Should Critical Fumbles be worse than Critical Successes?

Bren · February 17, 2015, 06:27:59 PM

Quote from: K Peterson;816114Or just result in a bunch of maimed and disabled PCs for those that don't reevaluate.

Cough...Gimpy's...cough, cough.

Omega · February 18, 2015, 09:47:26 AM

Quote from: Novastar;816105I'd like to joke, "If I can lose a 50gp bow on a critical fumble, in fairness, I should receive 50gp out of nowhere as well, just like a video game, with a critical hit..."

But that probably wouldn't go over well...

Gambler class. Every time you score a critical you gain 10gp/level. Every time you fumble you lose 10gp/level. And you can throw gold to deal damage. But dont get that back after. Sorry.

Ladybird · February 18, 2015, 10:57:07 AM

Quote from: Omega;816174Gambler class. Every time you score a critical you gain 10gp/level. Every time you fumble you lose 10gp/level. And you can throw gold to deal damage. But dont get that back after. Sorry.

Coins are notorious for disappearing when thrown or dropped. Happens like all the time.

Novastar · February 18, 2015, 06:23:10 PM

Quote from: Will;816108Having any attack possibly result in long-term problems, weirdly, puts pressure on strategies to minimize it.

Holy shit I would love that, honestly.

My biggest gripe is usually how "Combat must happen, for it is written such in the module! No surprise, no mere guile will allow you to avoid the encounter, and certainly never get XP from such tomfoolery!"

To me, you "defeat" the guard at the door, whether you knock him out, sneak in thru another door or window, or get him to leave by setting the barn on fire.

He'd give you the XP for the first, nothing for the second, and a pittance for the third (with it likely that the guard will return before you are finished inside, decide to open the door he's supposed to guard, and a fight ensues).

RPGPundit · February 23, 2015, 11:44:18 PM

fumbles should definitely be much less worse than successes.

First, remember that, properly done, crits and fumbles should happen to opponents as much as to players, more or less. So you want to be careful to make neither TOO deadly, as players will more often be victims than providers of these.

Second, if the fumbles are too extreme or easy to happen, you end up with games that look like bloodbath versions of the Keystone Cops, with everyone humiliating themselves in painful and violent ways. Not really good dramatic effect, unless you're going for goofball dark comedy.

Omega · February 24, 2015, 03:00:28 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;817347Second, if the fumbles are too extreme or easy to happen, you end up with games that look like bloodbath versions of the Keystone Cops, with everyone humiliating themselves in painful and violent ways. Not really good dramatic effect, unless you're going for goofball dark comedy.

The first 3rd ed Game I played in. The DM used the critical tables from Rule Master. "Bloodbath version of the Keystone Cops" was about how I described the aftermath.

mAcular Chaotic · February 24, 2015, 08:58:05 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;817347fumbles should definitely be much less worse than successes.

First, remember that, properly done, crits and fumbles should happen to opponents as much as to players, more or less. So you want to be careful to make neither TOO deadly, as players will more often be victims than providers of these.

Second, if the fumbles are too extreme or easy to happen, you end up with games that look like bloodbath versions of the Keystone Cops, with everyone humiliating themselves in painful and violent ways. Not really good dramatic effect, unless you're going for goofball dark comedy.

The critical failure doesn't necessarily have to be represented as the PC tripping all over himself though. Things could just not go his way because of other factors conspiring against him.

Rincewind1 · February 24, 2015, 09:55:37 AM

Quote from: ZWEIHÄNDER;816073You can really tell the difference between those whose formative role-playing years were spent with D&D or Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay by topics like this.

That being said, I am interested to see where this is going.

Pretty much this.

Sometimes they should be worse, sometimes they should be better. Outside of combat, both critical success and critical failure should lead to new developments (yes, I'm using the P word), if possible.

Will · February 24, 2015, 10:04:32 AM

Quote from: Omega;817363The first 3rd ed Game I played in. The DM used the critical tables from Rule Master. "Bloodbath version of the Keystone Cops" was about how I described the aftermath.

I'm envisioning a Monty Python skit... ha.

Simlasa · February 24, 2015, 12:18:15 PM

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;817387The critical failure doesn't necessarily have to be represented as the PC tripping all over himself though. Things could just not go his way because of other factors conspiring against him.

Most of the time I'd have a fumble leave the fumbler off balance or out of stance... maybe giving his opponent an advantage/opening... maybe putting the fumbler's next attack/parry at a disadvantage. If he were to fumble again next round... that's where I might use a harsher consequence, failing to regain balance/stance turns him into a pinata for a round.

Omega · February 24, 2015, 12:33:23 PM

Quote from: Will;817397I'm envisioning a Monty Python skit... ha.

As it was happening I was thinking of this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1-NpyaOWV0

Will · February 24, 2015, 12:34:40 PM

Having a brief disadvantage seems fair. Maybe give the next attack on the character an Advantage to reflect being off-balance or whatever.

It's just the bizarre 'double damage vs. being kinda fucked for a long time'

Bren · February 24, 2015, 03:04:26 PM

Quote from: Simlasa;817417
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;817387The critical failure doesn't necessarily have to be represented as the PC tripping all over himself though. Things could just not go his way because of other factors conspiring against him.

Most of the time I'd have a fumble leave the fumbler off balance or out of stance... maybe giving his opponent an advantage/opening... maybe putting the fumbler's next attack/parry at a disadvantage. If he were to fumble again next round... that's where I might use a harsher consequence, failing to regain balance/stance turns him into a pinata for a round.

I agree that a little bit of slapstick in combat goes a really long way so minimizing the slapstick is a good thing.

Quote from: Will;817433Having a brief disadvantage seems fair. Maybe give the next attack on the character an Advantage to reflect being off-balance or whatever.

It's just the bizarre 'double damage vs. being kinda fucked for a long time'

Like many things that is system dependent.

In a static hit point system, double damage may be fatal which is really fucked up for a really long time or maybe even for ever. Dead is a lot worse than your helmet got twisted sideways so you are at -20% for attacks and parries until you fix that.

In a hit points per level system, double damage for the Level 6 fighter may mean he is at 4/6 hit points instead of at 5/6 hit points. In that case the -20% to attacks and parries may be more severe than taking an extra hit die of damage.

RPGPundit · February 28, 2015, 12:50:12 AM

Yeah, the Keystone Cops Bloodbath just doesn't match up very well with the Hero's Journey; or even with Grim And Gritty...

Matt · March 01, 2015, 10:01:52 AM

I don't quite understand why there are critical hits/fumbles in a game where a combat round is an abstract representation of a full minute of fighting.