|
Oh yeah...And rolling a 1 in combat being a "critical fumble".I use these. What's the problem? It's only a critical if confirmed, and the confirmed chances I use are very small. But now I'm hearing on various fora about people that dislike confirmation rolls. Have a ride in the wambulence.
Theres a reason its not in the core rules anymore.I'm not quite sure why that reason is.
This is explained somewhere in the core three in a sidebar, but to summarize, the logic goes like this:
(1) PC's are typically stronger than the foes they face or are equal to them
(2) Randomness favors the underdog
(3) Anything that increases randomness (including critical hits and fumbles equally) therefore tends to help the underdog more than help the stronger person.
(4) Critical hits and fumbles (a form of randomness) therefore aid the monsters more often than the characters, leading to unwarranted character deaths or other loss.
Many people attempt to argue with (2) above, either by disputing it outright or by saying that both parties are equally hampered and therefore the randomness cancels out. These are poor arguments. Point (2) can be shown to be true by simple thought experiments. For example, if you had to fight Mike Tyson, all things being as they are, he would destroy you outright in a single punch. Your only hope of victory lies in an insane fluke; a critical, crushing blow he somehow fails to see or perhaps he slips on his own sweat (a critical fumble) as he throws that punch and knocks himself out. This is randomness favoring the underdog and there are many examples where this has happened in real life (e.g. WWII Battle of the Bulge had an unexpected streak of bad weather, grounding Allied planes and allowing the Germans to press their attack and nearly break the Allied advance).
Point (2) does not apply equally because of Point (1); the PC's are usually the stronger of the two forces and therefore anything that hampers both sides equally actually inequitably lowers the chance of PC victory relative to their foes.
In the end, the 3.x designers decided in favor of critical hits but against critical fumbles despite the inherent disadvantage players receive from critical hits because players love it when they crit and can accept, to a degree, when they are crit upon but find it much harder to accept bad consequences of critical fumbles. In the end, the randomness of the occasional critical hit was seen to raise the "funness factor" of the game; the same could not be said for critical fumbles and so they were taken out of the game.
|
I just don't get it. A 20 is an auto hit/possible crit but a 1 is an auto miss/auto fumble. I know some of you houserule a confirmation roll but why would it be more than the threat range of the weapon? I rolled a 1 on the dragon then rolled a 12 and missed the dragon so my sword hits me in the neck? That's ridiculous.
If I HAD to use critical fumbles I would use the reverse rules of critical hits. You have a threat range equal to your weapons threat range (think about those keen kukris now!) at the low end and if you threaten to critically fumble you need to reconfirm before anything happens, and the worst that should happen (IMO)should be falling prone, dropping your weapon, or being stunned for a round. No severed limbs attacks on your buddy, broken magic sword, lose an eye, Crit yourself, etc. A child might do those things if you hand them a flail, but a trained warrior who has carried his flail for a while shouldn't have an eyepatch, fingers missing, self inflicted scars, and end his career by caving in his own skull. That is just....again.....ridiculous.
Point (2) does not apply equally because of Point (1); the PC's are usually the stronger of the two forces and therefore anything...
Wow - the best argument I've seen against 4th Edition yet...
The PCs are NOT usually the stronger force; or at least shouldn't be - they should generally be equal to their foes. Maybe not on an individual encounter basis, but over the course of the adventure it should even out - there should be a few enemies who severely tax the abilities of the party, and a few who are cake-walks.
But 4E says they're the stronger force, so it must be true...
If you adhere to the CR system, PC's generally are the stronger force. The easiest example is that there are usually 4 or more PC's of a given level. One NPC of the same level is a balanced encounter by CR. And by RAW he even has less gear than a typical PC of the same level.
This is explained somewhere in the core three in a sidebar, but to summarize, the logic goes like this:(1) PC's are typically stronger than the foes they face or are equal to them
(2) Randomness favors the underdog
(3) Anything that increases randomness (including critical hits and fumbles equally) therefore tends to help the underdog more than help the stronger person.
(4) Critical hits and fumbles (a form of randomness) therefore aid the monsters more often than the characters, leading to unwarranted character deaths or other loss.
That's an excellent explanation of why they removed critical misses. I don't agree with some of it, but excellent nonetheless. A few comments on 1-4:
1) I definitely don't agree with this one. Despite game developers tendencies to make humans and demihumans at or near the top of the D&D food chain, the fact is they're the food. Gain all the powers, spells, and gear you can, but all that makes you is an oyster instead of a shrimp. Much tougher to crack, but still soft and squishy inside once you break through that hard outer layer, and just as tasty.
That fact is one of the few, fleeting things I like about 3e. They put the monster back into monsters. More hps, fiercer powers, more raw damage done. Take away a human's weapons, armor, magic, and trinkets, his best weapon left is harsh language.
2)You're definitely right on the randomness favoring the underdog, but let's not kid ourselves here. The odds are unilateral across the board if critical fumbles are ran fairly. Creatures fumble too, and I've yet to meet a player that doesn't get a kick out of a creature breaking his weapon, claw, or tooth off on a critical fumble result. I'm not talking the ridiculous results. I'm talking results that would make sense for the attack that's attempted. Believable results. Losing your next attack, hesitating, delayed initiative next round, injuring a claw or tooth, etc. Fumbles don't have to be campy or ridiculous; they can be just as fun when they turn out to be inconveniences.
|
I've yet to meet a player that doesn't get a kick out of a creature breaking his weapon, claw, or tooth off on a critical fumble result.
Pleased to meet you, Varl. Now never say that again.
8-)
Seriously, I don't much care for that as a player. I think it detracts from the heroic nature of the sort of game I prefer to play, in a way that a critical hit by either side doesn't.
Pleased to meet you, Varl. Now never say that again.8-)
Seriously, I don't much care for that as a player. I think it detracts from the heroic nature of the sort of game I prefer to play, in a way that a critical hit by either side doesn't.
Ok, ok. I knew as soon as I wrote that there'd be someone... ;)
I admit it's not for everybody, but I admit I like a scaling system where they eventually disappear based on your character's skill. I also like that natural 1s are to natural 20s as cursed magic items are to magical items. I also think they add to the game, as long as they're not fatal, obviously. They often can redefine a character in interesting (negative) ways on a "I went to Dragon Mountain, and I got this ugly brow scar and lost my left eye" kind of level.
