Variant Rules from the DMG, for Combat in My Campaigns
- Thread starter Azlan
- Start date
JiffyPopTart
Bree-Yark
I think that your numbers for the DC of the reflex saves to avoid a fumble are too high. In my game I do much the same excpept the reflex save is a flat DC10 for everything. Starting heros will fumble occasionally, but once they have a little proficiency the fumbles are few and far between. I can't really see how a 20th level fighter with no dex bonus and a greatsword (Reflex save of +6 but needs a DC21 save) should fumble as often as you have him fumbling. A 20th level fighter fumbling should be a yearly event.
DS
DS
CRGreathouse
Community Supporter
Azlan said:
A 19-20/x4 weapon (6 crit units*: x1 -> x4 on 20, x1 -> x4 on 19) is better than a 17-20/x2 weapon (4 crit units: x1 -> x2 on 17-20), even when a 17 hits (which would make 19-20/x4 even better).
With your keen, the heavy pick becomes proportionally better: 12 vs 6 crit units, with less chance for waste (the lower end of the rapier's threat range is useless if it doesn't hit).
Azlan said:
Double the base threat range. 19-20/x4 is just as powerful as 15-20/x2, in terms of average damage. Low crit multiplier means that you're more likely to have a pinched threat range, but you're less likely to 'waste' damage on a creature about to drop -- though Cleave helps a bit here.
* Crit units: One 'crit unit' means that the weapon's damage is increased by 5%. Thus, a 19-20/x4 weapon deals, on average, 1.3 times what a comparable critless weapon would deal, assuming that its threat range isn't 'pinched'.
Li Shenron
Legend
Incidentally our DM has used different rules to try achieve the same purposes of your (except point 3), while when I am the DM I use standard rules for all of them.
1. Our DM uses Initiative every round. It was nice at first, but later became annoying. Furthermore it messes up the special initiative actions and it is slightly more difficult to keep track of spells duration.
Your way has no consequences of these sort. Seems to me that you are just trying to decrease variance of the Init rolls, so to make them more often close to average. You can also roll 2d10 to do the same. I don't understand why are you concerned this much about occasionally rolling very low or very high Init: it really isn't important whether one is the last because he rolled a 1 or because he rolled 19 and everybody else rolled 20, it only matters that he's the last. IMHO reducing the variance has not much consequences.
2. This house rule balances the weapons more, since every weapon has at least a threat range of 2. If this is what you wanted to achieve then it's ok, but remember that in general it will make combat last slightly less and would empower weapon damage against spell damage. If that's ok for then do it.
Our DM increased frequency of criticals by skipping the confirmation roll, that is if you score a threat then it is automatically a crit. It is a very bad house rule IMHO.
3. I think this is a variant in the DMG (except that you can't choose, you always roll), and in fact there's nothing wrong with it, just that it increases randomness. If you like it, why not?
4. Different rules for rolling, but our DM uses fumbles too. I really dislike them, so I am very biased against it. They are funny for some time, then they lose their in-character fun and become annoying. Higher level PCs do many more attacks and are therefore exposed to more fumbles: your rule bases them to Reflex saves which makes them less likely at higher levels, but still you are going to roll many times for nothing.
If you really like the idea of fumbles, I strongly recommend you to add another roll in between: after a natural 1, let the PC roll a confirmation check (just like with criticals). It will require one more roll admittedly, but it will make them even less probable.
1. Our DM uses Initiative every round. It was nice at first, but later became annoying. Furthermore it messes up the special initiative actions and it is slightly more difficult to keep track of spells duration.
Your way has no consequences of these sort. Seems to me that you are just trying to decrease variance of the Init rolls, so to make them more often close to average. You can also roll 2d10 to do the same. I don't understand why are you concerned this much about occasionally rolling very low or very high Init: it really isn't important whether one is the last because he rolled a 1 or because he rolled 19 and everybody else rolled 20, it only matters that he's the last. IMHO reducing the variance has not much consequences.
2. This house rule balances the weapons more, since every weapon has at least a threat range of 2. If this is what you wanted to achieve then it's ok, but remember that in general it will make combat last slightly less and would empower weapon damage against spell damage. If that's ok for then do it.
Our DM increased frequency of criticals by skipping the confirmation roll, that is if you score a threat then it is automatically a crit. It is a very bad house rule IMHO.
