive mundane items essentially at will.So it's a critical fail that they didn't. So what?

This doesn't arrive at anything more than a miss. In 3.5, not seeing the target and missing ARE strongly related. However, not seeing the target doesn't traditionally add penalties like dropping weapons, hitting friendlies, etc.
This is, again, merely a fluff description for a miss. It's also a bit damaging to verisimilitude to anyone familiar with eagles or archery.
Again, just a miss.
Just a miss, probably. Only really applies when moving.
...
It appears that the majority of your events are merely descriptive of a miss and describing in detail how a miss or hit happens is just a DM elaborating on combat to prevent it from being an endless chain of "I roll a d20". Descriptions are encouraged, but they are not typically what is referred to by a fumble chart. Traditionally, they are a table that is rolled on to determine what negative mechanical effect happens to the player. The Pazio cards linked earlier fit such a description.So what? A critical fumble is allowed to be just a particularly impressive miss. If you think that a critical fumble must be "you seriously injure yourself/an ally", then no wonder you don't like them. But they don't have to be that. Unfortunately I can't find it at the moment (still looking), but I'm pretty sure the fumble tables I mentioned before that I sometimes use have a "you miss" option for the first part.

OldTrees

2010-09-28, 12:59 AM

In response to an earlier accusation,

No I do not have Nat 1s on skill checks auto fail. I let Nat 1s go as per the normal rules [fail on saves and ability, +1 on skills]
Then [IF] I am quick enough I add a comical harmless longterm effect.

Something else I have done that some players who enjoy comedy might like.
I took a bell curve and flipped it inside out so 1 and 20 were the most common results. This lead to a most hilarious session as my character switched between expert and incompetent.

[1d6+2d8-2][1-10->(11-result), 11-20->(31-result)]

Serpentine

2010-09-28, 01:04 AM

I use natural 1 = -10 on... everything, really. At least one of my players has adapted this rule for his own game. 'course, half the time they just make up their own fails anyway ("Do a memory retention check." [nat 1] "Hmm... We were after a muskrat, right? Yeah, definitely a muskrat." Muskrats are our go-to memory fail, now. But none of us actually knows what a muskrat even is...), even when they'd probably do okay if they took my -10 rule..

Tyndmyr

2010-09-28, 01:23 AM

"I think you're lying or totally clueless about what goes on in your own games" isn't much of a reason. You listed a couple of reasons why you don't like them in your games, not reasons why they must not work in mine despite my statements to the contrary.

Please reread my earlier post. It did not claim you were lying or totally clueless. Merely that a single aspect of gaming, crit fumbles, might not work "as well as you think they do".

Surely we can agree that this is a far more reasonable statement, and much different from accusing you of lying?

Your preference is valid and understandable. That doesn't mean you have a right or a justification in making blanket statements as though they are fact when even a single example - which I have already given you - proves it to be blatently wrong.

You didn't prove my actual claims wrong. I claimed that in the case of "same effect on every 1", you have a plausibility problem, and that in the alternative case of rolling confirmations and tables, you slow down gameplay. These are known downsides.

In response, you acknowledged that these were true, but claimed the added fun was worth it. This doesn't explain why it adds fun, so it's a fairly unsupported statement. It's certainly not a proof.

1. So what? A lot of things in D&D push the limits of plausibility. Why does it have to be plausible to be valid or fun?

Plausibility is not required for an activity to be fun. It is, however, greatly helpful for maintaining immersion, which is a significant aspect of roleplaying. Silly stuff happens, and can be great, but breaking immersion on a routine basis is a clear challenge for roleplaying in general, and can therefore be accurately described as a problem.

2. Not just Small Gods. Also a CSI episode, and the instance they both refer to (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeschylus).
So it's a critical fail that they didn't. So what?
So what? A critical fumble is allowed to be just a particularly impressive miss. If you think that a critical fumble must be "you seriously injure yourself/an ally", then no wonder you don't like them. But they don't have to be that. Unfortunately I can't find it at the moment (still looking), but I'm pretty sure the fumble tables I mentioned before that I sometimes use have a "you miss" option for the first part.

A miss is a miss. That's part of the rules, and is not the controversial part of fumble tables. The controversial part of fumble tables has always been the additional effects. Ignoring those when promoting the use of fumble tables is like ignoring maneuvers when promoting use of the warblade. Without them, it has no point whatsoever.

Serpentine

2010-09-28, 01:32 AM

Upon review, it seems you were talking about critical fumble tables, not fumbles themselves. In this regard I misunderstood, and I don't usually use them so much anymore. However, you said:
I submit that they likely do not work as well as you think in either of [your games].You are saying that I do not know how well things work in my own games. More than that, you are saying that you know better than me how well things work in my own games. This is, frankly, bulldung. You have never been a part of my games. You have never watched my games. You have never been in the presence of my games. You know absolutely nothing more about my games than I tell you, and I told you, they work. It just so happens that, with regard specifically to critical fumble tables, you're sort of right in that I've mostly stopped using them nowadays :smalltongue: But that's only because I find it easier and more fun to make it up as I go along - I still very much use fumbles, and often very similar ones to those on some tables. And the use of fumbles works perfectly well in my games, regardless of your cynicism.
In any case, the fact remains: The OP is trying to compile his own critical fumble table (or, rather, a list of sample fumbles), and you are accusing him of using something that doesn't work in any game ever under any circumstances based on other tables that are much more extreme than anything he's asking for.

edit: I found the critical tables (http://www.angelfire.com/dragon3/vinifera/critical_hit_table_2e.pdf) I used to use. Harsher than I remember it being - but then, that would be why I stopped using them - but still a long way from "natural 1? You die!".

Tyndmyr

2010-09-28, 01:47 AM

Well, the topic was crit fumble tables in specific.

However, I fear you're still misrepresenting my position by saying "you are accusing him of using something that doesn't work in any game ever under any circumstances based on other tables that are much more extreme than anything he's asking for."

First, I don't know exactly how extreme he's asking for.

Secondly, I've already stated that tables vary widely in terms of lethality(the table spoilered on page one can be considered an example of a fairly harsh table), but that this only determined how problematic they are, not if they're good or bad. Therefore, it's clear that I did not use only extremely harsh tables to judge the existence of all tables.

Let us consider some simplified tables.

Example 1: Rolling a 1 to attack results in dropping your weapon, every time. This is the position the OP is currently in. It's fast, and it might be amusing the first time or two, but it gets old really quickly, and players soon begin to question why so many swords are airborne.

Example 2: A simple melee chart.
1: drop weapon at feet.
2: throw weapon to adjacent square(determine which at random).
3: Weapon slips. Roll weapon damage die against yourself.
4: Weapon slips. Roll weapon damage die against adjacent player(determine randomly, if multiple possibility).
5: As 3, but with full damage.
6: As 4, but with full damage.

The above is a list of various negative effects, as is typical of a fumble chart. We've somewhat lessened the repetitive issue, at the cost of additional time every time it comes up.

Example 3: As example 2, but with 10 possibilities. The new 4 are simply misses.

This is absolutely no different from example 2, except in probability of occurring. The same is true of confirming misses. Confirming misses AND using regular misses on the chart has the flaw of taking even more time than doing merely one.

Extremely harsh charts, where blatant death is likely, add additional flaws, yes, but those are ones of balance, while the ones I listed are of generic gameplay, and thus, are more broadly applicable. Balance varies from group to group.

Serpentine

2010-09-28, 01:54 AM

You said
[F]umble charts... are always bad in heroic fantasy... [T]hey do not work in D&D.This is a blanket statement that fumble charts are always bad and should never be used. If even one person uses them and finds them a positive addition to their game - and I guarantee you there are many - then this is simply false.
The fact is that not everyone has the same preferences and priorities as you. For you, a few extra minutes, a few extra dice rolls and a slightly greater likelihood of misfortune are a terrible blow to your gaming experience. For other people, they are not - maybe even the opposite. Live with it, and stop making assumptions about other people's play preferences.

aquaticrna

2010-09-28, 02:17 AM

crit fumbles work because they don't happen very often, and when they do they mostly just increase the drama of the situation. Realistically they occur as a result of fighting a skilled opponent who can take full advantage of your mistakes, during my short time fencing i managed to disarm an opponent far better than me completely by accident, in essence he "crit fumbled." As far as casters being effected, their touch and ranged touches are just as susceptible to fumbles, often times more so because of their low to-hit. fumbles are great for creating drama, and shifting the tide of a battle... also comedy...

Arbane

2010-09-28, 05:10 AM

That's fair enough. Can I at least suggest you have them "confirm" their fumbles?

What I mean is, in 3.5 when you roll a nat 20 it isn't a critical. You have to roll again and if that roll is at least a hit, then it's a critical.

If I was going to use fumbles, a nat 1 wouldn't be a fumble. I'd make the player roll again and if that is at best a miss, then it's a fumble.

That way fumbles are somewhat more rare, which helps keep them in the realm of amusing rather than annoying.

Seconded.

Outside of a Pink Panther movie, no heroes in all of fiction screw up as often as player-characters.

Leon

2010-09-28, 07:59 AM

NAT 1S DO NOT AUTO-FAIL SKILL CHECKS!!!!!!

Depends on your Game.

Ive used a Fumble table in the past and while it had some rather nasty potential things on it it happened to the NPCs far far more often than to PCs.

Also used a Critical Hit table and that had some interesting things too...

These days i dont bother as it can slow things down somewhat ive found.

20s Auto Hit, 1s Auto Miss
Although i'll require you to roll the Nat 1 again and if you roll another one then your at a disadvantage of what ever i decide on the spot - dropped weapon is the most common ive used.

Lhurgyof

2010-09-28, 08:08 AM

Depends on your Game.

Ive used a Fumble table in the past and while it had some rather nasty potential things on it it happened to the NPCs far far more often than to PCs.

Also used a Critical Hit table and that had some interesting things too...

These days i dont bother as it can slow things down somewhat ive found.

