| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
Knight of Argenis
Corim Danex
Warlord
6567 Posts
    
West Valley City, Utah
 | | 01/31/2007 1:50 PM |
| Generally, with a failed fumble, the most common result for when I DM is that the weapon is dropped.
I don't think that fumbles resulting in broken weapons would happen very often, so I don't have that as an option on my table.
My question is, after someone rolls a 1 and fails the dexterity save of DC 10, what do you folks do? What are some of the different fumble charts out there?
I am looking to improve upon my current system.
My system is--
Natural 1 gets rolled by attacker.
Attacker gets DC10 Dex save to have no ill effect other than failed attack.
If attacker fails Dex save, then DM rolls d10.
1-wpn drops in attacker's sq
2-8 wpn goes into square in given direction, with 2 being directly away from DM when DM is in "home" position. If wpn goes into ally sq, roll damage.
10-attacker hits himself, rolls damage
For ranged attacks, the results are slightly different
1-drops bow
2-8-the arrow would go in direction. If it's an ally that is lined up with line, then attacker rolls another attack roll against ally's flatfooted AC. If it hits, roll damage
10-attacker hits self and rolls damage
I don't think my system is the best, as I said. I am looking for more ideas. | |
"Look to God and live." Alma 37:47
Ha 80/80---De 60/60---Ar 60/60---GoL 72/72---Ab 60/60---Dk 60/60---Af 60/60---Ud 60/60---WD 60/60---WDQ 60/60---BW 60/60---UH 60/60---NB 60/60---DDe 60/60---SSB 59/60 (Does anyone want to buy my SSB collection?)
Champion of Something, I imagine I will think of something
Vindicated Champ of Hippogriff (Arcadian Hippogriff) and Uncommon Horse | |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 01/31/2007 2:15 PM |
| I actually do fumbles as circumstances dictate. They're totally arbitrary, but rather rare.
For example, if someone is in a precarious position, rolling a 1 is likely to yield a DEX check to avoid fumble. Such situation occur if fighting while scaling a wall, while fighting in a quick-moving stream, while jumping on someone, and so on. Also, if a character declares that he puts more into his attack than usual or some such declaration (usually only for RP purposes), rolling a 1 might result in a fumble check. I do that myself as a DM occasionally, showing that a NPC is becoming very angry during combat and at one point explodes with warcries or the like, if i roll a 1 at that point a fumble check will be made.
Sky
p.s.: i assume you're aware of the fact that systematic fumble checks on rolls on 1 on the d20 penalize the most skilled warriors, since they'll end up rolling up more 1's than anybody else, right? I don't use automatic fumbles for that reason, although i'd like to. | |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
jacksonm
Warlord
5560 Posts
River City
| | 01/31/2007 2:22 PM |
| | My general policy on fumbles is when a 1 is rolled the player rolls again. A second 1 would would result in some kind of critical fumble apropriate to the situation. Other rolls I play off as a weapong throw/drow or just a temporary loss of grip. | | | |
|
Wraithborne
Commander
3440 Posts
West Virginia
| | 01/31/2007 2:22 PM |
| My system is even simpler
Roll fumble, check Dex.
If fails, weapon goes 1d4-1 squares in a random direction, with a roll of 0 being your square. I don't have any damage caused.
For missile weappons, same procedure, but a failed roll results in a misfire, broken string or something similar, depending on the weapon. | |
Hey Woman, Hey Woman!! Listen here. Since your ol' man ain't got no heart, maybe you'd like to see a real man. I bet you stay up late every night dreamin' you had a real man, don't ya'? I tell you what, bring your pretty little self over to my apartment tonight and I'll show you a real man!
Ghouls: 1 Player Characters: 0 | |
|
Wraithborne
Commander
3440 Posts
West Virginia
| | 01/31/2007 2:28 PM |
| Posted By jacksonm on 01/31/2007 2:22 PM
My general policy on fumbles is when a 1 is rolled the player rolls again. A second 1 would would result in some kind of critical fumble apropriate to the situation. Other rolls I play off as a weapong throw/drow or just a temporary loss of grip.
