• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Pathfinder 1E Critical Fumbles: Need Help Convincing DM

My groups Critical Fumble

In our group, as with critical hits, you have to confirm a critical fumble.

If you roll a 1, its a fumble chance. You have to reroll the to hit roll..if you miss again, its a critical fumble.

In this case, a level 20 fighter is a lot less likely to fumble then a level 1 fighter.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Light Knight, that's not guaranteed (and might actually be wrong)

It depends on what the character is fighting.

assuming a character is fighting a creature of the same cr as their level
A 1st level fighter might be fighting a gnoll AC 15, a fighter will commonly have +4 to hit so a 50% chance of fumbling on a natural 1.
A 20th level fighter might be fighting a Pit Fiend, AC 38.
Assume the fighter started with 18 str, 5 level increases in str, +5 inherent to str, +6 to str from a belt and that's 34 str so +12. BAB +20 so that's +32, assume a +5 weapon so +37 to hit and assume another +5 from party buffs/feats etc. Giving + 42 to hit.
On the 4th attack in a round that's +22 to hit which means he needs a 16 or better to avoid the fumble.
So he is more likely to fumble in a round than a 1st level fighter...
If we assume he's up to +47 to hit then he's still 50% chance of fumbling on the last attack of a round and he's still a chance of fumbling his earlier attacks (admittedly very little chance on the first couple)

(Also note that he's not power attacking in the above calculations... if he is he needs +16 to hit from various buffs to not have his last attack as likely to fumble as a 1st level fighter against a gnoll)
 

Critical fumbles look nice on paper but in result they just take away from players' enjoyment.

The only approach to CFs that seemed to treat higher-level characters fairly, had characters risk a critical fumble on a natural 1 with their final attack on their turn. This meant that everyone was vulnerable to one critical fumble chance per round regardless of level, and characters with two or more iterative attacks could depend on having at least one being "fumble free". The game system I played under with this system was not, in my recollection, D&D 3rd edition or any of its derivatives, so I am not sure how this approach would need to carry over into extra attacks with offhand weapons.
 

Light Knight, that's not guaranteed (and might actually be wrong)

It depends on what the character is fighting.

assuming a character is fighting a creature of the same cr as their level
A 1st level fighter might be fighting a gnoll AC 15, a fighter will commonly have +4 to hit so a 50% chance of fumbling on a natural 1.
A 20th level fighter might be fighting a Pit Fiend, AC 38.
Assume the fighter started with 18 str, 5 level increases in str, +5 inherent to str, +6 to str from a belt and that's 34 str so +12. BAB +20 so that's +32, assume a +5 weapon so +37 to hit and assume another +5 from party buffs/feats etc. Giving + 42 to hit.
On the 4th attack in a round that's +22 to hit which means he needs a 16 or better to avoid the fumble.
So he is more likely to fumble in a round than a 1st level fighter...
If we assume he's up to +47 to hit then he's still 50% chance of fumbling on the last attack of a round and he's still a chance of fumbling his earlier attacks (admittedly very little chance on the first couple)

(Also note that he's not power attacking in the above calculations... if he is he needs +16 to hit from various buffs to not have his last attack as likely to fumble as a 1st level fighter against a gnoll)


Mad Hamish, I *think* you just proved my point. Why is that fighter +22 on the 4th attack? In your opinion what causes that?
 

Critical fumbles look nice on paper but in result they just take away from players' enjoyment.

The only approach to CFs that seemed to treat higher-level characters fairly, had characters risk a critical fumble on a natural 1 with their final attack on their turn. This meant that everyone was vulnerable to one critical fumble chance per round regardless of level, and characters with two or more iterative attacks could depend on having at least one being "fumble free". The game system I played under with this system was not, in my recollection, D&D 3rd edition or any of its derivatives, so I am not sure how this approach would need to carry over into extra attacks with offhand weapons.

A couple of things.
1) The fumble chart we use is weighted at the top end for icky bad things to happen, though I like the one posted on this thread, so I might switch.
2) Personally I have always thought D&D in all of its variations and pathinder, lacked a ton of realism (yes I know its fantasy, but I'd like a few things to make sense), for instance, a 200 hitpint warrior gets down to 190, hear unconciousness, and he has the same fighting prowess he had when he started. And to me the first level guy (1st level) should have the slightest chance, EVER SO SLIGHTEST chance of killing that 20th level guy. You know, once a century kind of things. Without Critical Hit Charts and Fumbles, its just not possible. With the Critical Hit charts, in the game's I play, you'll have to roll a natural 20, another natural 20, and around 5% chance (somewhere 96-00) to kill that guy. And thats assuming you play with a 2nd natural 20 automatically confirming. Thats around 1 in 10000 chance. That might be good enough for a few, but playing with heroism tells me to go a bit higher...Whats the chance of a 20th level fighter critically fumbling on a 1st level guy? 1 in 400? Then he'll have to roll whatever is necessary to critically hit self, then roll that same 96-00?
 

