Pathfinder 1E Critical Fumbles: Need Help Convincing DM

[Nikmal]

There is a thread on either the WoTC or Paizo website that basically says: A 20th level fighter is god-like in battle to most people. How he can be so terrible at fighting make no sense if you use this rule. Maybe if he can explain this nonsense we can help you out though.

I most certainly would not equate a 20th level character or fighter as you say, to be almost godlike at all. I would say that a 20th level character would be almost like Michael Jordan/ Tiger Woods/ Garth Brooks or some such. The best of the best in their respective fields/genres. That is to say they are not gods nor should they be compared to such. If your DM wants to make them such that is up to that DM. Personally I would never allow it because of the complications that arise from it too. Even the Epic stuff can cause a certain amount of complications too.

Wish you luck

 

[Siuis]

There are substantial piles of evidence that 5th level is about the max skill potential of any human alive- the ol' Einstein was a 5th level e pert and unrelated Gandalf was a 5th level magic user. Numerically, a 20th level fighter is much closer to divine might than professional athlete.

As for fumble tables... They don't make a lot of sense to me. I've only ever seen them used as a method of nerfing players when the DM has a habit of letting things get past their comfort level. Though one DM was 'kind' enough to insist he wanted us to fumble because it was quirky and fun. He then broke down and admitted to the nerfing under pressure.

 

[billd91]

Critical fumbles every time you roll a 1 on a d20 is way too often, if you're going to use any kind of critical fumble system. It means that high level fighters (with more attacks) fumble more than neophytes who only attack once per round. A far better system would be to use a confirmation roll like with critical hits. Paizo's Fumble cards suggest using a confirmation roll - roll again and if the roll's a miss, use the fumble. This confirmation roll always uses the character's highest BAB, so the higher level fighter is less likely to fumble than low-level ones even if he's on his 4th iterative attack.

That said, any critical system that immediately imposes a broken status on the weapon is too harsh. Suggest that these situations, whether he uses a confirmation or not, inflict a single point of damage to the weapon. That should give the PCs a chance to maintain and repair weapons before they're made useless.

 

[Nikmal]

There are substantial piles of evidence that 5th level is about the max skill potential of any human alive- the ol' Einstein was a 5th level e pert and unrelated Gandalf was a 5th level magic user. Numerically, a 20th level fighter is much closer to divine might than professional athlete.

As for fumble tables... They don't make a lot of sense to me. I've only ever seen them used as a method of nerfing players when the DM has a habit of letting things get past their comfort level. Though one DM was 'kind' enough to insist he wanted us to fumble because it was quirky and fun. He then broke down and admitted to the nerfing under pressure.

Fumbles are by no means a way to nerf the game if done right. As mentioned before in this thread, confirmation rolls if used one is far less likely to fumble at greater levels. So therefor nerfing just does not happen then.

As far as the "Divine" rap you are stating that there are piles of evidence about 5th level being the best for our modern society.... In all the years I have been playing D&D and now Pathfinder (36 years almost 37) I have never heard or seen these piles of evidence in which you speak.

Gandalf, being a myth himself, was not 5th level for certain. Throughout history one could name figures that would be in the 19th to 20th level range. Through Myth or Real life. Simply stating there are piles of evidence without backing it up is just words sir.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

The Alexandrian - Misc Creations

 

[concerro]

I most certainly would not equate a 20th level character or fighter as you say, to be almost godlike at all. I would say that a 20th level character would be almost like Michael Jordan/ Tiger Woods/ Garth Brooks or some such. The best of the best in their respective fields/genres. That is to say they are not gods nor should they be compared to such. If your DM wants to make them such that is up to that DM. Personally I would never allow it because of the complications that arise from it too. Even the Epic stuff can cause a certain amount of complications too.

Wish you luck

Actually our best athletes are more like level 7. I guess saying a high level fighter can be more like Beawolf, Conan, Hercules, or Achilles. These people did legendary things like single-handedly take on mythical beast which a D&D fighter is capable of doing. If your skill is so great that you can take it on mythical beast then I doubt it was done by dropping your sword every 20th swing.

 

[concerro]

Fumbles are by no means a way to nerf the game if done right. As mentioned before in this thread, confirmation rolls if used one is far less likely to fumble at greater levels. So therefor nerfing just does not happen then.