20s Auto Hit, 1s Auto Miss
Although i'll require you to roll the Nat 1 again and if you roll another one then your at a disadvantage of what ever i decide on the spot - dropped weapon is the most common ive used.

I've seen a game using crit fumbles where enemies literally slaughtered each other and insta-killed themselves... just a bad DM, though.

I agree with confirming fumbles, seems to make it less apt to happen often.

UserClone

2010-09-28, 10:38 AM

On Controlling Fumbles:

I suggested that confirming fumbles be the norm, as it is with Crits.
I also pointed out that one could save a critical hit card in order to later prevent having to draw a fumble card on a confirmed fumble, instead simply missing.
There's no reason you couldn't just put a tickmark in a box on your character sheet to represent a regular critical hit that you instead chose to save for later (rendering it an ordinary hit), in order to later prevent a fumble, even without these cards.
???
Profit.

I really like the concept of PCs being able to control their own fate this way. If, as you say, the PCs are more likely in general to hit than miss, they should more often confirm a crit than a fumble, especially with the plethora of things out there that exist to boost critical confirmation rolls. So they should, all things being equal, have the chance to both save themselves from the occasional fumble with a stored crit, and still crit once in a while.

This could also go other directions, like being able to spend the crit you saved to automatically confirm another threat later, or that sort of thing. In fact, there's very little probability, if this system is used, to actually confirm a fumble.

This makes fumbles rarer, and more memorable, which is all-around a good thing.

Happy gaming. :smallcool:

Tyndmyr

2010-09-28, 11:36 AM

You saidThis is a blanket statement that fumble charts are always bad and should never be used. If even one person uses them and finds them a positive addition to their game - and I guarantee you there are many - then this is simply false.
The fact is that not everyone has the same preferences and priorities as you. For you, a few extra minutes, a few extra dice rolls and a slightly greater likelihood of misfortune are a terrible blow to your gaming experience. For other people, they are not - maybe even the opposite. Live with it, and stop making assumptions about other people's play preferences.

What, I suppose you correct people every time they say "apples are red" too, eh?

Blanket statements are a discussion of the broad applicability of things, not an exaustive listing of every event that has ever happened to mankind. If we required that not a single exception be recorded, then all general advice ever given is useless.

English is not used that way.

UserClone

2010-09-28, 11:50 AM

Well, it is. Conversationally, English is used in a myriad of incorrect ways. Doesn't make them correct, OED, Queen's English, but there you have it.

However, when attempting to make arguments based on logic (and let's face it, game rules are based on logic, or at least attempt to be to some degree and in some fashion), blanket statements are inappropriate when presented as fact, instead of as general trend.

Also, I want to start a new campaign using my critical hit and fumble cards. I have a rule about starting using a new rule mid-campaign.

Worira

2010-09-28, 02:02 PM

What, I suppose you correct people every time they say "apples are red" too, eh?

Blanket statements are a discussion of the broad applicability of things, not an exaustive listing of every event that has ever happened to mankind. If we required that not a single exception be recorded, then all general advice ever given is useless.

English is not used that way.

I certainly do if they say "all apples are red", which is much closer to what you said.

Serpentine

2010-09-29, 12:38 AM

What, I suppose you correct people every time they say "apples are red" too, eh?If they say that all apples are red, I would, because they're just plain wrong. And if someone told me that all apples are red, and then insisted that if I think I ate a green apple the other day then I must not know what either "red" or "apple" is, then I would take exception to it.
edit: Or I might suggest that they get their eyes checked for colourblindness.
Also, I want to start a new campaign using my critical hit and fumble cards. I have a rule about starting using a new rule mid-campaign.I'm annoyed at myself for something along these lines. I've been thinking for a while about condensing the skills down to more closely resemble those of Pathfinder or 4th ed, but haven't been sure about when to implement it. Last game I had everyone level up at the same time... and I didn't think to get them to change their skills :smallsigh:
I might just get them to do it anyway.

Worira

2010-09-29, 12:40 AM

Ah, but no true Scotsman eats apples.

Wait, no, that's not it.

Optimator

2010-09-29, 02:16 AM

I go by the book on what natural 1's result in. I also try to describe something interesting when it's appropriate.

Psyx

2010-09-29, 06:28 AM

Fumbles aren't fun, IMHO.
The thought that a trained warrior has a 1-in-20 of tripping over his own shoelaces, hitting an ally (who is at LEAST 5' away!) or throwing his weapon away is bizarre.

A fully-trained elite warrior (BAB 16+) will thus fumble his weapon once every 30 seconds. Give him 2 weapons and some training in using them and he becomes a deadly hazard to himself, thanks to probability.

Essentially, fumbles further penalise melee types while doing nothing to Tier 1 characters. If you are using melee fumbles, then for the sake of all that is good; insist spell-casters have a 1-in-20 chance (at least) of making an error every time they play with unimaginable reality-warping power and cast a spell.

Serpentine

2010-09-29, 06:52 AM

Sliver

2010-09-29, 08:35 AM

4th, its not ALWAYS thrown at a party member, its determined quasi randomly by the direction the character was attacking, the warhammer example merely came up last night due to poor positioning. and we had a hobgoblin nearly skewer his buddy on a 1, so it works both ways

Except that any single player (that rolls attacks regularly) will make more attack rolls than a monster. (that relies on attacking with a weapon) So the players are affected by fumbles more than the monsters.

Personally, a critical fumble in itself won't hurt a character, but might (and not always will) have consequences that may cause harm to the party, but they might not. Same as with critical successes, which aren't just "you hit for more damage", but with a higher chance of benefiting the party. NPCs are less likely to get extra benefits from crit successes, but might fail harder on fumbles. Because my PCs are heroes. At least currently. :smallamused:

mangosta71

2010-09-29, 08:51 AM

UserClone

2010-09-29, 08:58 AM

I always use confirms on fumbles, same as crits except you confirm a fumble by missing. Thus, fumbles are even less likely to happen than crits, on the whole. Also, spell roll variant ensures caster get in on the chaos, but only on the fumble end, not the crit end (unless it's a single-target damage spell), so it helps even things out a bit.

ArcanistSupreme

2010-09-29, 11:37 AM

Vassago

2010-09-29, 01:29 PM

First off I want to say I have been lurking for a long time and your post finally got me to sign up.

I DM for my group and have for roughly 10 years. WE have always used fumbles on a 1 back in AD&D we just made up something silly or funny for what happ0ened. Later we found a so so fumble chart. We like using them because they add interesting things to the game which is why I assume you are looking to include them. After awhile our fumble chart was pretty old and had been played to death because it did not have too many options. So when I had some free time I put a new one together based on a previous critical hit chart we had been using. Though I toned it down so that the fumbles are just minor annoyances.

Before we used it I had the players look over it and make sure they knew what they were getting into. So far it has been a great success, so I wanted to share it in hopes others may find a use for it. I am putting it in a spoiler tag since it is rather long. It is sorted by weapon type and also has sections for if you fumble with a ranged touch on a magic spell based on the element.

CRITICAL FUMBLE CHARTS
By
Vassago

CRITICAL FUMBLE CHARTS

SLASHING (Scimitar, Bastard Sword, Broad Sword, Long Sword, Great Sword, Axes)

1d100 Result

1-15 - Tripped self Reflex save DC 10 + level or fall prone
16-20 - Weapon is stuck in your surroundings, if there is nothing for it to stick in, dropped at your feet
21-24 - Pinched nerve -2 to hit and reflex saves for 2d4 rounds or until heal check DC 15
25-30 - Overconfident attack exposes a moment of vulnerability. One opponent within range may make an attack of opportunity.
31-37 - Loose your grip mid swing send weapon flying 10ft in a random direction
38-41 - Misplaced attack causes loss of balance. Lose Dex Bonus to AC until next turn.
42-44 - Misplaced attack causes complete loss of strain, roll on LIMB table
45-46 - Temporary loss of motor control, hit self
47 - Wild swing, critically hit self
48 - Surge of Adrenalin causes temporary loss of control over emotions, critically hit ally within range
49-51 - Off balanced swing, hit ally within range
52-53 - Weapon chips -1 permanently to weapon hardness and -2 hp. Magic weapons get a save as if you had hit them. Chipped piece hits you in the eye. Blind in one eye for 1d4 days or until heal check DC 15 using water to wash out eye
54-60 - Weapon chips -1 permanently to weapon hardness and -2 hp. Magic weapons get a save as if you had hit them.
61-63 - Entangled in your own armor, considered grappled until you make a grapple or escape artist check DC 15
64-75 - Temporary loss of muscle control Fortitude save DC 10 + level to regain control and not drop weapon. Soil armor -4 to Charisma based checks until cleaned.
76-80 - Pommel of weapon accidentally hits you int he stomach causing you to Barf: Sickened -2 attacks, damage, and saves for 2 rounds.
81-83 - Fatigued for 1 round, may only take a move or a standard action next turn not both
84-86 - Forget to breathe, choking on spit/tongue stunned for 1d2 +1 rounds
87-91 - Graze face, 1d4 damage and -2 to charisma until damage is healed. 25% chance of scar.
92-97 - Nick a minor vein, bleed for 1d3 damage for 8 rounds or until bandaged
98-99 - Trip and fall on your weapon Max damage to you and stunned for 1 round
100 - Embed your weapon in your own skull and die instantly

THRUSTING (Short Sword, Dagger)