I can't help but read all of your posts with Ralph's voice in my head  | |
Hey Woman, Hey Woman!! Listen here. Since your ol' man ain't got no heart, maybe you'd like to see a real man. I bet you stay up late every night dreamin' you had a real man, don't ya'? I tell you what, bring your pretty little self over to my apartment tonight and I'll show you a real man!
Ghouls: 1 Player Characters: 0 | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 01/31/2007 3:18 PM |
| | I don't use fumbles. Increasing randomness in a way that tends in the long run to hurt PCs more than monsters isn't a good idea, IMO. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
gss_000
Commander
3204 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 01/31/2007 3:59 PM |
| | That's how I feel, myself. It also lengthens the game in a way that does not increase fun to the players and is more hurtful to higher level characters. The more you roll, the more often you are going to get that 1. I used to play with the fumble rule in 1st and 2nd ed but gave it up in 3rd. | |
Completed trades: blackthorne, Drakkengi,Thorgrin, Ironfist Boulderbender x2, ckissee, nasamonkey, Username, Star, Ace13 x3, emontedodger x2, Drconveyor, church, Joeyb, Sir Bozak The Damned, Xeromod, the other guy x2, Qucalion of Celene, Dagaron x2, berus316, qillan_dvra, AshloreDarkShadow
For further info go to My Reference Thread and Trade Interface
Champion of Radiant Sevant | |
|
Star
Sergeant
978 Posts
New Britain, CT
| | 01/31/2007 10:33 PM |
| I use fumbles as the circumstances dictate. Usually it results in a dropped or maybe even thrown weapon, maybe the weapon is swung and misses hitting a wall and getting stuck, maybe overswinging giving the opponent a free attack of opportunity.
I like to descibe the combat somewhat to try and make it more interesting than just bonuses to hit and armor class - fumbles give me more of an opportunity to change things up a little bit. They're inconvenient for my PC's (and monsters) but I can't recall a time that they've been deadly. Players die from being stupid - not from rolling a fumble. | |
Champion of Gromph Baenre | |
|
gss_000
Commander
3204 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 01/31/2007 11:48 PM |
| I like that. I think when I'm playing with younger PCs, I describe the combat more like that. As long as it doesn't detract from PC enjoyment, I think it is all good and DMs should addd/subtract/stick with any rule they want to.
What you describe, Star, is something that I sometimes forget when I'm DMing my 10000th game, but it is important and really evocative for the players. Combat should be more than the numbers. Personally, I just think since fumbles only effects PCs they are not worthwhile. But that is just me. Your mileage may vary. | |
Completed trades: blackthorne, Drakkengi,Thorgrin, Ironfist Boulderbender x2, ckissee, nasamonkey, Username, Star, Ace13 x3, emontedodger x2, Drconveyor, church, Joeyb, Sir Bozak The Damned, Xeromod, the other guy x2, Qucalion of Celene, Dagaron x2, berus316, qillan_dvra, AshloreDarkShadow
For further info go to My Reference Thread and Trade Interface
Champion of Radiant Sevant | |
|
Wraithborne
Commander
3440 Posts
West Virginia
| | 02/01/2007 5:53 AM |
| Posted By gss_000 on 01/31/2007 11:48 PM Personally, I just think since fumbles only effects PCs they are not worthwhile. But that is just me. Your mileage may vary.
Dice hate me....my bad guys suffer from the effects of fumbles far more often than the PCs. | |
Hey Woman, Hey Woman!! Listen here. Since your ol' man ain't got no heart, maybe you'd like to see a real man. I bet you stay up late every night dreamin' you had a real man, don't ya'? I tell you what, bring your pretty little self over to my apartment tonight and I'll show you a real man!
