SoldierSolidus's page

I have my own system for crits and fumbles that's been adapting over the years depending on the players needs. After reading this thread I've gotten a few ideas that I'd like to implement.

I don't think of fumbling as a way of punishing, more like a way for balancing. 20 is always a hit while 1 is always a miss. Following that a confirmed 20 is always a crit while a confirmed 1 is always a fumble of some kind.

Aldaara: I like this idea for a spellcaster fumble/crit system, but what happens for aoe effects?

Stome: I see where your coming from and I can respect your opinion, but please stop with the poorly veiled insults. They only serve to distract from any constructive discussion.

Everyone: A more respectful tone goes a long way. (sorry for being so preachy, I don't know whats come over me)

That's a good question. It would be kind of silly to see a burning hands that crits on one and fumbles on another. One guy holds up a shield that reflects the fire while the other gets his eyes burned out of their sockets. The rules I posted need some work, but I think it's a start.

EDIT:

Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

On the previous page I posted proof that a fighter with 8 attacks (from haste, BAB+16, Greater TWF) Would roll a fumble threat 160 times over 400 full attacks, and confirm 53 of those fumbles. The farmer with a single attack would threaten a fumble 20 times over the same period, and confirm a fumble 19 times.

And this is assuming that the fighter only needs to roll a 2+ to hit with his primary attacks, and that the farmer needs a nat 20.

As I said, 53 is greater than 19, showing that 'a fighter won't ever be worse off' as very far from true.

Did you also post proof of how many of those 400 attacks would be critical threats? We'll even be nice and assume he's using a weapon with only a Nat 20 crit range.

Funny thing is, those characters only have a 5% chance to not confirm the crit.

"Stop wasting time!" Aldaara barks out at Horfil and Leotian. "Feel free to play dog trainer on your own time, but not on mine. Taking an animal, feral such as he is, is frankly too dangerous for the rest of us. How are we to know when the mutt will bite the hand that feeds it? Perhaps he will grow hungry during the night and plan to have a bite, when it's the dog's turn to 'keep watch'."

She turns to Kensington, and stretches out a hand. Speaking somewhat more calmly to her, she asks "May I have that blanket now, please?"

Hehe, barks. No pun intended.

Hard to say. Tell him he's being a prick? Honestly this just seems like the kind of game you should just walk away from. Punishing players for a reason such as that makes for a terrible GM. I don't know the situation, but if you're not having fun, what's the point?