Fumble House Rule

[Kid Charlemagne]

I thought I'd toss this house rule that I use in my campaign. I've always felt if you have criticals, you should have fumbles, too. However, it's important not to overdo it.

So, here's what I use.

If you roll a natural 1, you have to make a fumble check. The Fumble Check is an attack roll (at the PC's current attack bonus) vs. DC 15. A natural 1 on the Fumble Check is always a Fumble.

This has seemed to work very well over the course of a couple of years of use. Doesn't happen too often, but happens often enough to make it interesting.

We've played it to this point that a failed fumble check results in a dropped weapon in a square adjacent to the PC's square. I'm toying with the idea of adding a couple other possibilities, such as adding a third step (this part is untested):

On a failed fumble check, roll d6.
1-3: Drop Weapon
4: Provoke an AoO.
5: Roll damage against yourself (weapon dmg only/2) - I figure it's tough to get your full strength bonus against yourself...
6: Roll damage against your own weapon, using your full weapon damage plus modifiers, as if making a sunder attempt.

Thoughts?

 

[Shalewind]

Love the table. The only problem I see is the same problem I see with every fumble system, natural ones increase in probability with more attacks. Just to give you an idea:

+1 attack gives a final chance to fumble of 3.25% a round.

+6/+1 attacks gives a 5.185% chance per round.

+20/+15/+10/+5 gives a 3.7108% (if 1 is always a fail) and 3.2275% (of 1 isn't an auto fail).

+11/+11/+6/+1 gives a 6.6% chance per round.

So mid level fighters and those that use two weapons fumble more often. If this doesn't bother you, great! More power to you, as I said I love the table.

And just so you know, this is the best fumble system I have seen statistically.

 

[DonAdam]

I do something similar, but I make the "anti"-confirmation roll DC the AC of the target.

Depending on how much the confirmation roll misses, I use a chart on the Kingdoms of Kalamar DM screen to determine what nastiness happens to them.

I does, indeed, increase the number of crit failures at high levels, but since hit points are such a huge cushion and I prefer the chaos of low level combat, it has worked out well.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I do something similar, but I make the "anti"-confirmation roll DC the AC of the target.

I debated doing that, and here's the rationale I used in making the decision to make it a straight DC 15:

I figure a fumble is more about a failure on the part of the fumbler than a success on the part of the opponent. Also - should I be more likely to fumble fighting a man in armor than fighting the same man, not wearing armor?

An argument can be made either way, I just chose the way I did it.

Also, there was some debate on making the Fumble Check a Reflex Save. I decided against that because it didn't make sense for a rogue to be better at not fumbling than an expert fighter...

Shalewind: I see your point - but I don't mind the slight increase. In my experience, high level fighters don't get to use their full attacks all that often - maybe 30% of the time would be my guess. They drop their foes too quickly, or are put into situations where they have to do a lot of moving, thus getting only one attack. I just finished a campaign where the PC's were about 12th level (and we had two two-weapon fighters) and over the course of a year or so, they only fumbled two or three times each.

 

[willpax]

If you are having the fumble confirmation roll versus a fixed DC, you could always combine your severity table with it to make the severity of the fumble dependent on the degree of failure on the roll (and if the confirm roll is a 1, have them roll d20 and subtract from their attack bonus to determine the number).

I think provoking a AoO might be less severe than dropping a weapon in many circumstances, so that might be the primary result of a fumble. You also might consider different probabilities for fumbles with ranged weapons and melee weapons.

 

[DonAdam]

For me, it's a toss up between a fixed DC and the armor class.

I figure if you're trying to hit someone in heavy armor you're having to aim rather precisly, which might mean taking more of a risk. But either rationale works.

The important thing, I think we can agree, is the existence of a confirmation roll, to help out high level characters.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

The important thing, I think we can agree, is the existence of a confirmation roll, to help out high level characters.

I agree 100%. It's kind of funny - back in the late 80's the group I gamed with came up with a crit/fumble system that used a confirmation roll to verify a crit or a fumble - way back in 1st edition. I was jazzed when 3e came out and they had adopted something similar.

I think provoking a AoO might be less severe than dropping a weapon in many circumstances, so that might be the primary result of a fumble. You also might consider different probabilities for fumbles with ranged weapons and melee weapons.

I'm not so sure about that - IMC, both two-weapon fighters carry a backup blade, and one of them can quick draw, so losing a weapon isn't a massive blow. On the other hand, against some foes, taking a AoO by a skilled opponent at their top attack bonus is a good way to take 15-20 or so points of damage. I think I'd rather drop the weapon, myself...

 

[Kusuf ibn Zaid]

In my campaign we also use a confirmation roll for fumbles. However, this roll is actually a Reflex save (fixed DC 10) to avoid fumbling. I intentionally set the DC low such that fumbles rarely happen at mid to upper levels.

- Kusuf

 

[MarauderX]

I like the chart, but I feel you are missing something - weapon breaks. It's a pain for most players to then spend the move equal action to get another weapon (if they have one), but on the plus side it doesn't do damage to them. I use a similiar rule for fumble, but the more the PC misses the DC the greater the penalty. It ranges from dropping a weapon to breaking it to stunning yourself for 1d4-1 rounds to injuring yourself for 1/2 weapon damage.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I like the chart, but I feel you are missing something - weapon breaks.

That's what the "sunder vs. your own weapon" part is for. I suppose you could also use a Break DC which (I think) is listed in the DMG. If damage done is more than the Break DC, then the weapon breaks. I just figured doing it as a sunder attempt would be simpler...