I know that's a terrible fate to befall a character *gasp*, seeing how some people think heroes should be immaculate and pristine even at 21st level, but like them or not, they can and do help define a character too.
They often can redefine a character in interesting (negative) ways on a "I went to Dragon Mountain, and I got this ugly brow scar and lost my left eye" kind of level.
My reply to this would be: that's what critical hits are for. I agree- I think it's cooler and (Gods, I hate to use this term) more "realistic" to have a battle-scarred fighter than an immaculate one. But how heroic is the warrior you described when everyone learns he got that scar and lost his eye when he or his buddy accidentally threw their weapon across the cavern they were fighting in? Not so grand.
Rather, that type of stuff, IMO, is the role of the critical hit. When the ogre or the wyvern or even the dragon gets a critical on you, that is when you pick up those character-defining scars and wounds (although in the case of the dragon, all you're likely to get is a coffin, assuming there's anything left to bury).
I agree with Doug. Having the monster wound itself on a fumble strikes me as rediculous and majorly disrupts the game for me.
Oh, and in regards to PCs being more powerful than their foes. Some people seem to be objecting to this. I don't get it. If the PCs aren't marginally more powerful than their opponents, then how are they supposed to make it through a campaign? Every fight would be super lethal, party members would be extremely temporary due to constant death, plot lines would constantly be derailed.
Note that being more powerful doesn't mean invincible. If the party has a 65% chance of winning an encounter, they're still the more powerful faction in that encounter. Yet there is also a sizeable chance they are going to lose. I would say the PCs actually have in the 90-95% range of winning most encounters. Hard fights drop this into the 80s, and really hard fights, such as the most lethal of BBEGs (or perhaps some demons, most dragons, etc.), would usually lower this into the 70s, maybe even the 60s.
Those are gut-feeling figures, so please don't flay me, math people! I'm just trying to prove a point.
The party must be more powerful than their opponents for the game to work. That doesn't mean every fight is a cakewalk; it doesn't deny challenge. It's just a fact of the matter (assuming the DM isn't some type of gleeful PC-killer).
That's why the logic sequence about removing critical fumbles works.
Take away a human's weapons, armor, magic, and trinkets, his best weapon left is harsh language.
Ya! If you deny an adventurer everything that makes him an adventurer, he's not an adventurer! Awesome. It's just like if you took away a dragon's claws, bites, breath weapon, spells, and scales, all that's left is a lizard with lots of HP!
Take away a human's weapons, armor, magic, and trinkets, his best weapon left is harsh language.
Unless he's a Monk.
Or has the Vow of Poverty.
Or both.
(And whatever happened to all that oft-quoted bilge about a warrior's true strength coming from his will/belief in self yadda yadda yadda?)
Ya! If you deny an adventurer everything that makes him an adventurer, he's not an adventurer! Awesome. It's just like if you took away a dragon's claws, bites, breath weapon, spells, and scales, all that's left is a lizard with lots of HP!
Well, not really, if you take the scales away you have pile of uncontained organs sloshing around all over the floor. I assume you meant the diamond-hardness of the scales rather than the actual scales in toto (or you have to then remove the skin from the human for fairness).
And the aforemention warrior bovine excrement applies equally to dragons, right?
That and the fact they still weigh several tons and could therefore kill you just by sitting on you...
|
Saern is right on... Those who say that the PCs aren't more powerful than the monsters are suggesting that every single encounter in their games has a 50/50 chance of victory for the PCs. So in a typical day of 4 encounters, the PC's have about a 93.75% (I'm sure probability types will find an error in my calculations somewhere...) chance of having lost at least one of those combats (by TPK or retreat, presumably). I don't think this is how the game is typically played.
|
|
I just had a great idea for fumbles. I'll call it Fumble Resistance.
Instead of a DEX check or a Reflex save, all characters get a 5% chance per level to resist a Critical Fumble when they roll a natural 1. This never goes blow 5% or above 95%.
Simply put, if the player first level character gets a natural 1, they must roll the d20 again. If that roll comes up as a 20, then they have Resisted the Critical Fumble.
Later on, at sixth level, that character's Fumble Resistance is now 30%. If the player rolls a natural 1, he rolls the d20 again. This time, however, the roll must now come up 15-20. Any of those numbers will successfully avoid a Critical Fumble.
This does not mean, however, that the character did not fail his attack. It simply means he didn't lop his own arm off or shoot himself in the foot.
My group's house rule seems to work fairly well - on a natural 1, the character makes a DC 10 DEX check. A failure means the character has dropped his weapon - no damage to himself or his equipment, just a Move action provoking an Attack of Opportunity to retrieve it. In the case of natural weapons, the creature merely loses his next attack.
If on the DEX check, the character rolls a natural 1 AGAIN, there is a second DC 10 DEX check to avoid damaging yourself, and even in this case it would only be what the weapon normally does - no lopping off arms or gouging out eyes. All in all, we find it does retain some of the fun of the occasional "bad miss," but keeps it from being to weirdly ridiculous, YMMV.
|
|
Let's assume that the party and its opponents in each encounter are evenly matched and that there are 10 encounters per level. For the purposes of this analysis, I will assume a 50% chance of a TPK in each encounter that the party loses (because that's about what I see with NPCs.)
Using these assumptions, the party has about a 5.6% chance of avoiding a TPK for one level.
If you assume a 5% chance of a TPK in each encounter and 10 encounters per level, there's a 40% chance the party will get a TPK before 2nd level. If you assume a 5% chance that a given character will die in each encounter, 2 out of five characters will die every level.
For a long-term campaign, the party must have a massive advantage in nearly every encounter.
Take away a human's weapons, armor, magic, and trinkets, his best weapon left is harsh language.Ya! If you deny an adventurer everything that makes him an adventurer, he's not an adventurer! Awesome. It's just like if you took away a dragon's claws, bites, breath weapon, spells, and scales, all that's left is a lizard with lots of HP!
You missed my point completely, which is to say that if you take what Lich-loved said about PCs:
PC's are typically stronger than the foes they face or are equal to them
I think is wrong, because once you peel off all the layers and perks an adventurer (or a dragon) receives from the game by default, it's still a lizard with a lot of HPs as you put it, and it will still be stronger than the majority of humans imo.