Ghouls: 1 Player Characters: 0 | |
|
gss_000
Commander
3204 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 02/01/2007 9:53 AM |
| It always feels that way doesn't it? Or maybe you have factual evidence. You should train your dice better and/or punish one to show the others you mean business. Either that or you broke up a set and now need to give them all up. 
| |
Completed trades: blackthorne, Drakkengi,Thorgrin, Ironfist Boulderbender x2, ckissee, nasamonkey, Username, Star, Ace13 x3, emontedodger x2, Drconveyor, church, Joeyb, Sir Bozak The Damned, Xeromod, the other guy x2, Qucalion of Celene, Dagaron x2, berus316, qillan_dvra, AshloreDarkShadow
For further info go to My Reference Thread and Trade Interface
Champion of Radiant Sevant | |
|
notserious
Sneak
117 Posts
| | 02/01/2007 10:40 AM |
| I suspect that many of the long-time DM's have gone through the following - there was a period where I sought out more exactitude from the combat system, including criticals and fumbles. As someone else has mentioned, I hated the fact that a determination based purely on natural 20s and 1's meant there was no advantage to being a skilled fighter in how often criticals and fumbles happened. To offset this, I used an open ended rolling method - a natural 20 meant you could keep rolling (and adding) more d20's as long as you rolled 20, similarly, on a 1 you rolled again ans started subtracting the results in an open ended fashion (so that rolling a 1 then a 20 then a 13 resulted in a roll of -32). I then had rules about what being really over or under your required to hit roll (this was back in the day of THAC0) determined what type of critical or fumble you'd get. this meant that those with more skill, were less likely to fumble and more likely to crit.
I was reasonably satisfied with the system, but found it slowed down the game - so when 3.X had a simple crit system and no fumbles, I decided it was a place where simplicity of play outranked realism for me. (don't get me started on an older system I toyed with where criticals and fumbles were based on the damage roll as a percentage of the creatures hp's - that was torturously long).
But if you are going to keep the fumbles and want expert fighters to be more immune, then I would suggest it be a level check, or BAB based, or an open ended roll moderated by the to hit bonus.
| |
| |
| Knight of Argenis
Corim Danex
Warlord
6567 Posts
West Valley City, Utah
| | 02/01/2007 10:42 AM |
| Posted By gss_000 on 01/31/2007 11:48 PM
Personally, I just think since fumbles only effects PCs they are not worthwhile.
Why wouldn't creatures also fumble? I have seen many orcs, etc. drop weapons and be in a bind before.
A lot of times, PC's can carry a second wpn around to draw (which does not provoke AoE) and attack with.
If creatures don't have wpns, there could be a different penalty (tripping, etc.)
| |
"Look to God and live." Alma 37:47
Ha 80/80---De 60/60---Ar 60/60---GoL 72/72---Ab 60/60---Dk 60/60---Af 60/60---Ud 60/60---WD 60/60---WDQ 60/60---BW 60/60---UH 60/60---NB 60/60---DDe 60/60---SSB 59/60 (Does anyone want to buy my SSB collection?)
Champion of Something, I imagine I will think of something
Vindicated Champ of Hippogriff (Arcadian Hippogriff) and Uncommon Horse | |
|
gss_000
Commander
3204 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 02/01/2007 10:59 AM |
| Well, not only PCs, just that it has more of an effect on PCs since they do a lot more dice rolling than NPCs. You deal with any NPC maybe once or twice in combat, and then it's dead or irrelevant in most games. Even if they miss an action from a fumble, they don't loose as much as PCs. Monsters have other attacks that loss of a weapon is not that bad. It just means it dies as soon and maybe doesn't do as much damage to PCs. Tripping has the same effect i my view.
But since PCs are in combat after combat, the loss of a full round (assuming they have more than one attack) or even just less damage output can be critical, especially if they have to use a suboptimal weapon for the situation. That extra round or two that might cause can be deadly especially if fighting a monster that is hard to hit or has a lot of hit points.