1d100 Result

1-12 - Weapon is stuck in your surroundings, if there is nothing for it to stick in, dropped at your feet
13-18 - Tripped self Reflex 10 + level or fall down
19-21 - Distracted by something seen out of the corner of your eye, hit someone else within range
22-30 - Misplaced attack causes loss of balance. Lose Dex Bonus to AC until next turn
31-36 - Lose your grip and send your weapon flying away from you
37 - Slit own wrist, Max weapon damage and bleeding for 1d6 for 8 rounds or until bandaged. Poison applied to self if weapon was poisoned.
38-44 - Cut palm -1 to attack rolls for 1d4 rounds, poison applied to self if weapon was poisoned.
45-47 - Sever your own belt -5 movement, and pants fall down when not held up
48-51 - Twist Ankle. Speed reduced by 10 feet until 10 minutes of rest is taken.
52-62 - Temporary loss of muscle control Fortitude save DC 10 + level to regain control and not drop weapon. Soil armor -4 to Charisma based checks until cleaned.
63-69 - Twist your elbow, -2 to attack and damage rolls for 1d3 rounds
70-78 - Overconfident attack exposes a moment of vulnerability. One opponent within range may make an attack of opportunity
79-90 - Misplaced attack causes strain roll on LIMB table
91-99 - Fall into opponent, both are considered grappled. 25% chance fragile item on person breaks or you are hurt by item you are carrying
100 - Attack deflected, and pierces your heart instant death

CRUSHING (Bo-stick, Club, Hammer, Mace, Morning Star, Jo-stick, Quarterstaff,Flail)

1d100 Result

1-3 - Hit self in a major organ, see ORGAN chart damage is subdual
4 - Weapon rebounds hitting in the forehead causing concussion. Weapon damage to wielder and -2 to intelligence and wisdom for 2d4 days or until healed for 3x damage dealt
5-21 - Pulled muscle -2 to attack and damage for 1d4 rounds or until successful heal check DC 15
22-27 - Weapon dropped on foot damaged based on size: small 1d4, med 1d6, large 1d8 and -10 to movement for 1d4 rounds
28-29 - Weapon splinters -1 permanently to weapon hardness and -2 hp. Magic weapons get a save as if you had hit them. Splinter hits you in the eye. Blind in one eye for 1d4 days or until heal check DC 15 using water to wash out eye.
30-36 - Weapon hits a hard nearby object. Reverberations cause 2d4 sonic damage to you.
37-42 - Overconfident attack exposes a moment of vulnerability. One opponent within range may make an attack of opportunity
43-46 - Entangled in your own armor, considered grappled until you make a grapple or escape artist check DC 15
47-50 - Temporary loss of muscle control Fortitude save DC 10 + level to regain control and not drop weapon. Soil armor -4 to Charisma based checks until cleaned
51-57 - Off balanced swing, hit ally within range
58-63 - Misplaced attack causes loss of balance. Lose Dex Bonus to AC until next turn
64-65 - Misplaced attack causes severe strain roll on LIMB table
66-73 - Weapon accidentally hits you in the stomach causing you to Barf: Sickened -2 attacks, damage, and saves for 2 rounds.
74-77 - Hit your one of your containers 1d4 items destroyed. Magic items get a save as if you had hit them.
78-83 - Fatigued for 1 round, may only take a move or a standard action next turn not both
84-85 - Handle of weapon breaks into splinters 1d4 damage to self and weapon unusable. Magic weapons get a save as if you had hit them.
86-90 - Overextended shoulder +5 reach and 1d6 damage to self per attack for 1d4 rounds
91-94 - Glancing blow to your face, 1d3 teeth knocked out, -2 Charisma
95-99 - Heavy swing trips you, causing you to fall prone
100 -Impossibly bad swing hits you in the side of your head crushing your own skull. Dead

PROJECTILE (Arrow, Dart, Thrown Dagger, Crossbow Bolt, Sling)

1d100 Result

1-9 - Weapon stalled/unstrung requires a move equivalent action before usable again
10-12 - Somehow you manage to knock your head – hard. You are dazed for 1d3 rounds.
13-23 - Fatigued for 1 round, may only take a move or a standard action next turn not both
24-30 - Load ammo backwards causing a misfire 1d4 damage to you and -2 to attack for 1d3 +1 rounds
31-36 - Misplaced attack causes loss of balance. Lose Dex Bonus to AC until next turn
37-40 - Misplaced attack causes strain roll on LIMB table
41-45 - Loss of concentration: initiative drops by 2d4
46-50 - Twist Ankle. Speed reduced by 10 feet until 10 minutes of rest is taken.
51-59 - Handling your weapon like a rank amateur your weapon whips back and catches you in the eye. You take a -2 circumstance penalty to attacks rolls and manual actions for 1d3+2 rounds.
60-68 - Entangled in your own armor, considered grappled until you make a grapple or escape artist check DC 15
69-77 - Distracting shot, next person in initiative order gets a -2 to checks on their turn
78-84 - Nick the tendon of an ally within range. They take 1d3 damage and get -5 movement for 2 rounds
85-93 - Your weapon is slightly damaged. Any further attacks with that weapon receive a -1 circumstance penalty for the rest of the combat. The weapon can be repaired with a full-round action, but to do so would provoke an attack of opportunity.
94-98 - Ricochet off of surroundings, hit ally within 1 range increment
99 - Deadly Ricochet off of surroundings, critically hit ally within 1 range increment
100 - Rebounding ricochet into your forehead piercing your brain. Dead

POLE ARM (Bardiche, bec de corbin, bill-guisarme, fauchard, fauchard-fork, glaive, par ransuer, spetum, voulge)

1d100 Result

1-9 - Temporary loss of muscle control Fortitude save DC 10 + level to regain control and not drop weapon. Soil armor -4 to Charisma based checks until cleaned.
10-12 - Weapon slips and is throw at target within 30ft
13-18 - Weapon is stuck in your surroundings, if there is nothing for it to stick in, dropped at your feet
19-24 - Overconfident attack exposes a moment of vulnerability. One opponent within range may make an attack of opportunity
25-40 - Misplaced attack causes loss of balance. Lose Dex Bonus to AC until next turn
41-43 - Misplaced attack causes strain roll on LIMB table
44-47 - Loss of concentration: initiative drops by 2d4
48-51 - Entangled in your own armor, considered grappled until you make a grapple or escape artist check DC 15
52-54 - Nick your tendon of an ally within range. They take 1d3 damage and get -5 movement for 2 rounds
55-62 - Twist Ankle. Speed reduced by 10 feet until 10 minutes of rest is taken.
63-71 - Fatigued for 1 round, may only take a move or a standard action next turn not both
72-78 - Weapon accidentally hits you int he stomach causing you to Barf: Sickened -2 attacks, damage, and saves for 2 rounds.
79-80 - Throw shoulder out -3 to hit for 1d4 rounds
81-88 - Knock ally off balance they lose their dex bonus to AC until next turn
89-96 - Hit surroundings, Your weapon is slightly damaged. Any further attacks with that weapon receive a -1 circumstance penalty for the rest of the combat. The weapon can be repaired with a full-round action, but to do so would provoke an attack of opportunity.
97-99 - Weapon is accidentally thrown and impales an ally within 30 ft with a critical strike
100 - Blade cleaves off the top of your skull instant death

SPEAR-LIKE (Spear, Javelin, Trident, Lance, Fork, Pick, Pike)

1d100 Result

1-9 - Nick your tendon of an ally within range. They take 1d3 damage and get -5 movement for 2 rounds
10-12 - Loss of concentration: initiative drops by 2d4
13-20 - Weapon is stuck in your surroundings, if there is nothing for it to stick in, dropped at your feet
21-29 - Overconfident attack exposes a moment of vulnerability. One opponent within range may make an attack of opportunity
30-36 - Misplaced attack causes loss of balance. Lose Dex Bonus to AC until next turn
37-41 - Misplaced attack causes strain roll on LIMB table
42-46 - Twist Ankle. Speed reduced by 10 feet until 10 minutes of rest is taken.
47-48 - A near fatal miss causes a loss of confidence, shaken for 6 rounds or until a will save DC 12 is made. -2 penalty on all attack rolls, weapon damage rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks
49-55 - Hit surroundings, Your weapon is slightly damaged. Any further attacks with that weapon receive a -1 circumstance penalty for the rest of the combat. The weapon can be repaired with a full-round action, but to do so would provoke an attack of opportunity.
56-60 - Entangled in your own armor, considered grappled until you make a grapple or escape artist check DC 15
61-70 - Fatigued for 1 round, may only take a move or a standard action next turn not both
71-79 - Roll on THRUSTING table.
80-83 - Knock Ally off balance, they lose their dex bonus to AC until next turn
84-87 - Hit face, Additional damage 1d4, 25% chance of scar, -2 charisma until cured for 2x damage.
88-94 - Temporary loss of muscle control Fortitude save DC 10 + level to regain control and not drop weapon. Soil armor -4 to Charisma based checks until cleaned.
95-99 - Weapon is accidentally thrown and impales an ally within 30 ft with a critical strike
100 - Weapon juggles out of your hands as you trip and impale your self. instant death.

SPIKED (Some maces, Morning-stars, Flails, Clubs)

1d100 Result

1-50 - Roll on crushing table, with +1d4 damage to self.
51-57 - Misplaced attack causes loss of balance. Lose Dex Bonus to AC until next turn
58-67 - Misplaced attack causes strain roll on LIMB table
68-73 - Pierced your own hand, bleed for 1d3 damage for 8 rounds or until bandaged. -2 to hit for 8 rounds.
74-77 - Pierced your thigh, bleed for 1d3 damage for 8 rounds or until bandaged, -5 movement for 8 rounds or until bandaged
78-83 - Weapon pierces foot 1d6 damage and is stuck Strength check of 10 to remove
84-88 - Spikes on weapon bent it gets a -2 to damage rolls until repaired. Repairing requires a full round action which provokes attacks of opportunity
89-94 - Weapon accidentally hits you int he stomach causing you to Barf: Sickened -2 attacks, damage, and saves for 2 rounds.
95-99 - Organ hit, see ORGAN chart.
100 - Crushed skull, dead.

