Pathfinder 1E Critical Fumbles: Need Help Convincing DM

[Glade Riven]

But without critical fumbles, my last group would never have known just how poor dwarven bullets were...

Granted, we usually used it for accidents that resulted in a loss-of-turn (getting your blade un-stuck, unjamming your gun, etc - full round actions). Well, there WAS that time is SW:SAGA where a critical miss from a semi-super laser ended up accidently shooting down the party's shuttle...long story.

 

[Siuis]

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.

You probably weren't looking. It really depends on how you view deific power. A lot of common consensus is to slap the abrahamic "all mighty, all powerful and infallible" onto any concept of the divine. I disagree, myself; elsewise, how could Zeus have overthrown the titans? Or the aesir beat back the jotun?

The 5th level cap was a breakdown done in an essay, showing that a 5th level theoretical physicist could occasionally hit DC 30 and answer questions no one has thought to ask before. "Gandalf was a 5th level Magic-User" is an article from an old dragon magazine (I can find a link if you'd like) which, while canonically wrong, jives with my personal belief of "don't slap 20 levels on someone who's the best in their field". I prefer scaling down, so each +1 is a vast and note-worthy improvement. It's all preference here, really.

Simply stating there are piles of evidence without backing it up is just words sir.

You're right, and I apologize. I made a blunder, there, and figured the essay or article were common knowledge- the odds of knowing of at least one were, I thought, pretty good. I also didn't supply links because I was lazy, and it was late.

---

As for the fumble table, it's a good one, almost. The very end, where there's that one percent chance of auto-crit max damage to yourself, AND landing prone? Most of BaB should reflect poise, intuition, timing, and distance. When you can gauge millimeters at a glance, and stay far enough away from enemy swings to lose an eyelash then jump back into the opening they leave, you shouldn't be able to fall onto the business end of a weapon that badly. The save DCs are a nice touch, and help to make it more fair. But wouldn't a self-attack work better than "try to roll away from the tip of the weapon they'd pointing at you"? I'd feel better with it meshing with the rules more; say, they drop the sword, fall prone, and the weapon acts like a spike trap. Seems more constant to me.

Again though, I have never personally seen a game (played, DM'd or watched/heard about) where the fumble rules were fair to the players at all. I know it's anecdotal, but it sticks to me, y'know?

 

[Ghostwind]

Here is what we worked up for Torn Asunder: Critical Hits (PFRPG Edition)

To illustrate this side of combat, a variant rule for critical fumbles has been developed. If you roll a natural 1 on an attack, you must roll a Dexterity check (DC 15). Failure constitutes a Critical Fumble. To determine the extent of the fumble use the following equation.

1d4 + your Dexterity modifier (minimum 0, maximum +4)

Now use that total to determine the effect of the critical fumble on the table below.

Table 1-18: Critical Fumbles
Total Score............Fumble Effect
1..........................You strike ally – You strike an ally within your weapon’s reach/range (Game Master’s choice). Damage inflicted equals the weapon’s unmodified base damage.
2.........................You fall on weapon– You strike yourself with your own weapon. Damage inflicted equals the weapon’s unmodified base damage.
3.........................You lose your weapon. Roll for direction (1d8on a compass) and distance (odd= 5ft. even=10ft.).
4.........................You trip – You lose your footing and fall prone; you must use a standard or movement action to regain your footing (this does provoke an attack of opportunity).
5.........................You are disoriented – You get turned around and lose your action for the rest of this round and the next (this does not provoke an attack of opportunity).
6..........................You overextend your attack – You lunge or swing too wide and provoke an attack of opportunity from any hostile opponents in range to do so.
7...........................You are considered Dazed for one full round as you regain your composure (this provokes an attack of opportunity).
8..........................GM’s Choice

 

[Qwillion]

I read the original post and skipped the rest so forgive me if this has been suggested

Might I just suggest bribery, buy him Paizo's Critical Fumble and Critical Hit Card deck . My players love these things .

Its hard to resist using something someone bought you as a gift.