3. I think this is a variant in the DMG (except that you can't choose, you always roll), and in fact there's nothing wrong with it, just that it increases randomness. If you like it, why not?
4. Different rules for rolling, but our DM uses fumbles too. I really dislike them, so I am very biased against it. They are funny for some time, then they lose their in-character fun and become annoying. Higher level PCs do many more attacks and are therefore exposed to more fumbles: your rule bases them to Reflex saves which makes them less likely at higher levels, but still you are going to roll many times for nothing.
If you really like the idea of fumbles, I strongly recommend you to add another roll in between: after a natural 1, let the PC roll a confirmation check (just like with criticals). It will require one more roll admittedly, but it will make them even less probable.
Dalamar
Adventurer
Ah, but a greataxe isn't a one-handed weapon, is it? I missed that point before, but comparing weapons of a different size together doesn't really serve our purpose very well since they have other factors counting in, such that the magical plusses of a two-handed weapon are likely to be a smaller amount of the total damage due to the virtue that the character has a higher strenght (if not, why on earth is he bothering with the +1 or +2 to damage over a shield bonus to AC?).Azlan said:
And you don't really want to make small people pay more for their plusses, do you? Their weapons do less damage, so they benefit from from the plusses, don't they?
Last edited:
Li Shenron said:
I think the method I presented here is a good compromise between those who want to roll initiative every round, and those who want to roll only once at the beginning of an encounter. And, yes, the end result of my compromise is to decrease the variance of the initiative rolls. Rolling 2d10 for initiative could, indeed, accomplish the same thing, but I think my method is no more complex or time consuming than that; and besides, my method is in keeping with the use of d20s for all rolls other than damage.
Okay, here is a revision of rules variant #4, "Fumbles"...
Whenever you roll a natural 1 on an attack roll, you not only automatically miss your target, but there is a chance you will fumble.
You must roll a check to avoid a fumble. A fumble check is a d20 roll plus the same attack bonus you would've applied to the previous roll, if you had not rolled a natural 1. The DC for a fumble check is simply the AC of the target of that failed attack roll.
If you fail a fumble check, you must spend a move equivalent action on your next turn to recover. Until you've recovered, you're considered to be stunned, i.e. you lose your Dex bonus to AC (if any), and foes gain a +2 attack bonus against you.
Whenever you roll a natural 1 on an attack roll, you not only automatically miss your target, but there is a chance you will fumble.
You must roll a check to avoid a fumble. A fumble check is a d20 roll plus the same attack bonus you would've applied to the previous roll, if you had not rolled a natural 1. The DC for a fumble check is simply the AC of the target of that failed attack roll.
If you fail a fumble check, you must spend a move equivalent action on your next turn to recover. Until you've recovered, you're considered to be stunned, i.e. you lose your Dex bonus to AC (if any), and foes gain a +2 attack bonus against you.
Grayhawk
First Post
My fumble rules are pretty similar - only difference is that my confirming roll is against a set DC of 15.Azlan said:
My consequences of a fumble:
For non-weapon wielders: If the fumble occurs while still having any actions left in the same round you lose these. If it occurs as the last thing in a round, you're restricted to a partial action on the following round.
For weapon wielders: You drop your weapon in an adjacent square - for medium sized creatures roll d8 to see in which one. If the fumble occurs at the start of a round you may try to pick it back up using a ME, subject to AoO's.
Special: If you drop your weapon you may immediately (as a free action) try to catch it. This requires a ref save vs DC 15 and it provokes AoO's from those threatening you.
ciaran00
Explorer
Azlan said:
Hey, no problem with that.
I roll only once an encounter, but use the initiative phase rules from Spells and Powers. It's not as simple as fixed positions in the initiative chain, but it prevents caster types from electing to walk around undefended simply because casting time is no more. My particular contribution to combat speed is in eliminating stupid 3e AoO rules; boy does it progress fast without them.
My particular variant on S&P is rolling over the Initiative DC (whatever I decide it to be) speeds you up by a phase. A botch slows you down by one.
I use the crit charts from Combat and Tactics: they accounted for size vs. size as well as weapon types vs. creature types. Spell crits from Spells and Powers are nice too
This one's a bit puzzling... and yeah I can see where it can really bog combat down.
Totally. "Just misses" are just silly.
ciaran
