The Crimson Binome
Hero
I don't remember those rules particularly well. Can anyone learn a new language during down time, as they can with tools?
Trying to make 5e more oldish and want some people's opinions
TheCosmicKid
Hero
Yes. Using either the core rules or the streamlined Xanathar's system.
Azzy
ᚳᚣᚾᛖᚹᚢᛚᚠ
I recall this as well, and I don't remember who suggested it either LOL. But, that was the consensus for my group. They are all level 4 now, and by the time they finish the adventure they will be 5th. That was the point we all agreed to review and revise the file I have been building regarding house-rules.
But, that being said, a few changes I've ruled (as DM) from the beginning, such as Dragonborn having a Speed of 25 and not 30. My take is I want them a bit slower moving in my world. The player was fine with it. Everyone is happy!
Cool! I hope you and your group continue to have a lot of fun going forward.
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
I recall this as well, and I don't remember who suggested it either LOL. But, that was the consensus for my group. They are all level 4 now, and by the time they finish the adventure they will be 5th. That was the point we all agreed to review and revise the file I have been building regarding house-rules.
But, that being said, a few changes I've ruled (as DM) from the beginning, such as Dragonborn having a Speed of 25 and not 30. My take is I want them a bit slower moving in my world. The player was fine with it. Everyone is happy!
We use a similar system. A natural 1 requires a Dex check (or weapon dropped), but this is always assumed to be a proficent check (so higher level characters are less likely to fail). If that fails, a second check is required, with failure on the second check meaning the character falls prone. Since natural 1's aren't that common, it isn't all the time and doesn't really slow things down much.
On crits, we use the double dice RAW for now, but in the past I changed it to max damage (so no roll needed). I don't know if I will bother changing it in the future as double dice works fine.
As to the OP, if you make a Table, I would suggest having the roll adjusted by level, decreasing the likelihood of serious fumbles, etc. as level increases.
GAH! I get that probability is tricky and it's easy to fool yourself into thinking you've made something uncommon, but the above system isn't doing what you think it is. I'm assuming that you're using a DC10 DEX check? If you're not, then this is really, really not doing what you think it is.
Okay, I'm going to introduce you to a probability concept using a binomial distribution called 'as least x times.' Binomial distributions are good for known probability events to determine what the individual odds for a given number of event to take place over a number of trials. Like, say the odds of rolling 1 and only 1 fumble if you make 20 rolls (37.7%). If you take the odds of rolling 1 one and add it to the odds for rolling 2 ones... up to 20 ones in 20 rolls, you get the cumulative distribution for what the odds of rolling at least one 1 on 20 rolls (64.2%).
So, if we have a fighter who makes 20 attacks, there's a 64.2% chance they'll roll at least one fumble. When they do this, and there's a 20% chance they fail a DC 10 DEX check (+2 DEX, +3 proficiency, fail on 4 or less), then the chance they'll drop their weapon in 20 attacks is 12.8%. The chance they'll fall prone is 2.6%. That may sound good, but let's say this is a dual weilding figher, making twice as many attacks -- in 40 attacks the at least one numbers are: fumble: 67.1%; drop weapon: 17.4%; fall down 3.5%. This holds at low level, but what about higher?
A level 11 fighter is +4 prof with 3 attacks a round. Over the same time, that's 60 attacks. We're assuming they're not adding to DEX with ASI as STR and CON are important still, so that's a +6 on the DEX check. At DC 10, that's fail on 3 or less or 15%. The numbers now are: fumble: 95.4%; drop weapon: 14.3%; fall down: 2.1%. Things don't get much better. If this a that dual wielder making 80 attacks the numbers go to 98.3%, 14.7%, and 2.2% respectively.
So, a funny thing to note about 'at least' probabilities is that as the number of trials grows, the peak of the distribution moves up. For the level 11 fighter, the at least twice numbers in 60 attacks are 12.1% to drop their weapon at least twice and 1.8% to fall down at least twice. The 80 attacks is worse, with 13.7% to drop at least twice and 2.1% to fall down at least twice.
Now, here's the thing, I really don't expect the DEX check DC to be 10. To be honest, most people who like critical fumble checks think it's because it makes the game harder, and harder is better, so I expect the actual DC is at least 15. Those odds really suck.
Level 1, 20 attacks, fail check on 10 or less (+4) -- drop 35.3%, fall down 19.5 %
Level 1, 40 attacks, fail check on 10 or less (+4) -- drop 47.9%, fall down 26.4%
Level 11, 60 attacks, fail check on 8 or less (+6) -- drop 39.2%, fall down 15.2%
Level 11, 80 attacks, fail check on 8 or less (+6) -- drop 39.3%, fall down 15.7%
Level 20, 80 attacks, fail check on 5 or less (+10) -- drop 24.6%, fall down 6.1%
These are all at least once chances. With a Fighter with a +4 DEX at 20th level making attacks for 20 rounds (a reasonable fighting day) they'll drop their weapon at least once one in every four fighting days and fall down once every 18 fighting days. That's a best case, because most fighters will not have a +4 DEX, even at 20th level.
W
WhosDaDungeonMaster
Guest
Well, obviously you put a lot of work into this, so, regardless of anything else I appreciate that. I don't have time to check your numbers since I am about to work two 12-hours shifts, but probably Sunday.