 

[Noah Fentz]

Here is what we worked up for Torn Asunder: Critical Hits (PFRPG Edition)

To illustrate this side of combat, a variant rule for critical fumbles has been developed. If you roll a natural 1 on an attack, you must roll a Dexterity check (DC 15). Failure constitutes a Critical Fumble. To determine the extent of the fumble use the following equation.

1d4 + your Dexterity modifier (minimum 0, maximum +4)

Now use that total to determine the effect of the critical fumble on the table below.

Honestly, I think that one is just as bad, if not worse than the one I generated. I realize the DC 15 DEX check makes it easier to avoid, and you've made some things impossible for higher DEX, but the odds/probabilities are even down the board for each particular player. I'd MUCH rather have a 1% of the worst possible scenario than having it all even odds.

I also threw in some WILL saves for those without a decent DEX. Not all fighters focus on high DEX.

I read the original post and skipped the rest so forgive me if this has been suggested

Might I just suggest bribery, buy him Paizo's Critical Fumble and Critical Hit Card deck . My players love these things .

Its hard to resist using something someone bought you as a gift.

I've checked the fumble deck out, and I see there's some really harsh fumbles in there and for spellcasters to boot. Let's not get them involved, too!

I hope to run a campaign when he gets tired of doing it and show him life with fumbles on the receiving end.




Overall, I think the table I proposed would work best with a second roll to 'check' if it's a fumble at all. At least even then, there's a save chance to still avoid it. It may be a lot of rolling, but if the DM insists on using fumbles in their campaign, they should be best represented as accurately as possible, IMO.

 

[Qwillion]

I disagree that they are harsh but then again my GM played with the Dungeon Magazine crit fumble tables where you could auto kill yourself.

 

[Noah Fentz]

I disagree that they are harsh but then again my GM played with the Dungeon Magazine crit fumble tables where you could auto kill yourself.

HA HA!

Yeah, I played 1E with the same tables. Critical Hits and Misses from Dragon magazine?

I mostly remember the critical hit chart being 00 = DECAPITATION! That was just insane.

The fumbles were horrific, too!

All in all, I prefer to simply have a REF DC 15 to avoid dropping your weapon. If it's avoided, it's business as usual with no ill effects.

 

[Friend of the Dork]

Hmm even with confirm fumble rules it still is far from perfect. A 20th level fighter will still fumble more frequently than a 1st level fighter, because of the multiple number of attacks. Yes he has a much higher to hit bonus, but the enemies have much higher AC too, which means it almost evens out and the number of dice rolled becomes the most important thing.

A system I've seen that removes this aspect (for good or ill) is Shadowrun 4th ed. There you use dice pools, and you need half or more dice turn up as ones. So with 15+ dice (not unusual for a good gunslinger) the chance of fumbling is minimal.

However it has the drawback that very difficult shot or untrained people will have a really high chance of "fumbling" - to the point that even trying is a waste of time because of the high chance.

 

[DragonLancer]

I use fumbles but only because my players quite like them. However, I made it so that in a combat round a character can only potentially fumble once regardless of the number of attacks they get. It's then a D100 roll and a fumble only occurs on a 10 or less. As for the result I make that decision rather than a random table. If someone is firing into melee with a ranged attack or a magic attack then it's going to hit an ally. But in melee it could be a trip/fall prone, thrown weapon, hit self, hit ally... depends.

 

[Friend of the Dork]

I use fumbles but only because my players quite like them. However, I made it so that in a combat round a character can only potentially fumble once regardless of the number of attacks they get. It's then a D100 roll and a fumble only occurs on a 10 or less. As for the result I make that decision rather than a random table. If someone is firing into melee with a ranged attack or a magic attack then it's going to hit an ally. But in melee it could be a trip/fall prone, thrown weapon, hit self, hit ally... depends.

Do you mean only one chance (roll) at fumbling per round, or you mean you cannot double fumble... because of it is the latter then it is hardly any different as many fumble results will disrupt all the other attacks as well.