D&D 5E How fantastic are natural 1's?

[commandercrud]

So what's your explanation? That 20th level fighter one of the best if not the best swordsman in the world, suddenly starts whipping his sword around randomly yelling "Look at me mom! I'm a fighter! Wo-hoo!"

If a fighter at the pinnacle of their craft can't go a single combat without fumbling (and at high level the odds are they will not) it's a stupid rule that significantly penalizes builds that rely on multiple attacks. Meanwhile it has no impact on casters that rely on saving throws of enemies, minimal impact on PCs that don't get multiple attacks and little or no direct impact on archers. It's a bad rule.

A 20th level fighter is assumed to be fighting appropriately skilled foes, so the odds of a fumble don't change.

 

[Oofta]

@Oofta

I'm not seeing your math. The odds of a level 20 fighter rolling a nat 1 on 4 attacks is less than 19%, not "up to 45%". Where are you coming up with 45%???

If you add the confirmation roll (as our table does), the odds of the confirmation roll failing is very low, compared to a low-level fighter.

At 20th level you get 4 attacks with a bonus attack if you use 2-weapon fighting. If you action surge that's 9 attacks in 1 turn, each with a 5% chance of a fumble.

As far as confirmation rolls, yes that is a way to mitigate the impact and is something I did try for a while myself. Ultimately I just found that it wasn't worth the overhead and it just slowed down the game. It still didn't really solve some of the issues either, primarily that a lot of casters don't ever do an attack roll and that a "fumble" for the archer types is really a penalty to the people engaging the enemy directly. The former there was no answer, the latter we made the archer re-roll to see if they hit. But it was still that poor schmuck fighter in melee that took the brunt of the damage.

If your group has fun with it, it doesn't matter if I think it's one of the dumbest common house rules out there. I might consider it with the confirmation roll, but I'd probably want to play a caster that never rolled an attack.

 

[Oofta]

A 20th level fighter is assumed to be fighting appropriately skilled foes, so the odds of a fumble don't change.

So a 20th level fighter doesn't roll multiple attacks? Each attack doesn't have a 5% chance of a fumble? That's not the game I play.

You do you. I think basic math makes this a stupid rule that penalizes one type of PC far more than others.

 

[DND_Reborn]

At 20th level you get 4 attacks with a bonus attack if you use 2-weapon fighting. If you action surge that's 9 attacks in 1 turn, each with a 5% chance of a fumble.

As far as confirmation rolls, yes that is a way to mitigate the impact and is something I did try for a while myself. Ultimately I just found that it wasn't worth the overhead and it just slowed down the game. It still didn't really solve some of the issues either, primarily that a lot of casters don't ever do an attack roll and that a "fumble" for the archer types is really a penalty to the people engaging the enemy directly. The former there was no answer, the latter we made the archer re-roll to see if they hit. But it was still that poor schmuck fighter in melee that took the brunt of the damage.

If your group has fun with it, it doesn't matter if I think it's one of the dumbest common house rules out there. I might consider it with the confirmation roll, but I'd probably want to play a caster that never rolled an attack.

Ah!, Ok, action surge and bonus action for 9 attacks... I was just assuming the default 4. But even with 9 attacks, it is just shy of 37%. Is that high? Sure is! But 9 attacks in six seconds IS a lot IMO. Also, that is something they can do twice per short rest, which isn't often IME. Also when you consider that is only possible for a level 20 fighter... shrug

Now, I agree without a confirmation roll, I wouldn't like it either. The confirmation roll does allow the skill factor to make up for it. By level 20, a fighter will likely be +13 due to magic weapons, fighting styles (like archery), etc. This means they can only fail the confirmation roll on another natural 1 for a mishap, and another natural 1 for a disaster! FWIW that means only about a 2.22% (about 1 in 44) chance for a mishap out of 9 attacks and less than 0.1125% for a disaster (about 1 in 890!).

Even making 9 attacks, that is much lower than a level 1 fighter using the same system.

But, to repeat, yes, I would not like a fumble system without confirmation rolls or it does hurt PCs with extra attacks.

 

[commandercrud]

So a 20th level fighter doesn't roll multiple attacks? Each attack doesn't have a 5% chance of a fumble? That's not the game I play.

