Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nytmare" data-source="post: 4956605" data-attributes="member: 55178">I think that at it's pinnacle, my group's AD&D crit and fumble charts (built if memory serves on the bones of the Rolemaster and Arduin crit and fumble tables) were a bound book that involved the following series of charts: attack/weapon type (Sword?  Acid sword?  Flaming acid sword swung two handed while on horseback?) > creature type (basically what limbs and appendages the victim had) > armor type > attack location (which was dictated #1 by whether you were attacking from the front/rear/sides/above/below, and #2 whether or not you were aiming or making a called shot for a specific part of the body) > and then, depending on how much damage you did (broken down perhaps by levels of 10?) you rolled on one of 80 different chart for the effect.It was silly and stupid, and for some ungodly reason the thought of it STILL fills me with insipid gamer glee.  Crit charts just seem like a good idea to some base animalistic part of my brain and I have never been able to figure out why.  One of the first house rules we talked about instituting with my 4E group was a rewrite of our 3rd Edition charts.If we were to do a crit chart, it would be something close to what you have; but, we've had the talk like 4 or 5 times since we started the campaign, and even though everyone likes the idea of having one, we've talked ourselves out of it every time.</blockquote>