Critical fumbles look nice on paper but in result they just take away from players' enjoyment.

Missing in general takes away from player's enjoyment. I've seen many arguments for systems where on a "miss" you deal a glancing blow and deal minimum damage.
"Fun" is a pretty swingy argument.

That said, my players have a great time when the monster that's kicking their ass and about to kill the fighter fumbles and gives them a free round of attacks.

I like fumbles but do like the need to "confirm" with a Reflex save or second attack to balance them. It can suck, but so can being criticalled by a dragon. Luck be fickle that way.
 

It depends on what the character is fighting.
assuming a character is fighting a creature of the same cr as their level
A 1st level fighter might be fighting a gnoll AC 15, a fighter will commonly have +4 to hit so a 50% chance of fumbling on a natural 1.
A 20th level fighter might be fighting a Pit Fiend, AC 38.
Assume the fighter started with 18 str, 5 level increases in str, +5 inherent to str, +6 to str from a belt and that's 34 str so +12. BAB +20 so that's +32, assume a +5 weapon so +37 to hit and assume another +5 from party buffs/feats etc. Giving + 42 to hit.
On the 4th attack in a round that's +22 to hit which means he needs a 16 or better to avoid the fumble.
So he is more likely to fumble in a round than a 1st level fighter...
If we assume he's up to +47 to hit then he's still 50% chance of fumbling on the last attack of a round and he's still a chance of fumbling his earlier attacks (admittedly very little chance on the first couple)

(Also note that he's not power attacking in the above calculations... if he is he needs +16 to hit from various buffs to not have his last attack as likely to fumble as a 1st level fighter against a gnoll)

Why does on fighter in your argument start with an 18 strength and the other start with a 16 (or a 14 and weapon focus)?
Also, a level 20 character might have items and buffs that allow rerolls and do-overs and have all kinds of death avoidance bonuses. So fumbling is less of a character ending moment.

And, looking at the chance of fumbling itself, 50% for L1 and 75% for L20 still ends up being a total chance of 2.5% and 3.75%. The odds of fumbling increase by a whopping 1.25% meaning you'll fumble one extra time in a 100 full attacks. How many encounters do you plan on running at L20? The game assumes 13 encounters per level, and if each was 4 rounds that would only be little over 50 attacks, and not every one would be a full attack.
Som between L20 and the theoretical L21 the fighter would have a 50/50 chance of fumbling one extra time more than he did at L1. And then only if they fought nothing but high AC pit fiends.
 

Here is my attempt to create a "reasonable" fumble system.

First let's clarify the terms I use for this system. (If these differ from the official terms for the same concepts, or if they strongly clash with the standard rules in some way that I have misremembered, please let me know so I can retrofit these rules to comply with the standard)

* Normal attacks: the single attack action everyone is normally allowed to make in an encounter, plus any iterative attacks (additional attacks gained by having a base attack bonus of +6 or higher)

* Natural attacks: attacks with natural weapons

* Offhand attacks: any additional attack actions granted by virtue of using the two-weapon fighting rules, including attendant feats, and excluding multiple attacks from natural weapons

* Extra attack: any other additional attack actions granted by class abilities, feats, spells, etc., excluding attacks of opportunity and two-weapon fighting rules

* Attacks of opportunity: rules as written

* Final attack: A character can have multiple "final attacks", for example if they are two-weapon fighting



Rule #1. A character incurs a fumble threat with an attack roll if:
(a) a natural 1 is rolled for an attack roll, and
(b) The attack roll is for the final (or only) normal attack he is entitled to make on his turn, or
(c) The attack roll is for the final (or only) offhand attack he is entitled to make on his turn.

A character does not necessarily risks a fumble with the last attack he actually makes; if a character is entitled to three normal attacks but only uses two of them, he does not risk fumbling that round. Characters engaged in two-weapon fighting can be at risk of fumbling with two attacks, their final normal attack and their final offhand attack.

However, a low-level character with two weapon fighting--one normal attack and one offhand attack--would be at risk of a fumble with both attacks.



Rule #2. Extra attacks and attacks of opportunity, because they allow a character to push beyond his normal limitations, are always at risk of a fumble.



Rule #3. Natural attacks never risk a fumble unless the creature has lost their Dexterity bonus to AC, in which case it is at risk of a fumble on its final (or only) natural attack.



Rule #4. Fumble threats are adjudicated similar to a critical threat. Following the natural-1 roll, the character must make a fumble check: a d20 roll with the same bonuses and penalties applying to the previous attack against a DC of 20. Success converts the fumble threat into a normal missed attack. Failing the DC results in a fumble. As expected, a natural 20 always succeeds, and a natural 1 always fails (and incurs the threat of a critical fumble).