I don't know about you or your game, but humanity and demihumanity in my games are generally frail and weak species, as species strength goes, on the whole. That's why they need all those trinkets to survive in fantasy game worlds. Dragons, or any other monster, by its very definition, is heads and shoulders above any human in raw survivability. You pit any monster of equitable power heads up against any human, and it's only by adding the human's skills, gear, and trinkets that might allow him to survive. That was my point. YMOV.
The only time I make my players roll a skill check is if it's something out of the ordinary, or if they're trying to bluff someone and what they're role-playing doesn't sound quite believeable. Other than that, let common sense rule and keep the game moving.
amen
I've never been afraid to let players try things they want to or do things "a lil bit different" if it made things interesting or saved time. sometimes you gotta roll, sure, but other times, just 'role' with it;)
Critical Hit: Natural 20 (or weapon's threat range) and another 20 critical gives a 1/400 (20 threat range) or often 1/100 (19-20 threat range)chance of having a good day. (Can even be manipualted as low as a 1/16 chance (15-20 threat range) of rolling a critical again.)
Critical Fumble: Natural 1 and confirm (natural 1); gives a 1/400 chance of having a really bad day.
Just an easy (to me) option if you want critical fumbles in your game.
|
Down with Critical Fumbles!!!
A 1 is a miss?......
I agree.
I accept.A 1 is a Fumble?....
Shenannigans!!!
I like our DM's current method.
On a '1', roll again. 10or less you generally lose your grip on yoru weapon and it scatters. 11 or more you retain the grip on it and just miss. on another '1' on the roll....sometimes bad things happen depending. Last time the barbarian roilled two 1's in a row he had to roll to hit the mage standing next to him....(which he did, and dropped him negative, but since he dropped him he did get to cleave into the bad guys....).
and yes the bad guys are subject to the same rules....which gets incredibly amusing.....
The problem with fixed chances for fumbling is that more attacks you have (in case of humanoids, the better fighter you are), more likely you are to fumble...
Crits avoid this issue by making that check to confirm a crit, where you need to roll a successful hit, thus better fighters are more likely to crit.
For fumbles the chance should be equally representative, so if you roll 1 you have to make an attack check to confirm a fumble, and if you fail that attack, the result is a fumble. Otherwise it is just a miss.
Of course if one really wants to be mean, some weapons might have higher chances for fumbles...at least those flail-type weapons can go haywire in amusing ways (spiked chain, I'm looking at you).
Also, the effect of the fumble should be considered. After all, rolling a crit is not exactly "hallelujah, the combat is over", it is just double damage, or triple in some cases. Thus fumbles where person stabs herself in the eye or breaks her weapon in million pieces do ot really make sense...something like "misses next attack, subject for attack of opportunity" is probably bad enough while still not being a complete gamebreaker.
|
|
Of course if one really wants to be mean, some weapons might have higher chances for fumbles...at least those flail-type weapons can go haywire in amusing ways (spiked chain, I'm looking at you).
That's brilliant, I could take the idea of Fumble Resistance and add to it weapons that decrease or increase the chance of resisting a Fumble.
Dear DM.
You suck. Players are not suppose to level up after 1 session. Even in 4E, players are not suppose to level that fast. You throw us up against crap that we are WOEFULLY under-leveled for. And if it is not for your DMPCs, we'd die every session. In short, you cannot build an encounter.
You make the ranger if he has Track feat (not because you don't know, but because you want us to account for every single detail). You didn't look at our equipment list to see if we'd have everything that we'd need to survive in the environment and don't express in full detail what the environment would entail before the game started. You failed to tell me that every time I roll a 1 on an attack roll my bow string would snap and you didn't tell me that because I didn't have "extra bow strings" written on my character sheet, I couldn't restring my bow. (In all fairness, I won that argument because you could not find a price for "bow strings" in the PHB.)
Is it any wonder that every player in the group is volunteering to DM?
Did I mention you suck?
Signed
DMcCoy1693
Wow, you guys should play with me instead. I'll let you do totally heroic s#+@ if you can roll well enough.
Wow, you guys should play with me instead. I'll let you do totally heroic s!~% if you can roll well enough.
Wait, your expecting us to be heroes now?
Wow, you guys should play with me instead. I'll let you do totally heroic s!~% if you can roll well enough.Wait, your expecting us to be heroes now?
If you read my (extremely neglected) Styes campaign journal, you'll see that I'm more than willing to accomodate anti-heroic or even downright villainous actions.
Dear DM.
You suck. Players are not suppose to level up after 1 session. Even in 4E, players are not suppose to level that fast. You throw us up against crap that we are WOEFULLY under-leveled for. And if it is not for your DMPCs, we'd die every session. In short, you cannot build an encounter.
You make the ranger if he has Track feat (not because you don't know, but because you want us to account for every single detail). You didn't look at our equipment list to see if we'd have everything that we'd need to survive in the environment and don't express in full detail what the environment would entail before the game started. You failed to tell me that every time I roll a 1 on an attack roll my bow string would snap and you didn't tell me that because I didn't have "extra bow strings" written on my character sheet, I couldn't restring my bow. (In all fairness, I won that argument because you could not find a price for "bow strings" in the PHB.)
Is it any wonder that every player in the group is volunteering to DM?
Did I mention you suck?
Signed
DMcCoy1693
Yup. That there does sound like a right bit of suckage.
It's good to see this thread getting non-fumble rules posts again. :-)
Critical hit and fumble rules are something that the group as a whole should agree on. If, as a participant, you're not happy with your group's house rules, then raise the issue and discuss it as a group. If it's not open for discussion because your DM is an it's-my-game-so-I-make-the-rules type, then that's why he or she sucks. News flash: The DM is just another participant; it's the group's game.
If your group's rules/methods/etc. aren't fun for you or other members of the group, consider bringing up the concept of a Social Contract. The idea is to set expectations for your game sessions by agreeing ahead of time on what exactly you're playing, how you'll be playing it, and what the group members' responsibilities are to each other at the game table. It's surprising how discussing what everyone wants from playing together can uncover expectations that aren't being met.