Until then, giving it a quick glance, it looks like you didn't factor in my comment that these checks are always considered proficient. So, for instance, at Level 17+, given a Dex 14 with a +2 modifier and +6 proficiency bonus (total +8 to the check), the character will only drop their weapon on a 1. Note, a Dex 16 or higher at level 17+ (prof bonus +6) always makes there check since their total bonus is +9 and rolling a 1 still makes the DC 10 check. At any rate, with the +8 described earlier (Dex 14 or 15), the player would have to roll a Natural 1 for the attack, then roll another 1 for dropping their weapon, and then another 1 to fall prone. That is only 1 in 8000. Even with the vast number of attacks possibly over the course of some days... you aren't likely to see a tier 4 character with a good Dex drop their weapon or fall down very often.
Some people play checks of 1 always fail and 20 always succeed, but that isn't RAW.
If you have the time and want to rerun your binomial distribution with the proficiency bonus applied, I'll be pleased to see how it works out. Oh, and FYI, I am extremely well-versed in statistics and probabilities, so don't disappoint me if you run the numbers. 
Harzel
Adventurer
Yeah, but to me the analogy does not seem apt. A common view is that an "attack" is the one swing out of many (or at least several) during a round that has a chance to connect. By extension, I think of "extra attack" as having two of your swings have a chance to connect - not making more swings. So then a constant chance of fumble per attack looks like "you have a greater chance to fumble because out of the same number of swings, more of them were good". Doesn't seem right.
I suppose one might conceive that the fumble becomes possible only when the swing is strong and committed enough to constitute an attack, but honestly at that point it sounds a bit like one is just reaching for any fiction that will justify nat 1s being fumbles.
The Crimson Binome
Hero
I must have missed the part where you said this was a Dex check. That's the sort of detail which is likely to further skew the distribution of stats within the world, away from longswords and toward rapiers.
In my experience, fighters (and paladins) tend to wind up with either 20 Dexterity or 8 Dexterity, depending on their weapon of choice. My last fighter had a Dexterity of 5, and suffered appropriately on Initiative and saving throws, but there's no way I would have played that character under this house rule. I'm already struggling against the system by choosing Strength in the first place, and the last thing I need is to be kicked even further down when I miss an attack roll.
Harzel
Adventurer
Absent a more thorough understanding of how you construct encounters, I can't say for sure whether that is a bad (or good) idea. However, if your encounters are more or less in line with DMG guidelines, a level-appropriate band of monsters is already tends toward being weak. (This is a vast generalization, but then so is the quoted suggestion.) If you, say, increase monster DPR (or, equivalently, choose higher CR monsters with your trimmed-down HP) to compensate, then you move toward having glass cannon monsters and swingier encounters. For me, that is a very undesirable effect. YMMV.
Personally, I don't see any speed-of-play issues with combat generically*.
As to ability uses vs. rest rules...the two reasons that I can think of to adopt less generous rest rules are 1) to allow slower pacing, that is, more or less the same number of encounters spread out over a longer fictional time; or 2) to make the game harder by taxing PC resources. If it's (1), then availability of ability uses shouldn't change much, and if it's (2), well, then your suggestion just subverts the entire purpose of adopting the less generous rest rules. (!)
To the OP, I just reiterate for this suggestion what many have said for others - play it RAW for a good while first, then decide on what changes you want to make.
*At my table, combat is kind of slow because I have seven players, some of whom are sometimes indecisive, but those are different issues. And then there was the time that I gave them 2 NPC allies and a fight against 7 NPC opponents, all with class-like abilities. Yeah, I won't do that again very soon.
Last edited:
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
Well, obviously you put a lot of work into this, so, regardless of anything else I appreciate that. I don't have time to check your numbers since I am about to work two 12-hours shifts, but probably Sunday.
Until then, giving it a quick glance, it looks like you didn't factor in my comment that these checks are always considered proficient. So, for instance, at Level 17+, given a Dex 14 with a +2 modifier and +6 proficiency bonus (total +8 to the check), the character will only drop their weapon on a 1. Note, a Dex 16 or higher at level 17+ (prof bonus +6) always makes there check since their total bonus is +9 and rolling a 1 still makes the DC 10 check. At any rate, with the +8 described earlier (Dex 14 or 15), the player would have to roll a Natural 1 for the attack, then roll another 1 for dropping their weapon, and then another 1 to fall prone. That is only 1 in 8000. Even with the vast number of attacks possibly over the course of some days... you aren't likely to see a tier 4 character with a good Dex drop their weapon or fall down very often.
Some people play checks of 1 always fail and 20 always succeed, but that isn't RAW.
No, I did factor the proficiency bonus in, explicitly even called it out. It's right there man, more than once.
Are you saying that you use a DC10 DEX check, knowing that it's impossible for a DEX fighter to fail it as early as level 11? So, then, only critical fumbles for low level fighters? That would surprise me.
A level 20 fighter with a proficient DEX check of +8 (only fails on a 1) has a 5% chance of dropping their weapon at least once over an 80 attack day (20 rounds). Very little chance of falling down, only 0.2% chance. Amusingly, the odds of dropping your weapon twice in an 80 attack day is 4.6%, falling down 0.1%. An almost five percent chance of dropping your weapon at least twice is not what I expect from a legendary fighter unafraid of ancient red dragons.
Critical fumble systems are almost always worse that you expect. An explicitly punish fighters.
TheCosmicKid
Hero
If you're gonna be a math pedant then I get to be a word pedant: they don't explicitly punish fighters.
Similar Threads