That's what I meant by "only effects PCs." Fumble rules, to me anyways, have disproportionate affects on PCs and therefore I don't lke to use them. But that is just me. | |
Completed trades: blackthorne, Drakkengi,Thorgrin, Ironfist Boulderbender x2, ckissee, nasamonkey, Username, Star, Ace13 x3, emontedodger x2, Drconveyor, church, Joeyb, Sir Bozak The Damned, Xeromod, the other guy x2, Qucalion of Celene, Dagaron x2, berus316, qillan_dvra, AshloreDarkShadow
For further info go to My Reference Thread and Trade Interface
Champion of Radiant Sevant | |
|
nyjastul69
Commander
2710 Posts
Rhode Island
| | 02/01/2007 11:39 AM |
| Posted By notserious on 02/01/2007 10:40 AM
I suspect that many of the long-time DM's have gone through the following - there was a period where I sought out more exactitude from the combat system, including criticals and fumbles. As someone else has mentioned, I hated the fact that a determination based purely on natural 20s and 1's meant there was no advantage to being a skilled fighter in how often criticals and fumbles happened. To offset this, I used an open ended rolling method - a natural 20 meant you could keep rolling (and adding) more d20's as long as you rolled 20, similarly, on a 1 you rolled again ans started subtracting the results in an open ended fashion (so that rolling a 1 then a 20 then a 13 resulted in a roll of -32). I then had rules about what being really over or under your required to hit roll (this was back in the day of THAC0) determined what type of critical or fumble you'd get. this meant that those with more skill, were less likely to fumble and more likely to crit.
I was reasonably satisfied with the system, but found it slowed down the game - so when 3.X had a simple crit system and no fumbles, I decided it was a place where simplicity of play outranked realism for me. (don't get me started on an older system I toyed with where criticals and fumbles were based on the damage roll as a percentage of the creatures hp's - that was torturously long).
But if you are going to keep the fumbles and want expert fighters to be more immune, then I would suggest it be a level check, or BAB based, or an open ended roll moderated by the to hit bonus.
I've seen this system used before. We used a system very close to the current one. If a nat 20 was rolled you made another roll and if it was high enough to hit the AC you did double damage. Essentially, every weapon had a threat range of 20/x2.
What I currently do with fumbles: if a player rolls a 1, another roll is made and if he fails to hit the AC it's a fumble. The severity of a fumble is determined by how much the AC is missed by.
gss_000 is correct about fumbles being harder on PCs than NPCs. I let my players decide if they wanted to use fumbles or not, and they chose to use them. | |
You know, I keep thinking that after the new design team gets done with D&D 4e, D&D won't stand for Dungeons and Dragons anymore, because well, that's just not fun. It's old and stuffy. - Originally Posted by BabWryter on Kenzerco.com | |
|
gss_000
Commander
3204 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 02/01/2007 2:26 PM |
| I let my players decide if they wanted to use fumbles or not, and they chose to use them.
I like this attitude so much I thought I would highlight it. I said it before but I'd like to say it again, if it's good for your group it's okay. | |
Completed trades: blackthorne, Drakkengi,Thorgrin, Ironfist Boulderbender x2, ckissee, nasamonkey, Username, Star, Ace13 x3, emontedodger x2, Drconveyor, church, Joeyb, Sir Bozak The Damned, Xeromod, the other guy x2, Qucalion of Celene, Dagaron x2, berus316, qillan_dvra, AshloreDarkShadow
For further info go to My Reference Thread and Trade Interface
Champion of Radiant Sevant | |
|
Dordledum
Commander
3107 Posts
Netherlands
| | 02/02/2007 5:48 AM |
| totally depends on the situation. In combat: depends on the opponent, etc. sometimes something happens, sometimes it doesn't. Skill checks more often provide entertaining anecdotes, >.
D. | |
Member of the Bearded Devils
Champion of the Huge Spider (WotDQ 46/60), A New Umber Hulk (DoDe 57/60), and Hardcopy Printed DDM 2.0 Stat-Cards for all Minis! | |
| 
Vrecknidj
Warlord
10104 Posts
United States
| | 02/02/2007 7:01 AM |
| Proviso: I've never been in a swordfight.
I would think that fumbling weapons in combat wouldn't be all that likely. I had a DM who said that any natural 1 resulted in a critical miss table being consulted. After one day of adventuring, everyone in our group had something wrong (arms in slings, broken legs, incapacitated hands, etc.) it was terrible.