BITES AND CLAWS (Monsters, unarmed humanoids)

1d100 Result

1-9 - Overconfident attack exposes a moment of vulnerability. one opponent within range may make an attack of opportunity
10-12 - Accidental damage to an internal organ, see ORGAN chart
13-31 - Misplaced attack causes loss of balance. Lose Dex Bonus to AC until next turn
33-35 - strain your wrist. This gives you a -2 circumstance penalty to attacks and manual actions with your injured hand for 1d3 +1 full rounds
36-38 - Bump into nearby ally, they lose dex bonus to AC until their next turn
39-51 - Misplaced attack causes strain roll on LIMB table
52-54 - Fatigued for 1 round, may only take a move or a standard action next turn not both
55-57 - Twist Ankle. Speed reduced by 10 feet until 10 minutes of rest is taken.
58-65 - Loss of concentration: initiative drops by 2d4
66-75 - Roll on SPIKED table. Add 1d4 damage
76-79 - Pull groin muscle stunned for 1 round
80-99 - Temporary loss of muscle control Fortitude save DC 10 + level to regain control and not drop weapon. Soil armor -4 to Charisma based checks until cleaned.
100 - Removed throat dies instantly

LIMB DAMAGE

AREA -Reverse all L & R for left-handers

1d4 Result

1 - Right Leg
2 - Left Leg
3 - Right Arm
4 - Left Arm

LOCATION

1d10 Result

1 - Fingers (toes)
2-3 - Wrist (ankle)
4-5 - Mid-forearm (mid-calf)
6-8 - Elbow (knee)
9-10 - Shoulder (hip)

EXTENT

1d6 Result

1 - Temporarily damaged
2 - Bruised
3-4 - Strained
5-6 - Hyper extended

ARM

Extent Result

Temporarily Damaged:
-1 to hit, -1 to damage.

Bruised:
-2 to hit, -2 to damage.

Strained:
-3 to hit, -3 to damage.

Fingers Hyper Extended:
-3 to hit, -3 to damage, -4 to skill checks -

Hyper Extended:
-4 to hit, -4 damage.

LEG

Extent Result

Temporarily Damaged:
-5 to movement

Bruised:
-10 to movement

Strained:
-10 to movement -2 to reflex saves

Hyper Extended:
-15 to movement, -4 to reflex saves

ORGAN DAMAGE

1d6 Organ Result

1 - Lung
Additional Damage 2d3, Fort save DC 10 +1 per 3 damage taken or stunned for 3 rounds

2 - Heart
(nicked): bleed for 1d3 damage for 6 rounds

3 - Kidney
1d3 Damage, blood poisoning Fort save DC 15 1d3 primary Con damage, 1d3 secondary strength damage

4 - Liver
Damage 1d4, bleed for 1d2 hp for 3 rounds.

5 - Spleen
Damage 1d6, bleed for 1d3 hp for 3 rounds.

6 - Stomach
Violently vomit for 1d3 +1 rounds stunning you and causing you to take 1d4 acid damage per round

FIRE

1d100 Result

1-9 - Explosion knocks you off balance lose dex bonus to AC for 1d2 rounds
10-40 - All oil, alcohol, or other flammables explode for 1d2 damage each
41-45 - If holding metal item, it melts onto hand 1d6 damage and 1d3 when removed.
46-50 - Destroy 1d4 items
51-54 - One eye is burned, from sparks add 1d4 damage, -2 to hit, -4 with missiles, lose Dex bonus on AC for 1d4 rounds.
55-60 - Explosion causes spell to be miss aimed, hits random target with range.
61-66 - Blinded for 1d3 rounds.
67-74 - Smoke inhalation, partial actions for 1d2 rounds.
75-80 - Flame gets under clothes or armor, Additional Damage 2d3 25% chance of burn scars
81-99 - Burned face and skin, spell damage to self causing scars and -2 to charisma until magically healed for 2x the damage
100 - Inhaled flame and lunged are burnt completely, dead

COLD

1d100 Result

1-40 - Fingers numbed, -2 to hit and dex skill checks for 1d4 rounds
41-50 - Hands numbed causes spell to go awry, hits a random target within range
51-60 - Severely frozen, Strength and Dexterity -2 and -10 movement for 1d6 rounds.
61-70 - Go into shock from cold shaken for 1d3 rounds
71-75 - Body completely numbed- all surface nerves paralyzed for 1d2 rounds: will not know damage taken per each blow, must roll under Dex on d20 for each attack or will drop weapon.
76-88 - Severe frostbite- 1d4 damage and -3 to reflex saves for 3 rounds
89-99 - Flesh frozen and gangrene will set in, Additional Damage 2d3. Heal check DC 15 to thaw
100 - Blood crystallized, instant death

ELECTRICITY

1d100 Result

1-20 - Static discharge for 1 damage
21-40 - Static shock 1d2 damage and -1 to all actions for 2 rounds
41-46 - Fatigued for 1 round, may only take a move or a standard action next turn not both
47-52 - Shock to nervous system causes spell to go wild affects a random target within spell range
53-65 - Temporary loss of muscle control Fortitude save DC 10 + level to regain control and not drop weapon. Soil armor -4 to Charisma based checks until cleaned.
66-70 - Feedback knocks you back 5 feet and you are off balance, denied dex bonus to AC for 1 round
71-80 - Nervous system damaged: lose 1d2 of dexterity (regained if healed magically for 2X damage).
81-85 - Nervous system damaged: lose 1d2 of wisdom (regained if healed magically for 2x damage).
86-90 - Nervous system damaged: lose 1d2 of intelligence (regained if healed magically for 2x damage).
91-93 - Temporary amnesia lasts 1d3 rounds
94 - Temporary amnesia lasts 1d2 minutes
95-98 - Goes into convulsions, stunned for 1 rounds, Additional Damage 2d4
99 - Temporary amnesia lasts 1 hour
100 - Crossed the streams, Electrical feedback Strikes heart, death.

POISON

1d100 Result

1-40 - Temporary loss of muscle control Fortitude save DC 10 + level to regain control and not drop weapon. Soil armor -4 to Charisma based checks until cleaned.
41-49 - Weak exposure to poison nauseated for 1d4 rounds
50-59 - Moderate exposure to poison sickened for 1d2 rounds
60-79 - Strong exposure to poison unable to act for 1 rounds, after that disoriented lose dex
bonus to AC for an additional round
80-97 - Accidental self poisoned one score lowered 1-2 must neutralize poison and heal 2x damage to regain.
99 - Enters major artery, Max Ability Score Loss or Damage
100 - Poison was exceptionally potent if you fail your save you die

ACID, DISSOLVING

1d100 Result

1-40 - Acid splatters on you for 1d2 damage
41-60 - Weak chemical burn -1 to attack rolls and skill checks for 2 rounds, -1 to concentration checks
61-70 - Moderate chemical burn -2 to attack rolls and skill checks for 2 rounds, -2 to concentration checks
71-77 - Acid gets into potion flask, water skin, etc.
78-82 - Extreme chemical burn -3 to attack rolls and skill checks for 3 rounds, -3 to concentration checks
83-90 - Acid burn to hand causes spell to go wild hits a random target within spell range
91 - Hair burned off, in addition to spell damage normal damage
92-99 - Severe facial damage, -2 charisma until healed magically for 2x damage
100 - Acid splashed back all over your face. All features melted off and brain destroyed. Dead

Please excuse the lack of formatting. I had it in tables in my google docs but it did not transfer well. If anyone likes it and wants a prettier version to use let me know and I can email you a copy of the pretty one in my google docs.

Tyndmyr

2010-09-29, 01:43 PM

The other day I saw a video of the world champion pole vaulter missing the mat entirely and hurting himself on the concrete. So yeah, I don't find it all that hard to believe that a trained professional can **** up on occasion.
As often as 1/20? Maybe not. But then, I think most people confirm it, which would bring the probability down substantially (anyone want to do the maths for me?). I would also consider throwing in a percentile roll to determine the severity of the screw up.

To put it another way, I participate in a full contact foam fighting organization. This year, I took up archery. I fight at least one day a week, every week, with some days more(all week once), for at least several hours at a time.

I'm not sure how many arrow shots that is, but it's a lot. Probably a ridiculous number. Number of times I've broken an arrow string doing so: None(actually this holds true for my entire lifetime of archery in general. Replace string when worn. Life is great). Number of times I've dropped my weapon because of a shot: None. I realize this is a sample size of 1, but in addition, I've not seen other archers do this either.

Let's estimate. Say, 50 shots fired per hour. Given that this is less than one a minute, this seems quite conservative. Let's estimate 8 hours per week, for an average shot count of 400 arrows per week, over half a year. Total: 10,400.

Therefore, we can conclude with a rather high degree of certainty* that these events are an extremely rare occurance, probably less than 1 in 10,000. The average D&D character is unlikely to fire this many shots before reaching level 20. Therefore, in a realistic system, a critical failure of such magnitude will almost certainly not happen to a character in his career.

*You can calculate the t-test if you like. A sample size large enough to get at least one crit fail will get you better numbers, though.

Another_Poet

2010-09-29, 02:00 PM

[Completely awesome reason not to use crit fumbles]

Right, but the OP said he is going to use crit fumbles whether they make sense or not. He just needs advice on making a fun system for them.

Tyndmyr

2010-09-29, 02:32 PM

That entirely depends on what he finds fun.

I've seen a lot of people claim that fumble tables are fun. There has been significantly less explanation of why they are fun, which is pretty important, when you consider how much variance there is in what people consider fun.

If you just really enjoy randomness, I dunno, bust out a deck of many things. Invent rules for what causes you to draw a card. Very random, might not make a lot of sense, but might be considered fun by some.

UserClone

2010-09-29, 02:44 PM

I think there was a 2E Dragon article called "Good Hits, Bad Misses" with crit/fumble tables, but I'm not sure if that got redone for 3.5.

ArcanistSupreme

2010-09-29, 06:07 PM

One variation on the fumble could simply be funny reasons that you missed, such as some of the things Serpentine suggested earlier. You still get the random hilarity, but you don't increase the odds of players killing one another or of your meticulously planned encounters overcoming themselves.

Suggestions include:
You sneeze at exactly the wrong moment.
Your opponent sneezes and accidentally ducks the incoming blow.
A friend sneezes and bumps your arm, throwing off your aim.
An enemies friend sneezes, accidentally pushing their friend out of harms way.
The enemy sneezes in your face, and as you close your eyes to avoid getting spittle in them, you miss.