Finally, a suggestion for all DMs. The excellent 2d6 in a Random Direction podcast offered this recommendation:
Consider Yes. <--linkey
Simply put, if saying no to a player won't yield interesting results that ultimately prove exciting/worthwhile/fun for the players, then just say yes. Players hate being told no, so consider carefully when and why you're turning them down.
My $0.02 that's hopefully worth more to someone. ;-)
Take away a human's weapons, armor, magic, and trinkets, his best weapon left is harsh language.Ya! If you deny an adventurer everything that makes him an adventurer, he's not an adventurer! Awesome. It's just like if you took away a dragon's claws, bites, breath weapon, spells, and scales, all that's left is a lizard with lots of HP!You missed my point completely, which is to say that if you take what Lich-loved said about PCs:
PC's are typically stronger than the foes they face or are equal to themI think is wrong, because once you peel off all the layers and perks an adventurer (or a dragon) receives from the game by default, it's still a lizard with a lot of HPs as you put it, and it will still be stronger than the majority of humans imo.
I don't know about you or your game, but humanity and demihumanity in my games are generally frail and weak species, as species strength goes, on the whole. That's why they need all those trinkets to survive in fantasy game worlds. Dragons, or any other monster, by its very definition, is heads and shoulders above any human in raw survivability. You pit any monster of equitable power heads up against any human, and it's only by adding the human's skills, gear, and trinkets that might allow him to survive. That was my point. YMOV.
Yes, I'm sorry. I did miss your point. But (and I'm not trying to be antagonistic), I'm curious why exactly you were making that point at all. Humans are weaker than dragons (or trolls, or illithids, or whatever). Yes, so? We all know that. It isn't what the poster you were replying to meant. I can guarantee that with 99.9% certainty.
What we were discussing is the real power of the PC. All that magical junk is part of the equation. It's part of being a PC, just like breathing fire (or whatever) is part of being a dragon (obviously I'm not talking about wyverns and such here). The truth is, PCs are more powerful than their foes. If you take away everything the PC has got, of course they're going to then be weaker than said foes. That's understood. No one was arguing otherwise.
Dear DM.
You suck. Players are not suppose to level up after 1 session. Even in 4E, players are not suppose to level that fast. You throw us up against crap that we are WOEFULLY under-leveled for. And if it is not for your DMPCs, we'd die every session. In short, you cannot build an encounter.
You make the ranger if he has Track feat (not because you don't know, but because you want us to account for every single detail). You didn't look at our equipment list to see if we'd have everything that we'd need to survive in the environment and don't express in full detail what the environment would entail before the game started. You failed to tell me that every time I roll a 1 on an attack roll my bow string would snap and you didn't tell me that because I didn't have "extra bow strings" written on my character sheet, I couldn't restring my bow. (In all fairness, I won that argument because you could not find a price for "bow strings" in the PHB.)
Is it any wonder that every player in the group is volunteering to DM?
Did I mention you suck?
Signed
DMcCoy1693
Oh yeah, this is the stuff. Drag it on out people. Drag it ooooon out.
That's just bad DMing. My current DM? Same damn thing. And, when I do try to prepare for all his nitpickiness, he has the gall to make certain spells and potions not exist in his world.
"Sorry, there aren't any PROTECTION FROM EVIL potions." WHAT!?!?!?
"Oh yeah, and did I mention MAGIC weapons are exceedingly rare in my world that looks suspiciously like Forgotten Realms - it also has all the same names, people, and places as Forgotten Realms. So don't go trying to buy Magic Weapons now. Maybe at 4th level you might, MIGHT get a +1 sword. MAYBE."
Dear DM, you suck.
I was playing Star Wars RPG in the Living Force campaign. I wanted to use Force Strike against three items next to one another, but the GM forbade it. I asked why, he said "because they aren't standing."
It turns out the rules said Force Strike could be used against up to four objects standing adjacent to one another. I joked later with a player that one could become immune to the power by lying down.
Dear LF GM: You sucked, that's why.
Point (2) does not apply equally because of Point (1); the PC's are usually the stronger of the two forces and therefore anything...
Wow - the best argument I've seen against 4th Edition yet...
The PCs are NOT usually the stronger force; or at least shouldn't be - they should generally be equal to their foes. Maybe not on an individual encounter basis, but over the course of the adventure it should even out - there should be a few enemies who severely tax the abilities of the party, and a few who are cake-walks.
But 4E says they're the stronger force, so it must be true...
Its actually 3rd edition where it was spelled out that the PCs are stronger then their enemies. In the end its always been true that the PCs are more powerful - most of the time at most game tables the player characters win the adventure. They save the princess or town or what have you. Maybe a couple of times a campaign they fail miserably in their current mission and every so often they bump into something really scary bad and the challenge is to avoid it but by and large in the average encounter the PCs are more powerful and, so long as the dice roll average and nothing to freaky takes place the PCs will win the fight.
We can see this spelled out in the 3rd edition rules with the EL/CR system. lets take a perfectly equal encounter, a 4 person party of 8th level characters stumble upon a mirror of opposition. They all see the mirror and out of it steps their doubles which try and kill them. So whats the EL of this encounter? Well an 8th level character is a CR 8 creature. Four of them are an EL 12 encounter or about what might be appropriate for a really hard fight with the BBEG at the end of an adventure. So what we actually see here is that an encounter thats roughly 50/50 is one which is +4 EL, thats what the mechanics of the game break down too.
|
|
Well, I'm playing a multiclass barbarian in a campaign run by a DM who is notorious for railroading PCs. He has us in a complex that seems completely self-contained and impossible to escape, and we're chasing a villain who we've killed six times and who just keeps coming back to life or having multiple clones assume his work after his death. We are at the top of a ten-story spiralling staircase, and at the bottom is a door that we know is locked. The rogue can't pick the lock, and the arcanist is out of knock spells. I state that I am raging and charging down the stairs in an attempt to bash down the door. The DM looks at me for a moment, as though I had told him something completely nonsensical, and then shrugs as he declares, "You smash into the door and fall over dead." When he saw the incredulous look on my face, he made some comment about terminal velocity and the force of impact, then had the monstrously powerful NPC guide who'd been following us around true resurrect me. Classic.