As far as the "Divine" rap you are stating that there are piles of evidence about 5th level being the best for our modern society.... In all the years I have been playing D&D and now Pathfinder (36 years almost 37) I have never heard or seen these piles of evidence in which you speak.

Gandalf, being a myth himself, was not 5th level for certain. Throughout history one could name figures that would be in the 19th to 20th level range. Through Myth or Real life. Simply stating there are piles of evidence without backing it up is just words sir.

There are multiple threads on the issue on the WoTC and Paizo messageboards. If you compare our world records for example to what D&D characters do then 5th-7th levels routinely break them.

 

[renau1g]

Not even needing 5th level. In 4e my goliath barbarian rolled a Nat 20 on Athletics for a Long Jump and cleared over 30 ft.. The long jump record is only 29-ish feet...

I used to love Crit fumbles from a DM perspective, but then after a few games of it, I changed my tune and we dropped them once PC's hit 5th level. I don't like the additional time required for more rolls and the penalties obviously are far more damaging to PC's then enemies. If that orc rolls a 1 and breaks his cruddy battle-axe, who cares, but if Arthur breaks Excalibur... yeah that's stupid IMO.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Not even needing 5th level. In 4e my goliath barbarian rolled a Nat 20 on Athletics for a Long Jump and cleared over 30 ft.. The long jump record is only 29-ish feet...

As the essay notes, the Jump rules in particular suffered for the sake of ease of use when they transitioned from 3.0 to 3.5:

Let’s take a look at a 4th level Olympian jumper:

+7 skill ranks

+3 Strength bonus

+3 Skill Focus

That’s a +13 bonus.

Now, back in the original 3rd Edition (3.0), the result of a running long jump check was:

5 ft. + 1 ft. per 1 point above 10

This can be more easily paraphrased this way: The distance of a long jump is equal to your check result minus 5 feet.

Our Olympian’s jumps will range from 9 feet (stumbling all the way on a roll of natural 1) to 28 feet. But a typical Olympic event involves three jumps in which the best distance is recorded. That means that roughly 80% of the time, our long jumper will be jumping between 20 feet and 28 feet in competition.

Looking at the 2004 Olympics, the top forty men’s long-jump results during the qualification round range from 24 feet to 27.25 feet. Those types of results will be posted approximately 60% of the time by our Olympic long-jumper.

With out 5th level jumper we can bump the ability bonus up to +4, add a +2 synergy bonus from Tumble, or a +4 bonus from the Run feat. The result would be a the ability to achieve jumps in the 29-35 foot range. The world record is currently set at 29.35 feet.

So, once again we’re finding that 5th level is right at the dividing line between legendary real world performances and the impossible realms of the superhuman.

And you’ll find similar fidelity with the high jump rules. (In fact, the 3.0 high jump rules are even more accurate than the long jump rules.)

The jumping rules, however, are perhaps the most visible victim of gameplay compromises in D&D. When the system was revised for D20 Modern, the distance of a long jump was revised to simply equal the DC of the check. This change was later picked up in the 3.5 revision of the D&D rules.

This rule is a lot simpler to remember, but it makes jumping significantly easier than any other skill (compared to real world performance). Under the new rules, 1st level characters can now trivially perform Olympic-level jumps and our typical Olympians will be routinely smashing the world record. (The high jump rules, on the other hand, remain fairly accurate.)

The strength bonus from Goliath (totally beyond normal human capacity) and the speed bonus of Barbarian (probably within the realm of normal human capability), plus the possible further +2 bonus if he was raging at the time all also had a hand in helping him make Olympic athletes look like pansies.

EDIT: Ah, 4E. Don't know what bonuses a 4E goliath gets and in 4E the skill system is completely different, too.

 

[renau1g]

The strength bonus from Goliath (totally beyond normal human capacity) and the speed bonus of Barbarian (probably within the realm of normal human capability), plus the possible further +2 bonus if he was raging at the time all also had a hand in helping him make Olympic athletes look like pansies.

Well, the strength bonus from Goliath is +2, the Str bonus that a human can get in PF (or 4e) is +2 (if they select it with the floating bonus), so that's the same. In 4e the goliath can roll twice on jump checks and take the higher result (just easier to get that 20).

Edit: great table/essay btw