And I'm out of sneeze-related misses.

big teej

2010-09-29, 07:27 PM

Benly

2010-09-29, 08:02 PM

I remember an entry on the otherwise infamously brutal MERP/Rolemaster critical miss table, although I may be misremembering the exact text.

"You trip on an invisible imaginary turtle, causing your shot to fly wide of the mark. Don't bother looking for the turtle. It's gone now."

I reused that a few times over the years when I needed an odd and amusing miss description.

John Campbell

2010-10-01, 05:08 AM

These are the droids you're looking for. (http://paizo.com/store/gameAids/gameMasteryProducts/itemPacks/v5748btpy89mn)
My group used those, and their critical hit counterpart, for about half of one encounter, before the DM threw them away and retconned all of their effects to have not happened, because they were so ridiculously extreme.

To put it another way, I participate in a full contact foam fighting organization. This year, I took up archery. I fight at least one day a week, every week, with some days more(all week once), for at least several hours at a time.

I'm not sure how many arrow shots that is, but it's a lot. Probably a ridiculous number. Number of times I've broken an arrow string doing so: None(actually this holds true for my entire lifetime of archery in general. Replace string when worn. Life is great). Number of times I've dropped my weapon because of a shot: None. I realize this is a sample size of 1, but in addition, I've not seen other archers do this either.

Similarly, I've been an SCA heavy fighter for a decade and a half, and have made I don't know how many thousands of attacks. Number of times I've dropped my sword like an idiot: None. Number of times I've inadvertantly hit an ally with an attack aimed at someone else: None. (I've deliberately hit allies a few times...)

I did once break a bowstring (in about 25 years of archery...). That was because of a defect in the bow... there was a sharp edge on one of the string-nocks, and, over the course of a few hundred shots, it chewed through the string without me noticing until it snapped. I filed the edge smooth and it hasn't bothered since.

If you want to fluff up nat 1s, try just coming up with a reason why a highly trained fighter missed an attack that maybe strictly by the numbers he shouldn't have. Foot slipped in the mud, threw his attack off. An unnoticed tree branch or other minor terrain feature was in the way. The wing on his elbow-cop caught on his opponent's shield and he lost the attack in the moment it took to free his arm. One of his allies happened to attack the same opening at the exact same moment, and the ally's attack blocked his. Somebody bumped into him just at the wrong moment. (These have all happened to me more than once.)

And note that the effects of all of these are just: The attack missed. Doesn't matter what AC you hit; your attack missed. No further screwage or lasting effects, just automatic miss.

(1 in 20 is still probably too frequent...)

Psyx

2010-10-01, 05:16 AM

"100 - Embed your weapon in your own skull and die instantly"

Not fun.

Average encounters per level: 12?
Say 20 attacks each combat for our tank.

120 attacks per level = 6 fumbles.

So by 16th level, our fighter is statistically likely to have KILLED HIMSELF.

No save.

Being a meat shield is bad enough. You have no spells and nothing cool to do apart from get punched in the face by dragons while all the Tier 1 characters steal the glory.

How much more fun is it to add the chance of insta-killing yourself?

Once again: If you want fumbles, have spell fumbles. The melee types take enough sand-to-the-face as it is. And while it's practically impossible for someone to manage to accidentally kill themselves with their own sword, I can see lots more chance of horrible failure when spells are being used.

FelixG

2010-10-01, 05:23 AM

Gan The Grey

2010-10-01, 06:01 AM

Similarly, I've been an SCA heavy fighter for a decade and a half, and have made I don't know how many thousands of attacks. Number of times I've dropped my sword like an idiot: None. Number of times I've inadvertantly hit an ally with an attack aimed at someone else: None. (I've deliberately hit allies a few times...)

I did once break a bowstring (in about 25 years of archery...). That was because of a defect in the bow... there was a sharp edge on one of the string-nocks, and, over the course of a few hundred shots, it chewed through the string without me noticing until it snapped. I filed the edge smooth and it hasn't bothered since.

If you want to fluff up nat 1s, try just coming up with a reason why a highly trained fighter missed an attack that maybe strictly by the numbers he shouldn't have. Foot slipped in the mud, threw his attack off. An unnoticed tree branch or other minor terrain feature was in the way. The wing on his elbow-cop caught on his opponent's shield and he lost the attack in the moment it took to free his arm. One of his allies happened to attack the same opening at the exact same moment, and the ally's attack blocked his. Somebody bumped into him just at the wrong moment. (These have all happened to me more than once.)

And note that the effects of all of these are just: The attack missed. Doesn't matter what AC you hit; your attack missed. No further screwage or lasting effects, just automatic miss.

(1 in 20 is still probably too frequent...)

Well said. In Tynd's example, you can basically say that you were taking 10 the whole time, as firing a bow in a non-combat situation isn't really all that stressful. Add in a few enemies and a helping of fear and urgency and the situation changes a bit.

Yours is a better example, but still, no where near the sort of stress a fighter would deal with in a life-or-death situation. Fear and adrenaline changes things. I done some SCEA fighting myself. Nothing compared to being in an actual fight.

Still, always fumbling on a 1 is really harsh. Before I started my E6 game, fumbles were confirmed by rolling over twice your character level, or a 20 which is always a fumble. In E6, fumbles are confirmed by rolling over four times your character level, or a 20. They aren't all that harsh. Your weapon may take some damage, armor might take some damage, target gets AoO, -1 or -2 to further attacks for 1 round. The bad ones are rarer. Drop weapon, fall down, attack other closest target, ect.

My players love them. They have come to understand that bad situations and unfortunate circumstances are the things that drive epic stories and make good memories. The worse it gets, the better it feels when they succeed.

Tyndmyr

2010-10-01, 12:13 PM

Well said. In Tynd's example, you can basically say that you were taking 10 the whole time, as firing a bow in a non-combat situation isn't really all that stressful. Add in a few enemies and a helping of fear and urgency and the situation changes a bit.

It was a combat situation, though. Well, I'll grant you, it's mock combat, but stress and time constraints exist.

Yours is a better example, but still, no where near the sort of stress a fighter would deal with in a life-or-death situation. Fear and adrenaline changes things. I done some SCEA fighting myself. Nothing compared to being in an actual fight.

Have been in actual fights as well. Not swordfighting or using a bow, granted, but it's not as far off as you'd think. Sure, a real fight might be a shock the first time, but you grow accustomed to anything in time. Characters in D&D that survive past level 1 are not newcomers to combat. They will still experience stress, time constraints, etc, but I would imagine they are much more confident and sure than we would be if we were suddenly dropped into such a situation for the first time.

Plus, bowstrings don't just break even if you are nervous.

UserClone

2010-10-01, 12:28 PM

ArcanistSupreme

2010-10-01, 12:49 PM

The bowstring doesn't break because you are nervous, it breaks because it is the worst possible moment for it to break. That's what a fumble is all about. A representation of fate conspiring against you.

Question: In stressful situations, such as tests (standardized or otherwise), job interviews, public speeches, or sporting events, how many times has fate conspired against you and caused you to accidentally kill your best friend (or maybe stab yourself in the eye with a pencil)?

Combat should be lethal, but because of the other guy, not you.

ffone

2010-10-01, 01:16 PM

On a nat 1 attack the nearest set piece/environment.

Nothing quite as entertaining as seeing a power attacking barbarian with a magical adamantine great axe frag that local Inns wall because he misses the guard.

Or a monk splinter a table into a billion little bits when he misses with that round house kick!

Nat 1s can be used to liven up the mood, instead of saying "you failed, you look stupid" you say "you failed spectacularly!" and it can help change the environment, slamming your mace into an oil lamp can set the building ablaze making the fight that much more frantic or add a new obstacle to the fight

GM: "You have 1d20 rounds to finish the fight or GTFO before this building burns itself down around you!" Players: "OMG"

Agreed, this is roughly how I DM natural 1s. No crunchy consequences, just a little theatric fluff - especially when a 1 would've been a hit w/o the natural 1 rules: charging minotaur's horns gouge a hole in the wall, high-Reflex rogue with Evasion gets her foot caught by a treeroot. Especially in cases where the 1 only missed b/c of the natural 1 rules, I like to portray it as quirky environmental things rather than PC incompetence.

A PC looking massively incompetent one in 20 attacks, especially at high levels where they might get 4-6 attacks a round, is just silly.

UserClone

2010-10-01, 03:11 PM

Question: In stressful situations, such as tests (standardized or otherwise), job interviews, public speeches, or sporting events, how many times has fate conspired against you and caused you to accidentally kill your best friend (or maybe stab yourself in the eye with a pencil)?

Combat should be lethal, but because of the other guy, not you.

To be fair, Owen Hart died during a sporting event stunt. Others have almost died. And I never advocated auto self-kills, just fumbles. Also, no one seems to be taking into account my previous posts about negating a confirmed fumble with a saved-up confirmed crit.

blackjack217

2010-10-01, 03:14 PM

mangosta71

2010-10-01, 04:26 PM

"100 - Embed your weapon in your own skull and die instantly"

Not fun.

Average encounters per level: 12?
Say 20 attacks each combat for our tank.

120 attacks per level = 6 fumbles.

So by 16th level, our fighter is statistically likely to have KILLED HIMSELF.

No save.
Actually, 12 combats at 20 attacks per combat is 240 attacks per level, which translates to 12 fumbles per level. Using those ridiculous tables, he has a better than 50% chance to kill himself before he reaches level 7 (in world justification for there being so few high-level characters?).

In some situations, slipping and falling may be appropriate. Maybe you dropped your weapon because your target's parry smacked your arm. If a fight has been dragging along for a while, you may be starting to get tired. After a few minutes of swinging, even a 2lb sword feels heavy. Falling down or dropping a weapon really aren't that detrimental in D&D.

