Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wyvernhand" data-source="post: 6014443" data-attributes="member: 97681">The only strawmen in this argument are the training dummies that have a random chance of killing a professional soldier.&nbsp; I see people who like critical fumbles defending their points, and people who don't like them expounding on their reasoning.&nbsp; That's how arguments work.And casters ARE totally a part of the conversation, because they are a part of the game, and they do not suffer from the same mechanical &quot;houserule&quot; as proposed by the PHB.And I don't see how fumbles change the round-to-round flow of combat.&nbsp; Again, if they happen infrequently, then they aren't really changing the combat often.&nbsp; If they happen frequently, they are more likely to hamstring the PCs because statistically speaking, a single PC swings more often than any given single NPC over the lifetime of that PC.&nbsp; If it happens infrequently, or the consequences are minimal or easily negated by another check or roll, why even have it?&nbsp; All you are doing is forcing every melee PC to make sure they can automatically make a DC 10 balance check, or make a DC 12 Ref save, or whatever.&nbsp; Smart players will design their melee oriented PC to minimize this danger and you've just created yet another hoop to jump through and added needless complications to an already complicated game, or they will suffer, potentially get frustrated, and reroll a wizard or other non-weapon oriented PC like SotS did.I'm sorry, I'm still not convinced that critical fumble rules (or, by extension, massive damage save rules) add anything meaningful to the game.&nbsp; They are either high impact and often unfun, not to mention difficult to believe, or they are a minor aspect of the game, another rule to remember but seldom actually use.And if you want immerse, round by round dynamic combat where balance, parrying, stance, etc comes into play, try playing a more rules-lite game.&nbsp; D&amp;D just doesn't carry the chassis to support that type of play, sad as that is.&nbsp; If you want to create a whole in-depth set of rules to handle it in a fair, balanced, yet non-trivial way, good on you.&nbsp; I'd rather just ignore the fact that that rule even exists and move on with my game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wyvernhand, post: 6014443, member: 97681"] The only strawmen in this argument are the training dummies that have a random chance of killing a professional soldier. I see people who like critical fumbles defending their points, and people who don't like them expounding on their reasoning. That's how arguments work. And casters ARE totally a part of the conversation, because they are a part of the game, and they do not suffer from the same mechanical "houserule" as proposed by the PHB. And I don't see how fumbles change the round-to-round flow of combat. Again, if they happen infrequently, then they aren't really changing the combat often. If they happen frequently, they are more likely to hamstring the PCs because statistically speaking, a single PC swings more often than any given single NPC over the lifetime of that PC. If it happens infrequently, or the consequences are minimal or easily negated by another check or roll, why even have it? All you are doing is forcing every melee PC to make sure they can automatically make a DC 10 balance check, or make a DC 12 Ref save, or whatever. Smart players will design their melee oriented PC to minimize this danger and you've just created yet another hoop to jump through and added needless complications to an already complicated game, or they will suffer, potentially get frustrated, and reroll a wizard or other non-weapon oriented PC like SotS did. I'm sorry, I'm still not convinced that critical fumble rules (or, by extension, massive damage save rules) add anything meaningful to the game. They are either high impact and often unfun, not to mention difficult to believe, or they are a minor aspect of the game, another rule to remember but seldom actually use. And if you want immerse, round by round dynamic combat where balance, parrying, stance, etc comes into play, try playing a more rules-lite game. D&D just doesn't carry the chassis to support that type of play, sad as that is. If you want to create a whole in-depth set of rules to handle it in a fair, balanced, yet non-trivial way, good on you. I'd rather just ignore the fact that that rule even exists and move on with my game. [/QUOTE]

Verification