\I state that I am raging and charging down the stairs in an attempt to bash down the door. The DM looks at me for a moment, as though I had told him something completely nonsensical, and then shrugs as he declares, "You smash into the door and fall over dead." When he saw the incredulous look on my face, he made some comment about terminal velocity and the force of impact, then had the monstrously powerful NPC guide who'd been following us around true resurrect me. Classic.
Your DM definitely sucks. Hard.
Just offhand, using the rules that cover damage from falling (1d6 damage per 10 feet fallen) how many feet would your PC have needed to fall to take him/her to -10 HP? Heck, just assume 6 HP damage per 10 feet fallen to cover the max damage possible. How far would that have had to be?
|
|
\I state that I am raging and charging down the stairs in an attempt to bash down the door. The DM looks at me for a moment, as though I had told him something completely nonsensical, and then shrugs as he declares, "You smash into the door and fall over dead." When he saw the incredulous look on my face, he made some comment about terminal velocity and the force of impact, then had the monstrously powerful NPC guide who'd been following us around true resurrect me. Classic.Your DM definitely sucks. Hard.
Just offhand, using the rules that cover damage from falling (1d6 damage per 10 feet fallen) how many feet would your PC have needed to fall to take him/her to -10 HP? Heck, just assume 6 HP damage per 10 feet fallen to cover the max damage possible. How far would that have had to be?
Just to add to the "wow, that seems unfair", I had a player hit solid ground from a flying mount at high speed, I ruled terminal velocity, rolled the damage .... and the barbarian dusted himself off, and looted the poor sap he took with him off the mount. I doubt a flight of stairs would be more damaging.
|
|
On the shadow subject, I would rule same as bubbagump. The shadow is only going to describe a line to your real target if the target is directly between the light source and the shooter. Otherwise, shooting at where the shadow is projected on the tent wall is probably not going to hit the caster of the shadow.
Your character obviously knows the target is in the tent because of the shadow. But shooting at him through a cloth wall based on where his shadow is being cast, is essentially shooting blind.
Now if the material of the tent is at all transparent (like modern nylon tents) you might be able to see the target directly because of the light in the tent. If this was the case, I'd still give the target diminished cover. I doubt that would be the case with a true canvas tent though.
Maybe I suck as a DM. :)
Well...
I would say that the person has maybe half to three-quarters concealement and some cover from the tent. I would adjust the armor class by, say, +2 just because of the cloth of the tent, or impose a -2 on the attack roll for the uncertainty, then apply the miss chance. Now, true strike eliminates all miss chance for concealment in the description of the spell, which leaves the -2 to the attack, and you would end up with a +18.
What we were discussing is the real power of the PC. All that magical junk is part of the equation. It's part of being a PC, just like breathing fire (or whatever) is part of being a dragon (obviously I'm not talking about wyverns and such here). The truth is, PCs are more powerful than their foes. If you take away everything the PC has got, of course they're going to then be weaker than said foes. That's understood. No one was arguing otherwise.
Well, we'll have to agree to disagree then. I don't think PCs are more powerful than foes of their level, nor should they be. I think the magical trinkets PCs acquire barely brings them up to par to the creature strengths of a level they'd typically encounter (at best), and only when those trinkets are far superior to the powers creatures they'll typically encounter can bring to bear, will humans dominate.
Once played with a group with some interesting perspectives.
The DM adhered very closely to the rules. Except for all the ones he didn't read.
The thing that always amused me most (in retrospect), however, was that he played "by the book". Which means he used the official rules. Reasonable, right? Well, his idea of "official" was "what's printed in the book". As in, "I don't care what the errata says." Even for the most simple of oversights. It was kind of incredible.
Also, he always narrated enemy actions in first-person, like a PC. That always made me nervous.
Heres my insane Energy and Poison Crit system- Some of the stuff I borrowed from rolemaster which rules.
Critical wounds by failed saving throw against magical attacks, cold, acid
electricity, or Poison ETC a critical wound will result on a natural one or on a hit roll of 20 with touch attacks ( Ray spells etc ).
Extra damage is detailed on chart. So no X2 roll again or add etc
Armor, Shield, and Equipment Damage
Acid, fire, lightning, and other lethal energies and substances can quickly destroy a character’s armor, every critical strike endangers the victim’s armor and equipment since the character already failed a saving throw.
Fire
01-10 Singe 10 % extra damage. 10 % chance of caching fully on Fire and burning for 1d4 until put out.
11-20 Powerful Singe 20 % extra damage. 20 % chance of caching fully on Fire and burning for 1d4 until put out.
21-30 Massive Singe 30% extra Damage 30 % chance of caching fully on Fire and burning for 1d6 until put out.
31-40 Brutal Singe 40 % extra Damage 40 % chance of caching fully on Fire and burning for 1d6 until put out.
41-50 Horrid Burning 50 % extra damage on final damage count. 50 % chance of caching fully on Fire and burning for 1d 8 until put out.
51-60 Brutal Burning 60 % extra damage on final damage count 60 % chance of caching fully on Fire and burning for 1d 8 until put out.
61-70 Hideous Burning 70 % extra damage on final damage count 70 % chance of caching fully on Fire and burning for 1d 8 until put out.
71 Belly burned 80 % extra damage Fort DC 10 - 25 or writhe about screaming and staggered until save made.
72 Belly burned open x 2 dam .Skin on fire.Fort DC 10 - 25 or writhe about screaming and staggered until save made.
73 Chest Burn 80 % extra damage. - dazed 1-3 rounds - fatigued "Fort DC 10 - 25 or writhe about screaming and staggered until save made.
74 Chest Frizzed roll again and add- Smoke inhaled Dazed 1-6 rounds . "Fort DC 10 - 25 or write about screaming and staggered until save made.
75 Torso fried -max damage -fatigued- stunned one round - On fire.
76 Throat Burned - Smoke inhaled - roll again and add - no speech
77 Throat Charred - Roll 3 times for damage. - No speech.
78 Head scorched, –4 to all rolls, if victim wears metal helm, hot metal
sears him for 2d4 damage next round, 1d4 more for 1d10 rounds after.until removed com damage
79 Face burned, stunned 1d6 rounds, –6 to all rolls and 1/2 move; if victim wears metal helm, seared for additional damage as above com damage
80 Completly and Utterly Buninated -ON FIRE X 3 dam and on fire
81-85 One Eye 75 % or both 25 % Blinded. 1-6 days of time with good rest or powerful healing spell needed to fix. Eye Burn distracts victim for 1-12 rounds. All rolls at -6
Unless concentration check DC 24 is made each round.