Tyndmyr

2010-10-01, 04:32 PM

Well, what feels tiring for you may not be tiring for the 16th level fighter with a giant pile of strength and con. Unless you're an individual on the very extreme edge of human fitness, your stats are probably somewhat lower in those areas. I certainly believe mine are.

Fumbles don't usually model exhaustion well either. All systems I've seen are equally likely to happen at any point in the fight, where tiredness generally increases with the length of exertion. Thankfully, 3.5 already has fatigue and exhaustion conditions model in the game, and they do make you more prone to failure.

Doug Lampert

2010-10-01, 04:54 PM

Actually, 12 combats at 20 attacks per combat is 240 attacks per level, which translates to 12 fumbles per level. Using those ridiculous tables, he has a better than 50% chance to kill himself before he reaches level 7 (in world justification for there being so few high-level characters?).

Then consider that you probably expend 100 attacks in practice or drill for every one that's for real. D&D third edition backgrounds the required practice, saying you fit it in sometime, but they do assume it's happening. Wizards get free spells from it, fighters practice new feats prior to using them in combat, multiclassing represents studying your new class prior to leveling, all in the background.

Now, if fumbles exist, even if the chance is MUCH MUCH lower during practice than the "real thing", then how did anyone make it to level 1 fighter or warrior? Level 1 still represents a fairly enourmous amount of training time, YEARS of practice. How often do you fumble dangerously?

There is no realism justification for a fumble rule that produces serious consequences often enough to bother modeling in a game based on a d20. NONE. You'd need a rule something like, if you roll a 1 then roll FOUR more d20s and if ALL of them are also 1 then you roll on the fumble table (which most of the time has nothing worse then, "you drop your weapon".

The argument has to be based on a belief that it is FUN to be told that your highly skilled combatant just cut off his own arm... If you really think that then I suggest Paranoia where it's in genre.

UserClone

2010-10-01, 04:56 PM

Yes, they can save them between encounters, but you can never have more than one get out of a fumble free card at any given time. It's okay to save one from a less-dire encounter to cancel a potentially much more costly flub. They are meant to be heroes, after all.

ArcanistSupreme

2010-10-01, 09:04 PM

To be fair, Owen Hart died during a sporting event stunt. Others have almost died. And I never advocated auto self-kills, just fumbles. Also, no one seems to be taking into account my previous posts about negating a confirmed fumble with a saved-up confirmed crit.

Um, not sure how that example adds anything to your point. The guy died because he was using bad equipment, doing something completely unrelated to the sport in question. Even arguing that being lowered to the ring via cable is an integral part of professional wrestling, you still have one incident out of the millions of sporting events that have gone on without death (with Serpentine's example, you have two [I'm sure that plenty more examples exist, but consider the proportions of events without deaths before citing them]).

I wasn't saying you were advocating autokills, but keep in mind that dealing 4d6+2x Str (greatsword critical) can be incredibly lethal at lower levels. And even if you have the get-out-of-possible-death free card, consider that you are just as likely to get that fumble before you get the critical. Or to have spent the critical. Or to roll two fumbles in a row, and having just used your freebie be SOL.

This also makes critical hits considerably more lackluster if their only point is to prevent you from accidentally slitting your friend's throat.

Serpentine

2010-10-02, 12:54 AM

The argument has to be based on a belief that it is FUN to be told that your highly skilled combatant just cut off his own arm... If you really think that then I suggest Paranoia where it's in genre.More likely I think it's fun to see the enormous Barbarian minotaur trip over his own feet and hit his head, and then have the Knight get her axe stuck in a cobblestone. Yeah, I think that's fun. Especially when, next round, the Knight, red-faced with embarrassment, takes a mighty swing and chops the minotaur's leg right off.
And given the right circumstances and description, being told that my highly skilled combatant cut off his own arm would be fun too. But I'm happy with D&D, thanks.

Worira

2010-10-02, 01:42 AM

I'd write out a giant essay about why I disagree with you, Serp, but I broke both thumbs on my keyboard and it's kind of painful to type right now.

Gan The Grey

2010-10-02, 02:39 AM

I'd write out a giant essay about why I disagree with you, Serp, but I broke both thumbs on my keyboard and it's kind of painful to type right now.

Then don't play with fumble tables. Geez, it really is THAT simple, people. Sorry to call you out here, Worira, but your short reply really illustrates the problems we are having in this thread. I don't know why everyone is arguing so hard about each other's levels of fun. If you don't like it, GREAT! More power to ya. I, and it seems many others, ENJOY fumbles and fumble tables. And this thread is about those people.

If you can't understand why they are fun to some people, that doesn't make us wrong. It makes us different. Please, let us be different without trying to make us feel like idiots. We aren't idiots. We aren't mistaken about our enjoyments. We are just different.

Ozymandias9

2010-10-02, 02:50 AM

Plus, bowstrings don't just break even if you are nervous.

That depends heavily on what you make them out of. There are worse things than catgut or beeswax wrapped hemp, but they don't hold a candle to modern core-wrapped synthetics.

ArcanistSupreme

2010-10-02, 07:20 AM

Then don't play with fumble tables. Geez, it really is THAT simple, people. Sorry to call you out here, Worira, but your short reply really illustrates the problems we are having in this thread. I don't know why everyone is arguing so hard about each other's levels of fun. If you don't like it, GREAT! More power to ya. I, and it seems many others, ENJOY fumbles and fumble tables. And this thread is about those people.

If you can't understand why they are fun to some people, that doesn't make us wrong. It makes us different. Please, let us be different without trying to make us feel like idiots. We aren't idiots. We aren't mistaken about our enjoyments. We are just different.

At this point I'm not arguing that you shouldn't use fumbles, simply that the effects can still be funny without being extremely lethal for low-level (and often high-level) parties. I can see why it might be fun(ny) to watch the party tank hit himself in the face, but why can't you keep the comedy but ditch the melee tax? When the player rolls a one, just say "you hit yourself in the face with the flat side of your blade, which incidentally means that you miss your opponent" and move on without adding damage that will easily kill the ubercharging, power-attacking, damage dealing machine regardless of level.

EDIT: Sincere apologies for that train wreck of a sentence.

Serpentine

2010-10-02, 08:44 AM

That's pretty much my preference, although I'd aim for temporary inconvenience (and if any accidental damage was dealt, I wouldn't make it full damage. Maybe if there were a series of natural 1s), as well.
I'd write out a giant essay about why I disagree with you, Serp, but I broke both thumbs on my keyboard and it's kind of painful to type right now.I was talking purely about my personal preference and sense of fun. Yours is obviously different. So what? It's not like we play in the same game where our preferences are able to clash.

Worira

2010-10-02, 04:09 PM

Yeah, that was a joke. I don't actually give a consignment of the soul to eternal torment whether you use fumbles or not.

Damascus

2010-10-04, 02:15 PM

A group I started with (back in 2nd Ed) actually had a chart. If you rolled a natural 20, or a natural 1, you rolled percentile. What happens next corresponds with your roll.

Also, there's a thing in the 3.5 PHB that gives you an alternate method to doing a natural 1 roll.

Jastermereel

2010-10-04, 02:24 PM

The group I play with used to use them (and, as we were just starting, missed the rules on confirming crits (essentially auto-confirming)) and while they could be fun, they often felt arbitrary (and often were) and those who were able to critically fail on an attack were the ones most likely to instantly kill an ally on it. If the burly fighter's sword goes flying, odds are it'll hit a teammate with considerably fewer hit points.

That said, I still try to do a little extra something on a 1, but it generally doesn't enter the mechanics of the fight. It might embarrass the character but not wound or disable them significantly. A barbarian fighting with a blinkdog in the rain slashes down at it with a giant greatsword and misses with a 1? The sword cuts a deep groove in the muddy ground, splashing the barbarian and completely covering him/her in mud. Blinded by mud? No. Disarmed after the sword sticks in the mud? Nah. On a 2 or a 3 the sword might simply miss or might hit the ground but not splash mud everywhere. This way it affects how the players react but doesn't risk derailing a fight arbitrarily.

Still, you know your group best. If they're ok with sword dropping, ally smacking antics, more power to 'em. The whole point is to have fun.

Tyndmyr

2010-10-04, 02:26 PM

That depends heavily on what you make them out of. There are worse things than catgut or beeswax wrapped hemp, but they don't hold a candle to modern core-wrapped synthetics.

While I don't doubt that, I'm still using the handmade string that came with my handmade bow. It may involve synthetic fibers(never asked what they were made of), but it's just a standard braided cord, on a wooden bow. As mentioned before, it's a simulated battle with appropriate tech. Using a modern fiberglass compound bow, modern string, etc would, IMO, be a bit against the spirit of the thing(and rules exist to limit such things).

So, it's at least a decent approximation of historical weaponry. It does not account for any magical adjustments in toughness D&D weaponry may possess. After all, if a bow can survive attacks that can kill low leveled players, presumably it's a fairly durable item.

mangosta71

2010-10-04, 02:30 PM

Yeah, that was a joke. I don't actually give a consignment of the soul to eternal torment whether you use fumbles or not.
I just assumed that you had fumbled your typing check. :smalltongue:

@AS: That's basically what I've been saying all along. Let the PCs fumble, but don't make fumbles autokill the PC or an ally. Something comical with an accompanying minor, non-threatening effect is all the game needs. If I was playing in a situation where PCs died from fumbles, I doubt I would enjoy it any more than the majority in the thread.

While I don't doubt that, I'm still using the handmade string that came with my handmade bow. It may involve synthetic fibers(never asked what they were made of), but it's just a standard braided cord, on a wooden bow. As mentioned before, it's a simulated battle with appropriate tech. Using a modern fiberglass compound bow, modern string, etc would, IMO, be a bit against the spirit of the thing(and rules exist to limit such things).