However, requiring two consecutive 1s might be a little less often than is realistic. For a character with a BAB up to +5, most combat rounds are accompanied by one attack roll. The odds of getting consecutive 1s are roughly 1-in-400, so, that would be 400 rounds of combat. But, that's not 400 conseuctive rounds (talk about a long fight!).
If there are 5 encounters in a day, and each lasts 10 rounds, then it will take 8 days for each combatant to reach this point.
Fumbling a weapon once in 8 days worth of combat could be realistic, but, I'm thinking that expertly trained folks will see it happen less often (sure, an infantryman's gun can jam, etc., but I'd imagine a member of the SEALs isn't dropping his knife all that often). So, the Dex check isn't a bad idea. Being trained would include being trained not to drop things. However, the Dex check doesn't really improve for most folks as they get higher level.
I don't really know how to go about changing it though. A Ref save isn't really called for here (though that would deal with the "higher level guys should have a better chance" issue). Adding the BAB as a modifier to the roll makes it impossible for higher level combatants to fail this roll (at DC 10).
Maybe the DC should be flexible? In some circumstances, the DC for retaining a hold on the weapon might be 15 or 20 (or, conversely, 5).
Dave | |
Knowledge Arcana editor issues 5-9, Phoenix Lore Magazine editor, assistant editor for Rite Publishing;
My Trade Thread and My Reference Thread; Winner of WBC IV, IX and XIII; Rule #0: bshugg is always right! | |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 02/02/2007 8:44 AM |
| I'm surprised that the discussion revolves mostly around whether fumbles disadvantage the PCs or their opponents most. Although a relevant point, the question of the irony of the fumble rules is mostly as follows, in my opinion:
Fumbles are supposed to realistically represent something that can turn bad in combat. However, in a given number of rounds, using the rule that a natural 1 equals a "fumble threat" (dex check or not, depending on the game) will yield that the most skilled fighters will fumble most often, on an absolute count. For me, this dichotomy is counter-intuitive. It's a statement that "to obtain realism, i'll use a rule that's unrealistic".
Not only that, but mechanically speaking, it'll nerf the fighters and fighter-types with higher BABs, thus relatively strengthening the other classes and in particular the wizards and sorcerors that have no fumble possibility on their spells if they don't wear armor.
So although i would not be adverse to a fumble system, i think it MUST take into account the experience of the person wielding the weapon (and possibly other parameters). For example, the fumble check could be related to the BAB, although this only partly alleviates the problem as long as a natural 1 triggers a fumble threat on an attack roll.
Sky | |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
gss_000
Commander
3204 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 02/02/2007 11:04 AM |
| | That is a factor. I touched on it on an earlier post, he more you roll, the more often you are going to get that 1. but you explain it very well.
Joel Rosenberg in one of his books (the one about the kid from Minnesota who goes to a fantasy world, but not the Guardian of the Flame series) talks about the difference between the various fencing styles and how each one adequately represents a certain aspect of real life fighting, yet fails in others. I think that is the case with all game system. Each one has a certain set of assumptions that allows it to adequately represent some things but since it is not real doesn't others.
Thinking about this more, you can say that fumble rules were a lot more appropriate realism-wise when a combat round represented a minute, not 6 seconds. Having done some boffer fighting (not anywhere realistic, PVC and closed cell foam does not equal steel), I could drop a sword when I was fighting for long periods of time of the order of minutes but for the first 30 seconds it rarely happened and then usually after several matches.
Really, how do you represnt that? All the ways presented capture that in some way, but really fail in others as some have mentioned. | |
Completed trades: blackthorne, Drakkengi,Thorgrin, Ironfist Boulderbender x2, ckissee, nasamonkey, Username, Star, Ace13 x3, emontedodger x2, Drconveyor, church, Joeyb, Sir Bozak The Damned, Xeromod, the other guy x2, Qucalion of Celene, Dagaron x2, berus316, qillan_dvra, AshloreDarkShadow
For further info go to My Reference Thread and Trade Interface
Champion of Radiant Sevant | |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 02/02/2007 12:22 PM |
| How do you realistically represent fumbles? After thinking this over, here's an idea.
