Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Critical Fumbles: Need Help Convincing DM
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Friend of the Dork" data-source="post: 5452061" data-attributes="member: 91954"><p>Ah yes it could be indeed and it was almost what I hoped Dragonlance meant (when in fact he was just being unclear <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue :P" data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" /> ). The only drawback is that creatures with multiple same bonus attacks must still differentiate which die is the first rolled, or just roll one die before the other attacks. </p><p></p><p>But would you keep the confirmation check? If you do, then the chances would be so small you might not even bother using fumbles at all on higher levels, while on low level the fumbles would be 5% of the attacks which is too high. </p><p></p><p>Also while BAB is an example of skill at arms, having multiple attacks from other scources is not entirely that. Rapid shot allows you to shoot faster, not more accurately, and should not decrease the chance of fumbling (if anything the chance should INcrease). Same thing with Two-weapon or multiweapon fighting, or Flurry. </p><p></p><p>Which is why I still prefer a confirmation system based on total attack bonus for the attack in question. </p><p></p><p>Confirmation test for crits make sense - someone in heavy armor or extremely dodgy will be harder to hit a sensetive location. Not so with fumbles however, why would it be easier to stumble just because your foe has a shield and full plate? Thus I beleive Confirmation test for fumbles should be based on a set DC instead. 15 Seems to be the typical "challenging" test, and attack DC 15 is pretty much 50/50 for a first level warrior type. </p><p></p><p>If you think this is too hard then you could set it at DC 10. That could still mean fumbling at low levels while would very quickly become impossible to fail. As an option you could always have 1 as automatic failure so that you COULD fumble at 20th level with 2 consecutive 1s.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Friend of the Dork, post: 5452061, member: 91954"] Ah yes it could be indeed and it was almost what I hoped Dragonlance meant (when in fact he was just being unclear :P ). The only drawback is that creatures with multiple same bonus attacks must still differentiate which die is the first rolled, or just roll one die before the other attacks. But would you keep the confirmation check? If you do, then the chances would be so small you might not even bother using fumbles at all on higher levels, while on low level the fumbles would be 5% of the attacks which is too high. Also while BAB is an example of skill at arms, having multiple attacks from other scources is not entirely that. Rapid shot allows you to shoot faster, not more accurately, and should not decrease the chance of fumbling (if anything the chance should INcrease). Same thing with Two-weapon or multiweapon fighting, or Flurry. Which is why I still prefer a confirmation system based on total attack bonus for the attack in question. Confirmation test for crits make sense - someone in heavy armor or extremely dodgy will be harder to hit a sensetive location. Not so with fumbles however, why would it be easier to stumble just because your foe has a shield and full plate? Thus I beleive Confirmation test for fumbles should be based on a set DC instead. 15 Seems to be the typical "challenging" test, and attack DC 15 is pretty much 50/50 for a first level warrior type. If you think this is too hard then you could set it at DC 10. That could still mean fumbling at low levels while would very quickly become impossible to fail. As an option you could always have 1 as automatic failure so that you COULD fumble at 20th level with 2 consecutive 1s. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Critical Fumbles: Need Help Convincing DM
Top