So, it's at least a decent approximation of historical weaponry. It does not account for any magical adjustments in toughness D&D weaponry may possess. After all, if a bow can survive attacks that can kill low leveled players, presumably it's a fairly durable item.
So it's got a 150-200lb draw weight, and thus can punch through plate armor at 100 yards? That's what traditional longbows (the models for D&D) were like. Drawing them puts a lot of stress on the string. I don't think it's unreasonable for strings to break more often in D&D than they do in modern situations. Not every fumble with a bow should result in a string breaking, but I don't think 1/400 is too high given the quality of materials and the stress the string is under.

big teej

2010-10-04, 03:29 PM

I got to use the "sneezing" thing last night as opposed to flying weapons

I think the greatly appreciated not throwing their weapon away from the hell hound....

and the orc who had just killed the party rogue...

ArcanistSupreme

2010-10-04, 03:43 PM

Glad I could contribute. :smallbiggrin:

Tyndmyr

2010-10-04, 03:49 PM

So it's got a 150-200lb draw weight, and thus can punch through plate armor at 100 yards? That's what traditional longbows (the models for D&D) were like. Drawing them puts a lot of stress on the string. I don't think it's unreasonable for strings to break more often in D&D than they do in modern situations. Not every fumble with a bow should result in a string breaking, but I don't think 1/400 is too high given the quality of materials and the stress the string is under.

This might be more appropriate in the real world weapons and armor, but no, they were not like that at all. Bows round the world tend to be around the 50 lb mark. A 200 lb bow is the world record ever fired, not a typical example. Longbows were far above average, with 110 lbs being fairly appropriate. They would certainly not punch through plate armor at 100 yards. In fact, testing indicates that unless it's a point blank shot WITH a bodkin arrow, rivetted chain is sufficient to stop them with ease.

Crossbows were used that DID have significantly higher stresses on the strings, though. Due to having a vastly shorter bow, they required much higher draw strength, and being a crossbow, were held at full draw for much longer. Despite all this and added complexity like cranks, crossbows were considered pretty reliable, and were crafted in exceedingly high draw weights for seige purposes. If you want to find justification for crit failures, you'll want to explore this extreme end.

Then, you'll need to show how they apply to D&D bows.

Keep in mind that a completely normal, non-magical bow in D&D has hardness 5 and hp 5. At level 1, that's pretty tough. Most people will die of damage from a bow less powerful than a generic bow can take.

Psyx

2010-10-05, 05:47 AM

Actually, 12 combats at 20 attacks per combat is 240 attacks per level, which translates to 12 fumbles per level.

How the hell did I fail so badly at basic maths?! *facedesk*
Thank-you for spotting that and pointing out that the situation was even more absurd that I had imagined.

More likely I think it's fun to see the enormous Barbarian minotaur trip over his own feet and hit his head, and then have the Knight get her axe stuck in a cobblestone. Yeah, I think that's fun. Especially when, next round, the Knight, red-faced with embarrassment, takes a mighty swing and chops the minotaur's leg right off.

I don't personally enjoy my 'heroic' character looking like a Keystone Cop.

I enjoy it even less when the Tier 1 casters are throwing around balls of energy, summoning unimaginable powers and messing with the fabric of reality WITH NO CHANCE OF FAILURE.

Seriously: Does anyone advocating fumbles give casters a percentage chance of insta-killing themselves with every spell?

If not; why not?

Psyx

2010-10-05, 06:02 AM

can punch through plate armor at 100 yards?

I don't think that longbows work in the way that you think they do...

Serpentine

2010-10-05, 06:19 AM

I don't personally enjoy my 'heroic' character looking like a Keystone Cop.And that's just swell. As I pointed out before, that was my own personal preference, one which I neither expect nor require others to agree with.

I enjoy it even less when the Tier 1 casters are throwing around balls of energy, summoning unimaginable powers and messing with the fabric of reality WITH NO CHANCE OF FAILURE.

Seriously: Does anyone advocating fumbles give casters a percentage chance of insta-killing themselves with every spell?

If not; why not?No. For starters, the non-caster would have to get an extreme roll - like, 3 ones in a row, if that - to even have a chance of insta-killing themselves or an ally in my games, so I wouldn't be terribly inclined to burden the casters with that.
For seconds, I have no problems with "Tier 1 casters... throwing around balls of energy, summoning unimaginable powers and messing with the fabric of reality" in my game. In fact, at least one of my casters tends to feel useless more often than any other character. My problem character is the Warlock who, I believe, has a chance of fumbling with his eldrich blast and the like anyway.
Finally, it just isn't really all that big of a deal. Not enough to go out of my way to craft a whole new mechanic.

Psyx

2010-10-05, 08:30 AM

But...you did craft a new mechanic: Fumbles.
Why is it completely infeasible to create another new one: Magical fumbles?

What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

It's just punishment to dump fumbles on the weakest classes in the game, while leaving the wizards to not only 'win' constantly, and not only do it from the safety of being being the tanks, but to do it with no chance of those cosmic energies even once biting them in the backside.

I used to play with a guy who ruled that a natural 20 followed by a natural 20 was always an insta-kill. On anyone. It really made certain that I never, ever wanted to play anyone who got meleed in any of his games. Because it's just not a fun thing to arbitrarily happen when you're already 'taking one for the team' by playing a meatshield.

UserClone

2010-10-05, 09:30 AM

I plan to use the spell roll variant when I start the game to implement my cards.

Again, no cards have an insta-kill effect, and I seriously doubt anyone wants to advocate ridiculously harsh fumbles.

Serpentine

2010-10-05, 10:31 AM

But...you did craft a new mechanic: Fumbles.
Why is it completely infeasible to create another new one: Magical fumbles?

What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

It's just punishment to dump fumbles on the weakest classes in the game, while leaving the wizards to not only 'win' constantly, and not only do it from the safety of being being the tanks, but to do it with no chance of those cosmic energies even once biting them in the backside.No, I didn't. Fumble tables were already available so I didn't have to make them from scratch, and when I don't use them I'm not using any extra rolls at all. For magical fumbles, I would have to require a whole new set of rolls, come up with new concepts for what exactly a magical fumble would involve, maybe make a whole new table... Much more work.
And like I said: the relative power of spellcasters is not a problem in my games. You're saying I should fix a problem that I don't even have.

Psyx

2010-10-05, 10:36 AM

I'm pretty sure five minutes of google would uncover a magical fumble table.

after all: If fumbles are so much fun, then the casters shouldn't be robbed of the hilarity.

mangosta71

2010-10-05, 10:55 AM

I used to play with a guy who ruled that a natural 20 followed by a natural 20 was always an insta-kill. On anyone. It really made certain that I never, ever wanted to play anyone who got meleed in any of his games. Because it's just not a fun thing to arbitrarily happen when you're already 'taking one for the team' by playing a meatshield.
That rule variant is included in the DMG.

As for casters not having fumbles, a mage throwing around reality warping power having the equivalent of the auto-self-kill would result in something horrific. I'm not opposed to them also having fumbles as long as they're not worse than melee fumbles, which is why I limit the effects of melee fumbles. Caster fumbles would get scary otherwise.

ArcanistSupreme

2010-10-05, 11:12 AM

As for casters not having fumbles, a mage throwing around reality warping power having the equivalent of the auto-self-kill would result in something horrific. I'm not opposed to them also having fumbles as long as they're not worse than melee fumbles, which is why I limit the effects of melee fumbles. Caster fumbles would get scary otherwise.

I agree. If you absolutely have to have lethal melee fumbles, you should probably limit magic fumbles to hitting just one person so you don't cause a TPK with a fumble.

Emmerask

2010-10-05, 11:24 AM

'your companion's head is suddenly decorated by your warhammer'

greetings playground.

I'm afraid I won't be rambling this time, I'm not awake enough for that.

I have recently taken up the mantle of DM for my on campus gaming group.

misfortunately, we've had more than a few 1's rolled (not enough to say their dice hate them, but we could get there)

and I was curious as to what my fellow DM's do on a critical failure/natural 1

so far all I've been doing is having the character comically lose grip on his weapon, sending it flying in a random direction, with a chance to hit someone else for half damage.

however, this is getting rather dull, as I do so HATE doing the same thing over and over.

I am looking for suggestions for what to do when a PC rolls a 1 on an attack, and if anyone knows of the existence of a fumble chart, and if so, where to find it.

please refrain from "natural 1's are stupid" posts, my group has decided to play with them, so being told repeatedly that one of our rules is stupid doesn't help solve our problem.

thankyou all

ready......

GO

Fumbles:
If you roll a 1 you roll again and subtract that roll, if it still hits no fumble.
If you roll a 1 - next roll and it didn´t hit you confirm the fumble (ie new attack roll check if it hits) if that doesn´t hit roll percentile and check the chart for your weapon. I created a nice little java tool so we haven´t got a million charts in paper form lying around.

Crits:
Pretty much the same there are no auto crits, just crit chances, 20 means you continue rolling, if the crit chance would land you roll again to confirm the crit (normal attack roll) if it is a crit roll percentile on the chart.

It sounds highly complicated at first but after a few sessions it goes really smoothly and the high bab fighter has a lower chance to fumble then a low bab class. With more attacks there are of course more chances of a fumble but with the system it roughly evens out compared to low bab classes and they of course have a higher chance to crit :smallwink:

To make it a more even playing field with caster they can fumble on attack rolls and on concentration checks.

We also have a fatepoint system in play so if you are unhappy with your fumble you can reroll for 5d6 fatepoints :smallwink:

Psyx

2010-10-05, 12:11 PM

That rule variant is included in the DMG.

12 encounters per level... sucking down perhaps 15 attacks per encounter...Statistically, no fighter is likely to live past level 3.
Being in the DMG doesn't mean that it's not a moronic rule suggestion.

As for casters not having fumbles, a mage throwing around reality warping power having the equivalent of the auto-self-kill would result in something horrific. I'm not opposed to them also having fumbles as long as they're not worse than melee fumbles, which is why I limit the effects of melee fumbles. Caster fumbles would get scary otherwise.

So... fighters playing around with swords, impaling themselves and whathaveyou is ok because it only ever maims them or one person nearby.