86-90 One Eye75 % or both 25 % burned out. Dazed for 1-6 rounds. After that burning distracts victim for 1-12 rounds. All rolls at -6 Unless concentration check DC 24 is made each round.
91-95 Severe Facial damage - 1-8 Comeliness. And stunned and blinded with pain for 1-6 rounds. Stinging distracts victim for 1-12 rounds. All rolls at -6 Unless concentration check DC 24 is made each round.
96-98 Severe Facial damage - 1-8 Comeliness. And stunned and blinded with pain for 1-6 rounds. One Eye75 % or both 25 % burned out. Dazed for 1-6 rounds. After that burning distracts victim for 1-12 rounds. All rolls at -6 Unless concentration check DC 24 is made each round
99. Head and most of body Burned away- Death.
100. Entire body Incinerated. Death and No resurrection possible.
Cold attacks include chill touch, cone of cold, Otiluke’s freezing sphere, white dragon or silver dragon breath, and the deathly touch of a lich.
01-10 Chilled 10 % extra damage. 10 % chance of having to make a Fort save DC 10 or take 1-6 non lethal cold damage and become fatigued Until warmed up.
11-20 Powerfully Chilled 20 % extra damage. 20 % chance of having to make a Fort save DC 11 or take 1-6 non lethal cold damage and become fatigued Until warmed up.
21-30 Massive Chill 30% extra Damage 30 % chance of having to make a Fort save DC 12 or take 1-6 non lethal cold damage and become fatigued Until warmed up.
31-40 Brutal Chill 40% extra Damage 40 % chance of having to make a Fort save DC 13 or take 2 d 6 non lethal cold damage and become fatigued Until warmed up.
41-50 Horrid Chill 50% extra Damage 50 % chance of having to make a Fort save DC 14 or take 2 d 6 non lethal cold damage and become fatigued Until warmed up.
51-60 Brutal Chill 60% extra Damage 60 % chance of having to make a Fort save DC 16 or take 2 d 6 non lethal cold damage and become fatigued Until warmed up.
61-65 Hideous Chill 70% extra Damage 70 % chance of having to make a Fort save DC 18 or take 2 d 6 non lethal cold damage and become fatigued Until warmed up.
66 Throat Chilled - - roll again and add- no speech
67 Throat Frozen - Max damage. - No speech.
68 Head chilled, –4 to all rolls, if victim wears metal helm, chill metal
sears him for 2d4 damage next round, 1d4 more the round after for 1- 10 rounds untill removed Slowed for 1-3 rounds.
69 Face Chilled, stunned 1d6 rounds, –6 to all rolls and 1/2 move; if victim wears metal helm, seared for additional damage as above plus slowed for 1-6 rounds.
70 Scalp blasted dazed for 1 round x2 dam ( Helm damage as above )
71 Face Frozen, victim blinded, stunned 1-6 rounds. Max damage ( Helm damage as above ) plus slowed 1-10 rounds
72 Head frozen, victim blinded and deafened, and remains so until he
receives a regenerate spell or similar healing magic Stunned 1-6 rounds.( Helm damage as above ) Roll three times. plus slowed 1-20 rounds
73 Head iced. victim blinded and deafened, stunned 1-6 rounds Rounds- Max damage + 50 %
–6 to all rolls and 1/2 move; if victim wears metal helm, seared for additional damage as above plus slowed 2-40 rounds.
74 Completly and Utterly Freezinated 3x dam .Slowed till warmed
75- 80 Screaming Chill 80% extra Damage 80 % chance of having to make a Fort save DC 20 or take 3d6 non lethal cold damage and become fatigued Until warmed up.
81-85 Severely frozen, + 3d6 Non lethal and Strength and Dexterity halved for 2d6 rounds then Exhausted until warmed up.
86-90 Go into shock from cold- Con check DC 15 every round or stunned until save is made- + 3d6 Non lethal and Strength and Dexterity halved for 2d6 rounds then Exhausted until warmed up.
91-95 Head Freeze. - 1d3 INT loss permanently. Stunned and blinded with pain for 1-6 rounds. Freezing distracts victim for 1-12 rounds. All rolls at -6 Unless concentration check DC 24 is made each round. Blinded until ice cleared from eyes.
96-98 Ice coating -1d3 INT loss permanently- Treat as Chill Metal spell + Go into shock from cold- Con check DC 15 every round or stunned until save is made- + 3d6 Non lethal and Strength and Dexterity halved for 2d6 rounds then Exhausted until warmed up.
99. Head and most of body frozen Solid.- Death.
100. Entire body Frozen then Explodes into Tiny Shards. No resurrection possible.
Acid attacks include Melf’s acid arrow, acid storm, the breath of a black dragon, the secretions of a black pudding, or the effects of holy water on certain undead.
01-10 Singe 10 % extra damage. Stinging distracts victim for 1-3 rounds. All rolls at -2.
Unless concentration check DC 14 is made each round.
11-20 Powerful Singe 20 %
Stinging distracts victim for 1-6 rounds. All rolls at -2
Unless concentration check DC 14 is made each round
21-30 Massive Singe 30% extra Damage "
Stinging distracts victim for 1-3 rounds. All rolls at -4
Unless concentration check DC 16 is made each round
31-40 Brutal Singe 40 % extra Damage "
Stinging distracts victim for 1-6 rounds. All rolls at -4
Unless concentration check DC 18 is made each round
41-50 Horrid fizzing 50 % extra damage on final damage count.
Stinging distracts victim for 1-6 rounds. All rolls at -4
Unless concentration check DC 20 is made each round
51-60 Brutal Fizzing 60 % extra damage on final damage count
Stinging distracts victim for 1-6 rounds. All rolls at -4
Unless concentration check DC 20 is made each round
61-70 Hideous Fizzing 70 % extra damage on final damage count
Stinging distracts victim for 1-12 rounds. All rolls at -4
Unless concentration check DC 22 is made each round.