You do you. I think basic math makes this a stupid rule that penalizes one type of PC far more than others.

This has nothing to do with multiple attacks. Melee combat is dangerous. Swords flinging around is risky no matter how skilled you are, especially when the opponent is equally skilled. It is clearly much safer to be far back with a bow or nothing at all.

 

[Oofta]

This has nothing to do with multiple attacks. Melee combat is dangerous. Swords flinging around is risky no matter how skilled you are, especially when the opponent is equally skilled. It is clearly much safer to be far back with a bow or nothing at all.

Being in melee getting hit by your enemy is dangerous. An expert swordsman should not be at a higher risk of dropping their sword than someone who has never picked up a sword in their life.

It's as stupid rule and I'm done arguing with you. Have a god one.

 

[Oofta]

Ah!, Ok, action surge and bonus action for 9 attacks... I was just assuming the default 4. But even with 9 attacks, it is just shy of 37%. Is that high? Sure is! But 9 attacks in six seconds IS a lot IMO. Also, that is something they can do twice per short rest, which isn't often IME. Also when you consider that is only possible for a level 20 fighter... shrug

Now, I agree without a confirmation roll, I wouldn't like it either. The confirmation roll does allow the skill factor to make up for it. By level 20, a fighter will likely be +13 due to magic weapons, fighting styles (like archery), etc. This means they can only fail the confirmation roll on another natural 1 for a mishap, and another natural 1 for a disaster! FWIW that means only about a 2.22% (about 1 in 44) chance for a mishap out of 9 attacks and less than 0.1125% for a disaster (about 1 in 890!).

Even making 9 attacks, that is much lower than a level 1 fighter using the same system.

But, to repeat, yes, I would not like a fumble system without confirmation rolls or it does hurt PCs with extra attacks.

Not sure how you get 37% on 9 attacks. There's a 5% chance on each and every swing of a fumble, unless you're assuming the fumble stops every subsequent attack? Which ... I guess it might. Also makes it an even harsher penalty.

In any case, like I said, I did try a variation of your confirmation rule and it worked okay but still didn't address all of the issues. Typically ranged attackers that roll a 1 hit an ally. Frequently they automatically hit an ally no matter what that ally's AC is, which honestly is penalizing the ally not the archer.

I guess I simply have different ways of adding excitement to the game, if there's only a 1 in 144 chance of failure at what point does it become effectively no chance and not worth rolling?

 

[R_J_K75]

Very few players remember when the Rogue succeeds on a Sleight of Hand check when pick-pocketing the Watch Commander to filch a couple of SP.

Not a skill check but still funny. I was DMing one of the 2E adventures in the FR Spellbound boxed set, I forget which one. The adventure was unremarkable at best but the only reason I remember it was because of one natural 20 a player rolled. The players wander into the refugee camp, I think in Thesk on the Golden Way trade route. Pretty sure they were recovering from the Tuigan Horde invasion. The trend here is that my recollection is pretty vague on the whole setup but as the players make their way through the camp they are approached by a gruff man in full platemail, Lord Simgarde whos a paladin. He starts giving the players the business about knowing their kind, adventures and their propensity to cause trouble, he's watching them. Players tell him to go screw himself. After Simgarde walks away 30'-50', one of the PCs picks up a rock and whips it at him, called shot to nuts, NATURAL 20, dents in his cod piece and he drops to his knees. As hes writhing on the ground another PC blasts him with a lightning bolt. Lord Simgarde knowing discretion is the better part of valor retreats, albeit disgraced...to go get reinforcements. It was hilarious as they caught him by surprise and it happened so quick, we didnt stop laughing for quite awhile. I'll never forget that NPCs name because of that nat 20.

 

[Oofta]

On a side note, I do sometimes add extra color to failures for skill checks if someone fails the DC by 10 or more. So if the party is sneaking, someone knocks over a metal cup which causes a pot to tip over which causes a loud cascade of a dozen pots, pans and glassware to fall to the floor.

But it doesn't matter if they missed by that much because they rolled a 1 or a 5.

 

[R_J_K75]

As a DM, I'll use critical fails on 1s for skill checks and fumbles on attacks occasionally, but only if I can come up with something unique that adds to the game. Its not an auto fail or fumble though.