Whereas playing around with the reality of the universe should probably stay 'safe' because fumbles would be bad?

Playing around with the fabric of the universe SHOULD be scary, shouldn't it?

Tyndmyr

2010-10-05, 12:24 PM

12 encounters per level... sucking down perhaps 15 attacks per encounter...Statistically, no fighter is likely to live past level 3.
Being in the DMG doesn't mean that it's not a moronic rule suggestion.

It's fairly unpopular for that reason. Plus, a no-save, no-anything "you die" is generally not considered enjoyable, or good gaming, at least when it happens to the players.

So... fighters playing around with swords, impaling themselves and whathaveyou is ok because it only ever maims them or one person nearby.

Whereas playing around with the reality of the universe should probably stay 'safe' because fumbles would be bad?

I believe he merely meant that you want to ensure that negatives should be balanced between melee and magic. I'm against fumbles at all, but if you're going to have them, I agree that it would be preferable to have them roughly equal in danger to everyone. One big flaw with most fumble tables is they happen only on attack rolls. Not everyone makes the same amount of attack rolls, not by a long shot.

Playing around with the fabric of the universe SHOULD be scary, shouldn't it?

That entirely depends on the game. If you are playing Call of Cthulu, you are in a world in which using any magic is inherently a costly, scary thing to do. This fits with the setting. Attempting to use the same system in Eberron would make little sense at all. It doesn't fit, and outright conflicts with the setting.

mangosta71

2010-10-05, 12:30 PM

12 encounters per level... sucking down perhaps 15 attacks per encounter...Statistically, no fighter is likely to live past level 3.
Being in the DMG doesn't mean that it's not a moronic rule suggestion.
Agreed, but in this case there is RAW justification.

So... fighters playing around with swords, impaling themselves and whathaveyou is ok because it only ever maims them or one person nearby.

Whereas playing around with the reality of the universe should probably stay 'safe' because fumbles would be bad?

Playing around with the fabric of the universe SHOULD be scary, shouldn't it?
I said that having the melee types in the party killing themselves/allies on fumbles is not ok. In part because I am of the opinion that it's ridiculously stupid. The fact that drawing up tables for casters would be extremely complex - we would want separate tables for each level of spell to allow for the potential to bend reality, then come up with all the different effects - doesn't help matters. Sure, give casters the potential to fumble spells. Give their fumbles the same types of effects - a spell slot wasted, provoke an AoO even on a successful concentration check, etc. Not ripping away a chunk of the material plane or slaughtering every creature in a 10-mile radius. Minor effects with a light-hearted, comedic side rather than cataclysmic events.

Serpentine

2010-10-05, 11:16 PM

12 encounters per level... sucking down perhaps 15 attacks per encounter...Statistically, no fighter is likely to live past level 3.
Being in the DMG doesn't mean that it's not a moronic rule suggestion.Maybe not, but it does make it a lot easier than having to look for a homebrewed rule for casters, which was the point.

So... fighters playing around with swords, impaling themselves and whathaveyou is ok because it only ever maims them or one person nearby.No. As has been said repeatedly, many of us rarely, if ever, use fumble rules that have even a slightest chance of anyone getting "maimed". Mango and I both agree that this is a bad rule. You are not arguing with us.

Whereas playing around with the reality of the universe should probably stay 'safe' because fumbles would be bad?Not really. It's just more convenient for me, gameplay-wise.
Playing around with the fabric of the universe SHOULD be scary, shouldn't it?Perhaps, and I'm even going to start considering some magical risks (I've already got some for a few save-or-die spells). But, again, this just isn't an issue in my games. I have a cleric who shoots moonbeams, a druid who turns into a volcano and a warlock who has to make fumbleable attack rolls anyway. Not. An. Issue.

Psyx

2010-10-06, 05:53 AM

But the whole point is that fumbles are 'fun'. If people want to use fumbles because they are fun, then it seems very unfair to deprive those poor casters of the hilarity.

I happen to utterly disagree with every ounce of flesh on my body that fumbles should exist in D&D, but there y'go...

we would want separate tables for each level of spell to allow for the potential to bend reality

Why? Unless you have different fumble tables for each weapon? Keep the granularity of the same level for both. One fumble table for melee, one for magic. Works for me.

As for the making up a table thing... C'mon... that would take 30 minutes, at most. I don't see that as a reason not to do it. Roll a d20 every time you cast: 1=miscast. Cantrips never miscast. Maybe spells of your highest available level miscast on a 1-2. Done job! Then a table with twenty entries for results, ranging in severity dependant on how fun or brutal you want them to be. Or just nick the minor miscast table from WFRP or DH.

Gan The Grey

2010-10-06, 06:01 AM

My problem with caster fumbles is the fact that spells are finite, and physical attacks generally are not. It hurts SO much more when your fumble completely eliminates one of your options for the rest of the day. If I fumble a melee attack, that doesn't prevent me from attacking again that day. If I fumble my Dispel Magic or whatnot, I might not be able to do that again at all for the rest of the day. I can handle screwing up a few attacks, even if it hurts me or my party. Makes thing more interesting. Flubbing a spell just hurts so much more.

Snake-Aes

2010-10-06, 06:09 AM

Serpentine

2010-10-06, 06:49 AM

But the whole point is that fumbles are 'fun'. If people want to use fumbles because they are fun, then it seems very unfair to deprive those poor casters of the hilarity.They cope. And, in any case, they have their weapons option too, so in fact, if we give casters "the fun of fumbling" as you so snarkily put it, then we are further making fighters miss out because they only have one way to fumble, while the casters get two! Now that's not fair, is it?

I happen to utterly disagree with every ounce of flesh on my body that fumbles should exist in D&D, but there y'go...And where have you seen me attacking you for that preference? When have I belittled your choice, snarked at it, insisted that your choice is "moronic"?
I use fumbles. You don't. I really don't care that you don't. I would even be fine playing in a game that didn't. But I do, and I enjoy them, so deal with it.

Why? Unless you have different fumble tables for each weapon? Keep the granularity of the same level for both. One fumble table for melee, one for magic. Works for me.There's a lot more difference between cure moderate wounds and magic missile than there is between a sword and a pick. You'll notice, too, that there are often different tables for ranged, slashing, bludgeoning and piercing weapons.

As for the making up a table thing... C'mon... that would take 30 minutes, at most. I don't see that as a reason not to do it. Roll a d20 every time you cast: 1=miscast. Cantrips never miscast. Maybe spells of your highest available level miscast on a 1-2. Done job! Then a table with twenty entries for results, ranging in severity dependant on how fun or brutal you want them to be. Or just nick the minor miscast table from WFRP or DH.I don't want to spend that half hour - which would actually be more like 3 for me, I'm slow and thorough - for something I don't need, want nor particularly care about.
A reason, hurrah!

Also, there is the point I already alluded to, which is that requiring a "fumble check" for casters - and if they can fumble, they must be able to crit, by the way - requires a whole new roll to be instituted. A fighter rolls to attack anyway. A caster doesn't. It's a lot easier to institute "a natural 1 on an attack roll, which you make anyway, is always a miss and is extra-inconvenient" than "every time you cast a spell you need to roll this extra die just to see if you screw up. No, there's no other purpose. You get anything in the middle, nothing happens".

Lhurgyof

2010-10-06, 07:11 AM

That rule variant is included in the DMG.

As for casters not having fumbles, a mage throwing around reality warping power having the equivalent of the auto-self-kill would result in something horrific. I'm not opposed to them also having fumbles as long as they're not worse than melee fumbles, which is why I limit the effects of melee fumbles. Caster fumbles would get scary otherwise.

The variant rule is two 20's and a confirm. Not just two 20's.

Psyx

2010-10-06, 07:14 AM

My problem with caster fumbles is the fact that spells are finite, and physical attacks generally are not.

Tell that to the guy who just fumbled his arrow of slaying... :smalltongue:

Lhurgyof

2010-10-06, 07:18 AM

Yeah, if I were you (OP, not Serpentine, feel free to do whatever you want in your game), I'd implement some way for casters to fumble as well, that way the wealth is spread around.

Gan The Grey

2010-10-06, 07:37 AM

Tell that to the guy who just fumbled his arrow of slaying... :smalltongue:

Sigh. Do I need to define generally? There is a reason why I included it in that sentence.

EDIT Sorry, if that was meant in good humor. Well, only half-sorry. Its exceedingly rare for someone to admit the value of another's different opinion, but people will go out of their way to find a way to be right. Bugs me.

Psyx

2010-10-06, 08:51 AM

^I was also commenting in humour, rather than any degree of seriousness.

I also knocked up a 20-result spell fumble table on the back of a ***-packet earlier, just for S&Gs. I may post it at some point.

Psyx

2010-10-06, 08:54 AM

CIGARETTE packet, rather.

Grrrr.

Gan The Grey

2010-10-06, 09:30 AM

CIGARETTE packet, rather.

Grrrr.

Hahah! I was trying SO hard to figure out what the heck you were talking about. Could not figure it out for the life of me. Stupid *'s.

UserClone

2010-10-06, 09:49 AM

CIGARETTE packet, rather.

Grrrr.

Bahahaha. That's like trying to say that a puppy cocked its head to one side in curiosity...err, TILTed its head.

EDIT: hm, you can say cocked but not *****. So a puppy TILTS its head instead of cocking it.

Paladineyddi

2010-10-06, 05:16 PM

Combat is dangerous

and what the frick highly trained soldiers not hurting themselves?
im kinda sure there have been incidents of friendly fire

When somebody at my table rolls at natural 1 he throw again to see how bad it is

based on the outcome of the roll he gets to decide himself what is appropriate
fumble

the most basic is that he gets a -2 on his next attack or a -2 on his next ac or something
lightweight stuff

for heavier stuff its all according to situation throw your wepon away,hit an ally (he gets to try to defend himself) and so forth
when people with more then one attack roll a nat 1 on their first attack we use the normal rule
if they roll a 1 on any other attack during that full attack they only fail the attack

has worked our good so far