Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ImBatman" data-source="post: 4131239" data-attributes="member: 53165">There is a huge problem with this &quot;confirming&quot; a fumble roll system using a follow-up miss check.Highly competent characters will &quot;fumble&quot; much more often (especially vs. formidable opponents), as their multiple attacks will have lower to hit rolls.&nbsp; Having more than one attack will statistically increase your chance to fumble!A Dragon vs a 15th level Paladin, both have decent &quot;to hit&quot; rolls and AC's.&nbsp; Both are heroic fantasy figures, very competent and deadly fighters, cool under pressure, etc.&nbsp; Now the Paladin rolls a &quot;1&quot; in combat and then is forced to roll a &quot;fumble&quot; check to confirm &quot;fumbling&quot; his sword swing.&nbsp; He is statistically much more likely to confirm the fumble versus a dragon (very high AC) than versus say a goblin (low AC).While it is more likely to miss the Dragon, but why with a fumble system would you want him to not only miss, but catastrophically botch his attack?&nbsp; Is that heroic or cinematic?&nbsp; And even versus the lowly goblin, why would you want to embarrass your player's 15th level Paladin with such a scene?&nbsp; Some will argue that with adversity a true hero still finds a way to succeed, but I think a well defined combat scene and foe will be enough.At low levels, some of this is okay, &quot;remember that time when we were just starting out when you swung your sword so hard it went flying in the air&quot;, (as long as other PC/NPC's aren't hurt), but I really think (IMHO) that it detracts from the &quot;heroic&quot; aspects of the game.I personally don't use any fumble system, players already really hate rolling a &quot;1&quot; for an automatic miss, no one finds it heroic to stab a friend, shoot an ally, etc.&nbsp; It may be realistic for simulating the chaos of combat, but it's not heroic, did Legolas ever miss and hit Gimli instead?&nbsp; Would you want him to?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ImBatman, post: 4131239, member: 53165"] There is a huge problem with this "confirming" a fumble roll system using a follow-up miss check. Highly competent characters will "fumble" much more often (especially vs. formidable opponents), as their multiple attacks will have lower to hit rolls. Having more than one attack will statistically increase your chance to fumble! A Dragon vs a 15th level Paladin, both have decent "to hit" rolls and AC's. Both are heroic fantasy figures, very competent and deadly fighters, cool under pressure, etc. Now the Paladin rolls a "1" in combat and then is forced to roll a "fumble" check to confirm "fumbling" his sword swing. He is statistically much more likely to confirm the fumble versus a dragon (very high AC) than versus say a goblin (low AC). While it is more likely to miss the Dragon, but why with a fumble system would you want him to not only miss, but catastrophically botch his attack? Is that heroic or cinematic? And even versus the lowly goblin, why would you want to embarrass your player's 15th level Paladin with such a scene? Some will argue that with adversity a true hero still finds a way to succeed, but I think a well defined combat scene and foe will be enough. At low levels, some of this is okay, "remember that time when we were just starting out when you swung your sword so hard it went flying in the air", (as long as other PC/NPC's aren't hurt), but I really think (IMHO) that it detracts from the "heroic" aspects of the game. I personally don't use any fumble system, players already really hate rolling a "1" for an automatic miss, no one finds it heroic to stab a friend, shoot an ally, etc. It may be realistic for simulating the chaos of combat, but it's not heroic, did Legolas ever miss and hit Gimli instead? Would you want him to? [/QUOTE]

Verification