At the outset, i've approached this with the view that i don't want to add another roll in addition to the attack roll to keep things simple, and i don't want to penalize the most skilled fighters who roll more often. It appears contradictory unless, we change the DC of the fumble check proportionally to the BAB... or more simply, to the number of attacks!
The fumble DC could be divided by the number of attacks a creature gets, rounded up. For instance, if the DC for a fumble check is normally 11 on the d20 (50% chance for a creature with no DEX modifier), and if the creature has 2 attacks, the DC would be 6 instead of 11. If the creature has 3 attacks, the DC would be 4. And so on.
It would be easy for high-level, agile fighters to circumvent fumbles altogether, since an 11th level fighter with +3 dex modifier would need only a second 1 to fumble. Which makes sense to me anyway, fumbling 1/400 attack rolls. I would rule that a natural 1 on the fumble check is an automatic fumble.
So, in summary, the fumble check would be as follows:
- if you roll a 1 on any attack roll, you have a "fumble threat"
- you then roll a fumble check, equal to d20 + DEX modifier against DC = (X divided by maximum number of attacks per round of creature, rounded up)
where X is the base DC you want to put on the fumble check, for example 11.
Of note: for the maximum number of attacks value, i think i would not take into account flurry of blows or two-weapon fighting bonus, but this would be up for discussion, together with the entire suggestion herein.
Also, i realize that the natural 1 on the fumble check equaling an automatic fumble remains disadvantageous for high-level fighters, but i can live with that in the 1/400 odds. I have more trouble in the approx. 1/40 odds of the more conventional fumble check (1 on attack roll, then dex check vs DC = 10).
Final comment: one good thing about this system is that the fumble check DC for a given creature remains the same until it levels enough to gain a new attack. So every PC, for instance, could be provided with his fumble check DC and roll it quickly when applicable.
How's that?
Sky | |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
Sulaco
Underboss
1605 Posts
| | 02/02/2007 2:20 PM |
| Posted By Wraithborne on 01/31/2007 2:22 PM
My system is even simpler
Roll fumble, check Dex.
If fails, weapon goes 1d4-1 squares in a random direction, with a roll of 0 being your square. I don't have any damage caused.
For
missile weappons, same procedure, but a failed roll results in a
misfire, broken string or something similar, depending on the weapon.
My system is simpler still:
• If you roll a nautral 1 roll again.
• If you roll a natural 1 the second time then the DM adlibs some amusing but innocuous situation-appropriate occurence.
| |
Champion of the Gelatinous Cube. Nemesis of Gnomes and Dinosaurs.
Over the centuries, mankind has tried many ways of combating the forces of evil... prayer, fasting, good works and so on. Up until Doom, no one seemed to have thought about the double-barrel shotgun. ~ Terry Pratchett | |
|
kestrel.ca
Underboss
1671 Posts
| | 02/02/2007 3:00 PM |
| In my system, I've created a table which includes 5 possible outcomes: drop weapon, fall, damage weapon, provoke attack of opportunity, twist ankle (reduce mvmt rate for 1d4 rounds). Each outcome also has a saving throw to negate. I also have a few different levels to add some variety. Each time a combatant rolls a 1 (PC or enemy) I roll a d20 and consult the table. The table might look like this (I don't remember exact numbers off the top of my head):
1-2: Drop Weapon, Reflex 10 negates, lands d6 feet away
3: Drop Weapon, Reflex 12 negates, lands d10 feet away
4: Drop Weapon, Reflex 15 negates, lands d20 feet away
5-6: d6 damage to weapon [almost impossible to do actual damage conisdering most weapon hardnesses]
7: d10 damage to weapon [these weapon damage results have snapped a number of bow strings, though]
8: d20 damage to weapon [hey, every weapons gonna fail sometime; hasn't happened yet though]
9-10: Twist ankle, Fort 10 negates, reduce movement by 5 feet, 1d4 rounds
11: Twist ankle, Fort 12 negates, reduce movement by 10 feet, 1d6 rounds