Rule #5. A fumble event can take one of several random forms, appropriate to the circumstances of the attack, the weapon used, and the intended target of the attack. Roll d% on the following table, or use any other list of fumble events that you wish, which randomly determines the effect.

(01-17) User loses physical control of weapon. A creature or object in range other than the intended target (not including the user himself) is struck by the weapon for half damage.

(17-33) (melee and thrown weapons only) User's weapon may take damage or be broken at the moment of impact. The intended target (which can be an object) gains a free sunder attack against it. If the user adds his Strength modifier to the weapon's damage, this is added to the opponent's damage roll. The sunder does not count against the target's allotment of AOOs, and does not provoke an AOO. If the target has any enhancements to its ability to sunder, these still apply.

(34-50) (ammunition weapons only) The weapon fails under mechanical stress, dealing normal damage to itself plus the user's Strength modifier. In the case of a critical fumble, the weapon explodes violently in the user's hands, dealing its normal damage roll to him and is destroyed outright.

(51-67) User loses grip on the weapon in the midst of a swing or thrust. The intended target (which can be an object) gains a free disarm attack against it. The disarm does not count against the target's allotment of AOOs, and does not provoke an AOO. If the target has any enhancements to its ability to sunder, these still apply.

(68-83) Awkward posturing or overextension of a limb wrenches the character's body in the wrong way. The character takes 1d6 nonlethal damage and is sickened for 1d6 hours because of the distracting pain and overstressed muscles. If the character was already sickened from a previous fumble, an additional -2 penalty applies from the sickened condition and the character becomes stunned for 1 round.

(84-100) (slings, chains, lassos, nets, etc. only) User accidentally entangles himself with the weapon and must spend a move action remove the entangled condition from himself and the weapon.

If a generated fumble event is inappropriate to the situation, reroll.



Rule #6. A critical fumble threat is resolved in the same manner as a critical fumble and imposes the same kind of effects, but the weapon's critical hit multiplier applies to any die roll imposed by the critical fumble.



Rule #7. Fumble Immunities: at 6th level and every five levels thereafter (11th, 16th, 21st, etc.), a character gains immunity to a fumble event of his choosing. Thus, if the fumble event generated is appropriate to the situation but the user is immune, then nothing bad happens at all (other than the fact of automatically missing on the original attack). Creatures gain immunities to fumbles according to their HD in the same way.
 
Last edited:

Mad Hamish, I *think* you just proved my point. Why is that fighter +22 on the 4th attack? In your opinion what causes that?

What causes that is either
a) Too little sleep on my part or
b) looking at Iron Heroes too much (where some classes get up to 5 iterative attacks)

Now it depends what buffs and what feats (as well as gear and stat increases) the character has as to whether the numbers are better, worse or equal to the 1st level fighter in terms of crits.
Actually let's change the fighter to a Ranger or Paladin (who isn't smiting because he's fighting mooks) as Weapon Mastery does mean the fighter will almost certainly be less likely to fumble. The Paladin or Ranger not so much.

Now you can come up with a combination of feats and buffs that will make the character less likely to fumble but they depend on party composition and tactics as to whether they're reasonable.
 

Why does on fighter in your argument start with an 18 strength and the other start with a 16 (or a 14 and weapon focus)?

o.k. with that I'm opting for too little sleep...
The first level fighter should probably have +5 to hit

Also, a level 20 character might have items and buffs that allow rerolls and do-overs and have all kinds of death avoidance bonuses. So fumbling is less of a character ending moment.

Possibly, although I don't think there are that many items or buffs that allow rerolls on attacks and I'd rather not have to use them to avoid hurting myself.

And, looking at the chance of fumbling itself, 50% for L1 and 75% for L20 still ends up being a total chance of 2.5% and 3.75%. The odds of fumbling increase by a whopping 1.25% meaning you'll fumble one extra time in a 100 full attacks. How many encounters do you plan on running at L20? The game assumes 13 encounters per level, and if each was 4 rounds that would only be little over 50 attacks, and not every one would be a full attack.
Som between L20 and the theoretical L21 the fighter would have a 50/50 chance of fumbling one extra time more than he did at L1. And then only if they fought nothing but high AC pit fiends.

Apart from my maths just being wrong the claim was that a high level fighter would fumble less often than a low level one under the proposed confirmation system. I will now agree that Weapon Mastery makes it pretty likely to be true but the same is not necessarily true for a Paladin, Ranger or many other classes (although Smite or Favored Enemy could have an impact, assume they either aren't on for Smite or isn't in effect for favored enemy).
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top