Quote from: Chris24601;1031641We use crits, but they're a bit less severe than typical... maximum damage plus your level if you roll a natural 20. With the way damage scales in the game we use it works out to roughly +50% damage compared to an average damage roll.

I do similar - max damage + half level on a crit. So you always do more damage than a normal hit. I hate the roll twice crit damage crap like 5e has - if you roll unlucky, the crit can be woeful, it's just too deflating after a 20!

For fumbles, I grant a melee opponent a free attack or if shooting then the firer checks to see if they hit their friend in melee with the target (if there is one) . I dont do the dropped weapons, slip over, etc.

In combination these two rules make combat more dangerous/unpredictable for everyone, which I prefer.

Quote from: AsenRG;1031712For much the same reasons as Lars Dangly, I believe that the best way to address them in D&D-derived systems is to have several critical tables, varying by class and possibly level:D!

DCC style

Quote from: joewolz;1032256Cris make everyone at my table laugh. I just finished a Castles & Crusades game where we used the Pathfinder critical hits/fumbles deck. It was cards with effects based on the weapon used. We ignored a lot of the conditions imposed, because they were pathfinder-isms. Or we made up something for it.

Based on the discussions around here, you all take these kinds of things much more seriously than my group.

I had my best ever death with teh paizo crit deck. My ranger full of confidence charged a demon with her t-h sword. Fumbled and the sword lodged in the doorway, stuck. Demon's go, she crits with her claws. Paizo deck draw the decapitation card. Fail my save. Demons pulls my ranger's head off. Man it was glorious. Never had such a cool death before or since.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1031653I roll all combat dice openly, so there's plenty of "AW FUCK" when that 20 comes up for a monster.  But the people I play with consider it "part of the gamble."

All combat dice in the open is my no.1 gaming motto

The idea that anyone would roll combat dice secretly so they can cook the books when 'needed' makes me throw up a little, re-swallow the bile, and then explosively spew all over the room. Are there seriously people who do this?

Quote from: Larsdangly;1032737The idea that anyone would roll combat dice secretly so they can cook the books when 'needed' makes me throw up a little, re-swallow the bile, and then explosively spew all over the room. Are there seriously people who do this?

Uh, yeah, seriously.

I absolutely love fumbles on a 1. Regular miss results happen usually half or more of the results. I love when that natural 1 shows up and WHAMMO something crazy happens either to the PC or the monsters.

It's also important to note that Fumbles make Criticals more equitable because since monsters roll to attack more than PCs (PCs are often outnumbered by foes), they will on average crit and fumble more often. Of course, this isn't true if your D&D combats don't usually have a high monster-to-PC ratio.

Quote from: EOTB;1032362Interestingly, this is why I don't like to use crits.  Hit points were supposed to allow exactly this - to allow the player to take a fairly accurate measure of tactical risk, and have a good chance to withdraw their character when that risk reached a likelihood of death.  I want players to be able to do that.  I don't see it as a problem.

I totally understand! I want my players to fear combat beyond the numerical odds, especially when THAT PLAYER starts doing his Spock C3PO impression about the game math. FOR ME, criticals and fumbles are crucial to keeping combat scary.

And from the DM side, I enjoy the surprises when the melee becomes "WTF just happened!"

How do you guys feel about fumbles for characters with multiple attacks per round?
Isn't it odd that high-level fighters have a higher chance of fumbling each round than a level 0 hireling?

It is odd, but if you're flinging a sword around at high speed, you're tempting fate. AD&D 3/2 and 5/4 attacks drove me batty. Players always forgot which round we were in. In OD&D, I balanced it with +1 damage per 2 levels, so you attacked once, but really brutally. A 8th level fighter has +8 attack and +4 damage, easily slicing down most 2HD foes in a single hit and I use "kill & kill again" rules (aka, like cleave) so the fighter is hacking through foes.

I've had fighters fumble during their "mow down the goblins" moment, but it always seemed poetic that the fighter went kill, kill, kill, whoops as they were caught up in the bloodlust of the whirling melee.

Quote from: Cave Bear;1032747How do you guys feel about fumbles for characters with multiple attacks per round?
Isn't it odd that high-level fighters have a higher chance of fumbling each round than a level 0 hireling?

It is but they also get more crit chances, evens out

Quote from: Psikerlord;1032755It is but they also get more crit chances, evens out

Not if a fumble causes you to lose your next attack, as some have suggested earlier.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1032745I absolutely love fumbles on a 1. Regular miss results happen usually half or more of the results. I love when that natural 1 shows up and WHAMMO something crazy happens either to the PC or the monsters.

I'm not saying fun stuff doesn't happen on a 1, but I won't put a character in an instant death, disaster situation on a single dice roll like that.

Another potential problem is that fumbles hurt more than critical hits help.

Dritical hits might not actually help all that much. Depending on which edition you are playing, there might be a significant number of monsters that are immune to critical hits (constructs, undead, oozes, plants, incorporeal creatures, and swarms in 3.5). Critical hits are also largely useless (or at least only marginally useful) against weak monsters. I mean, who cares if you critically hit a 1HD kobold; it would have died to a regular hit!

Fumbles hurt you regardless of what monsters you are facing. It's not an even trade!

I'm a little late to the discussion, but my opinion on criticals is generally unfavorable. They are tolerable in modern games like 5th edition because the damage math has been structured to account for them. This removes their purpose because they are simply an expected occurrence. Since the game works with them, I'm unlikely to take them out bit they don't really add all that much to play.

In older editions where HP is lower, there really is no point to include them. A good hit is simply a maximum roll on damage. I find the excitement of rolling max on the dice replaces that feeling you would get from rolling a critical.

Quote from: Cave Bear;1032777Another potential problem is that fumbles hurt more than critical hits help.

Dritical hits might not actually help all that much. Depending on which edition you are playing, there might be a significant number of monsters that are immune to critical hits (constructs, undead, oozes, plants, incorporeal creatures, and swarms in 3.5). Critical hits are also largely useless (or at least only marginally useful) against weak monsters. I mean, who cares if you critically hit a 1HD kobold; it would have died to a regular hit!

Fumbles hurt you regardless of what monsters you are facing. It's not an even trade!

"Life is not fair.  Anyone who tells you differently is trying to sell you something."