12: Twist ankle, Fort 15 negates, reduce movement by 10 feet, 1d8 rounds
13-14: Fall, Reflex 10 negates, Fort 10 avoids stun
15: Fall, Relfex 12 negates, Fort 12 avoids stun
16: Fall, Reflex 15 negates, Fort 15 avoids stun
17-18: Provoke Att of Opp, Reflex 10 negates
19: Provoke Att of Opp, Reflex 12 negates
20: Provoke Att of Opp, Reflex 15 negates
The features I like is that most of the saving throws are generally low and should not normally be a problem (except for the greenest of adventurers). As the players advance in level, they fail less and less often, even on their fumbles. Additionally, by using different saving throws, I'm not penalizing PCs with low Reflex saves more than others. Typically, passing a fumble check allows me to spice up the combat description somewhat: "Overextending yourself on your attack, you slip on a patch of moss and narrowly avoid falling," or, "swinging wildly at you, the goblin chips his blade on the wall, leaving an impressive display of sparks." The consequences are varied enough to be interesting, and minor enough that they should almost never be the turning point in any combat. | |
Completed Trades/Transactions: 91 || Pending Trades: 0 || Bad Trades: 3 (Chaotic Good x2, MackeyV) | |
|
Oryan77
Sergeant
951 Posts
| | 02/02/2007 5:53 PM |
| I've actually never liked the idea of using fumble rules myself. These guys are experienced warriors with their weapons, I would like to think they know how to hold onto their weapons by now. I know fumble checks add spice to the combat, but that's just my thought on it.
But I know that has nothing to do with the question and I didn't add anything to the thread
| |
Miniatures for sale *more added 07/17/08*: Click here
I will buy your unwanted D&D WotC minis collection (DDM only). Email me your asking price! | |
|
nyjastul69
Commander
2710 Posts
Rhode Island
|
| 02/03/2007 1:33 PM |
| Posted By gss_000 on 02/01/2007 2:26 PM I let my players decide if they wanted to use fumbles or not, and they chose to use them. I like this attitude so much I thought I would highlight it. I said it before but I'd like to say it again, if it's good for your group it's okay.
As a matter of fact they also voted to use the massive damage rules. This has resulted in 2 character deaths (same player) and not a single beastie death. There's just too much 1st/2nd Ed. in them.
Edit: I should mention that I use a modified action point system from Unearthed Arcana. | |
You know, I keep thinking that after the new design team gets done with D&D 4e, D&D won't stand for Dungeons and Dragons anymore, because well, that's just not fun. It's old and stuffy. - Originally Posted by BabWryter on Kenzerco.com | |
|
zenthrus
Commander
4680 Posts
SLC, UT
| | 02/03/2007 2:33 PM |
| My group ran fumbles (natural 1 + Dex check) for many years. Recently we've come to the conclusion that while occasionally humorous, they're usually just frustrating.
Having spent a lot of time in melee combat (LARP, SCA, martial arts) weapon fumbles by people who are trained and skilled in weapon use are incredibly few and far between. | |
Knight Warlord a.k.a. Commander (#32) in only 6 months. Where's my pie?
Champion of Dwarven Thunderlashers
Knight of the Large Dire Chicken
Have/Want List
Trade References | |
|
Anaxagoras
Warrior
306 Posts
| | 02/13/2007 11:33 AM |
|
Having spent a lot of time in melee combat (LARP, SCA, martial arts) weapon fumbles by people who are trained and skilled in weapon use are incredibly few and far between.
Until you add in blood coating your hands and a bladed weapon biting into bone.
Depending on how grim you want your game, fumbles are very appropriate: sweat, mud, bad footing, twisted wrists, gore and body parts hacked about...I use a method similar to Sulaco-A Natural 1 prompts some situation appropriate test, maybe a balance test to avoid slipping, a dex check to avoid a broken blade. My players enjoy the fear (I also run a hidded HP game as well), and in rewards people who take skills and abilities besides merely focusing on a 20 strength and power attack...
| |
| |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 | You must be signed in to participate in the
games. |