Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sir Brennen" data-source="post: 1295150" data-attributes="member: 553">The math makes it easier for things to go wrong, yes, but aren't you then punishing the fighter for using his class abilities?  Using fumbles this way  dissuades characters from ever using the full attack action, and causes fumbles to occur more often at higher levels if they do, which, either way, reduces the power of the fighter class significantly.  Better to only check on the first attack in a sequence, rather than penalize a fighter for doing his job.You ignored the fire-proof possiblity, DM control of circumstances, and the overall point that you provided a limited, specific solution to a general issue.And how does any of that translate into a reason to fumble more often against the tank? (Effectively) miss more often, yes, but fumble?Besides the point.  The less mobile tank is easier to hit, if not damage, as you pointed out.  This is all abstracted and simplified in the "you either hit or you miss" result of the attack roll.You use extreme examples to explain something you can't rationalize for more common cases?Even so, if the naked guy is just standing there, and he can't fight back, it's a Coup de Grace, and fumbles don't come into play.  If he's sane, then he's running for his life, and you once again have a more mobile target than the plate mail guy. Possilibity of fumbles for a number of reasons enter the picture, unrelated to his AC.Maybe our views of what a fumble is should be clarified.  From what I'm reading, your view is: if you hit something hard, the more likely your weapon is to bounce out of your hand.  Not unreasonable, but not my definition, which might be where our differences lie.Mine is: in the heat of fighting for your life, all manner of unexpected, unpleasant things can happen, and the better trained at fighting you are, the more likely you are to recover from such an event.  A fumble isn't just a really bad miss, a moment of clumsiness.  It's the guy trying to kill you swinging so hard he knocks the weapon from your hand, or cleaves it in two.  It's a slipping on the blood-soaked floor, or falling for an opponents subtle feint so that you leave yourself wide open.  It's the chaos of battle.Okay, maybe a little over the top, but you get the idea <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> So, I think you can see, from my perspective, the opponen't AC is just one of many possible factors which I abstract into a flat DC 15.Make sense?</blockquote>

Verification