71-80 Screaming Fizzing 80 % extra damage on final damage count
Stinging distracts victim for 1-12 rounds. All rolls at -6
Unless concentration check DC 24 is made each round.
81-85 One Eye 75 % or both 25 % Blinded. 1-6 days of time with good rest or powerful healing spell needed to fix. Stinging distracts victim for 1-12 rounds. All rolls at -6
Unless concentration check DC 24 is made each round.
86-90 One Eye75 % or both 25 % burned out. Stinging distracts victim for 1-12 rounds. All rolls at -6 Unless concentration check DC 24 is made each round.
91-95 Severe Facial damage - 1-8 Comeliness. And stunned and blinded with pain for 1-6 rounds. Stinging distracts victim for 1-12 rounds. All rolls at -6 Unless concentration check DC 24 is made each round.
96-98 Severe Facial damage - 1-8 Comeliness. And stunned and blinded with pain for 1-6 rounds. One Eye75 % or both 25 % burned out Stinging distracts victim for 1-12 rounds. All rolls at -6 Unless concentration check DC 24 is made each round.
99. Head and most of body Dissolved. Death.
100. Entire body Dissolved. Death and No resurrection possible.
Electricity includes various forms of magical lightning, shocking grasp, and the breath of a Behir or blue or bronze dragon. There is no distinction between electricity and lightning for critical strikes.
10- 50 % extra damage if wearing 10 - 100 % metal.
01-10 Zapped 10 % extra damage. 10 % chance of being dazzled - 4 penalty on attack rolls, Search checks, and Spot checks for 10- 30 minutes
11-20 Powerfully Zapped- 20 % extra damage. 20 % chance of being dazzled - 4 penalty on attack rolls, Search checks, and Spot checks for 10- 30 minutes
21-30 Massively Zapped- 30 % extra damage. 30 % chance of being dazzled - 4 penalty on attack rolls, Search checks, and Spot checks for 10- 30 minutes
31-40 Brutal Zapped- 40 % extra damage. 40 % chance of being dazzled - 4 penalty on attack rolls, Search checks, and Spot checks for 10- 30 minutes
41-50 Horrid Zapped- 50 % extra damage. 50 % chance of being dazzled - 4 penalty on attack rolls, Search checks, and Spot checks for 10- 30 minutes and 10% chance of being dazed for 1- 3 rounds- unable to act normally - can take no actions, but has no penalty to AC.
51-60 Brutally Frazzled - 60 % extra damage. 60 % chance of being dazzled - 4 penalty on attack rolls, Search checks, and Spot checks for 10- 30 minutes and 20% chance of being dazed for 1- 3 rounds- unable to act normally - can take no actions, but has no penalty to AC.
61-70 Hideously Frazzled - 70 % extra damage. 70 % chance of being dazzled - 4 penalty on attack rolls, Search checks, and Spot checks for 10- 30 minutes and 30% chance of being dazed for 1- 3 rounds- unable to act normally - can take no actions, but has no penalty to AC.
71 Throat blamed - - Roll again and add- no speech
72 Eye Blasted out- Dazed for 1-6 rounds - blind
73 Ear removed - Stunned for 1-6 round -4 listen - deafened
74 Head Zapped, –4 to all rolls, Nervous system damaged: lose 1d4 of dexterity
75 Face Zapped, stunned 1d6 rounds, –6 to all rolls lose 1d4 Dex and 1d 6 sanity.
76 Face Zapped, victim blinded, stunned 1-6 rounds. Extra Mulitiple. Lose 1-3 Dex, Int and 1d 10 Sanity.
77 Head Blasted, victim blinded and deafened, and remains so until he
receives a regenerate spell or similar healing magic Stunned 1-6 rounds.(roll 3 x for dam. plus Lose 1-3 Dex, Int and 1d 20 Sanity.
78 Head Totally Blasted. - 3x dam Temporary amnesia past (1d20) days. Will Save Dc 15 or lose 1 d20 x 100 xp
lose all spells memorized.
79 Completly and Utterly Blasted . 3x dam .Temporary amnesia past (2d20) days. Will Save Dc 15 or lose 1 d20 x 200 xp
lose all spells memorized.
80 Blastinated roll 3 more times on chart, 2 d20 Sanity loss.
81-85 Severely Zapped Stunned for 1-6 rounds and Blinded for 1-20 rounds then dazzled at - 4 for 2d20 rounds.
86-90 Go into shock Brutal ZAP. Stunned for 1-6 rounds. Then Paralyzed for 1-6 rounds then Blinded for 1-20 rounds then dazzled at - 4 for 2d20 rounds.
91-95 Head Zap- Permanently Blinded. lose 1- 3 dex permanently - Stunned for 1-6 rounds. Then Paralyzed for 1-6 rounds.
96-98 Full Body Zap. Lose 1- 3 dex permanently -Permanently Blinded- Stunned for 1-10 rounds. Then Paralyzed for 1-10.
99. Head and most of body blown away.- Death.
100. Central nervous system acts as a super conductor and lights the body up like a Christmas tree- providing witnesses with a fine light show, before Exploding into a fine hot grey powder that quickly turns into a pale mist and evaporates. DEATH. No resurrection possible.
Poison.
01-10 Poison confuses for 1-6 rounds.
11-20 Poison dazes for 1-6 rounds.
21-30 Poison Fatigues for 1-6 hours
31-40 Poison Exhausts for 1-6 hours.
41-50 Character Shaken for 1-6 hours
51-60 Sickens character for 1-6 hours.
61-70 Temporary insanity, lasts for 3d6 days
71-80. Lingering results- poison won't leave system for 1d4+2 days and
there will be "flashbacks" which do 10-80% of poison damage
81-85 Unusually high dosage, effects (damage) MAX and roll again ignoring 81 +
86-90 bad effect. One score lowered 1-6 permanently.
91-95 Enters major artery, damage MAX X2 and reroll ignoring 81+
96-98 Many dangerous effects. Roll 1-3 times ignoring 95 +
99. Allergic reaction. Immediate death.
100. Supernatural reaction. Poison will never leave body. Death. Nothing short of a wish can be rid of the poison.
|
|
(1) PC's are typically stronger than the foes they face or are equal to them
(2) Randomness favors the underdog
(3) Anything that increases randomness (including critical hits and fumbles equally) therefore tends to help the underdog more than help the stronger person.
(4) Critical hits and fumbles (a form of randomness) therefore aid the monsters more often than the characters, leading to unwarranted character deaths or other loss.
I've seen this explained in a much clearer fashion.
Think of it as the number of rounds of combat, if the chance of getting a fumble or crit is 1 in 20, you expect 1 for ever twenty rounds of combat (ignoring crit ranges, and multiple attacks, both of which up the odds not reduce them).
How many enemies last 20 rounds?
So, over the course of a campaign you garentee that all of the PCs will take a fumble at some point, and probably quite a few, but you do no such thing for the NPCs. Some NPCs undoubtedly will fumble, but most likley the low powered grunts, as you see more of these. This gives the BBEG a distinct advantage.
|
My current DM? Same damn thing.
Dear DM, you suck.
...and, presumably this is a world with the same well-equipped NPCs, and monsters with DR/magic...?
There's nothing wrong with wanting to play a low-magic game, but at least consider how this has a knock-on effect on the rest of the rules, and strip that pack of stupid gricks and gargoyles out of your pre-published adventure!
(1) PC's are typically stronger than the foes they face or are equal to them
(2) Randomness favors the underdog
(3) Anything that increases randomness (including critical hits and fumbles equally) therefore tends to help the underdog more than help the stronger person.
(4) Critical hits and fumbles (a form of randomness) therefore aid the monsters more often than the characters, leading to unwarranted character deaths or other loss.I've seen this explained in a much clearer fashion.
Think of it as the number of rounds of combat, if the chance of getting a fumble or crit is 1 in 20, you expect 1 for ever twenty rounds of combat (ignoring crit ranges, and multiple attacks, both of which up the odds not reduce them).
How many enemies last 20 rounds?
So, over the course of a campaign you garentee that all of the PCs will take a fumble at some point, and probably quite a few, but you do no such thing for the NPCs. Some NPCs undoubtedly will fumble, but most likley the low powered grunts, as you see more of these. This gives the BBEG a distinct advantage.
This is not the correct explanation. Critical fumbles and Critical hits favour the monsters becuase the monsters are the underdogs and randomness favours the underdogs. On those rare occasions where the monster is clearly more powerful then the combined power of the PCs then randomness favours them. Their going to loose unless they get lucky or the monster gets unlucky. In most fights the PCs are going to win unless the dice turn on them. So its not really about how many times you roll, the bad guys roll a lot as well. Its that the odds are stacked in the players favour but certian results can throw that out the window, turning a tough fight into a cake walk or making a challenging but winnable fight into one in which half the party dies and the other half run away.
I have several situations that have come up with a bad DM. So forgive me if this is a long post.
The most recent is when my DM decided to throw a homegrown encounter at us with plenty of equipment that he wanted for a side campaign that his character is playing with another person in our group. We defeated the monsters and took their stuff, he got a little bit upset we were not going to give it to his character in the side campaign. So he said that the group of monsters we stole it from wanted it back, and has been sending increasingly harder creatures at us to take it back. The latest we ran from was a level 10 medusa sorceroress and her 8 advanced ogre guards. Normally you wouldn't think this is that bad of an encounter, but we are level 4. He has no concept of encounter building or even what is right to do. We just decided to drop the stuff and run, after the medusa killed two of our group members with a fireball.
In the same campaign when he figured out I was an enchanter/illusionist wizard he started using nothing but undead so all I could do was use my crossbow until I could scribe some new spells to my spellbook.
He found out I liked using illusions when we were attacked by a group of Kobolds in a bar, and I happened to speak dragon and decided to try talking through a Silent Image of a Dragon to get them to give us a little breathing room. Since this was Eberron and everyone knows kobolds all but worship dragons everyone in the group thought it would work at least for a little while. But he wouldn't even roll to see if they disbelieved, just said it didnt work, that they were immune to any type of compulsion because they had been intimidated previously to attack us in the bar.
In another adventure we decided to try and use a portal hole to get across a gap and we had one of the characters animal companions fly with it across the gap. Out of nowhere a harpy or something resembling a harpy takes the hole and decides to throw us in a lake after tying the hole shut. So that ended the party.
He also constantly attacks only me and my brother, because "I know you two can handle dying, but I don't think the others would take it so well."
If you are a DM and dont want your players to hate you dont let them make climb checks just to go up a 10 foot lader or a dexterity check to eat without stabbing yourself in the eye with a fork.Losing an eye this way would be talked about for years.
Eating while drunk might cover that, just insure to put a cork on the end of your fork before you buy the first round.
Oh my God, Detritus, that's a bad DM. That's a really bad DM.
You need to either start DMing or have someone else do it, because you're not playing Dungeons and Dragons, you're playing Death and Donuts (tm)!
I would just be honset with your DM and tell him you're not having fun dying all the time and not being able to defeat the creatures you're supposed to defeat. If he throws a fit then it is now your decision whether you want to keep playing with him.
|
|
He also constantly attacks only me and my brother, because "I know you two can handle dying, but I don't think the others would take it so well."
That's what is known in economics as a "perverse incentive". He is rewarding people for tantrums and whining. If that's what gets rewards, ....
8-)
Seriously, if he has a DMPC that's more powerful than the PCs, he's managed to do just about everything on the list of "How to be a terrible GM".
|
|
My current DM? Same damn thing.
Dear DM, you suck....and, presumably this is a world with the same well-equipped NPCs, and monsters with DR/magic...?
There's nothing wrong with wanting to play a low-magic game, but at least consider how this has a knock-on effect on the rest of the rules, and strip that pack of stupid gricks and gargoyles out of your pre-published adventure!
You guys gaming in Delaware? Sounds suspiciously like my ex-DM, even down to the Forgotten Realms stuff. Note the 'ex' in there.
No, gaming in Seattle.
Rolemaster critical charts where always so fun to read!
Critical on an ice spell, "Target freezes solid, falls back 10 ft. and shatters into a million pieces."
When I was 10 or so, we liked to use I.C.E.'s Middle Earth Role Playing fumble charts for our D&D games.
Our favorite was, "You trip over an imaginary turtle."