Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Bayne 02-16-06, 11:21 AM	'When you roll a nat one on an attack roll you provoke attack of oppertunities from all threatening oppents' I've been using it consistantly and my players have never complained so I think with some tweaking this could become quite useful. However while this works well in melee there's not that much problem when you roll a nat 1 using ranged attacks. I've been thinking of adding a second crit fumble rule for ranged so that it's more balanced. Any thoughts?
Oneiros 02-16-06, 11:42 AM	As mentioned in the other "roll a 1" thread, this means experienced fighters using full attacks, two-weapon fighting or combat reflexes are more likely to have this happen than a wizard who's not sure which end of the sword is which. Using the "any natural 1" rule, a 1st level commoner will fumble exactly the same percent of the time (5%) that a high level fighter does (assuming the fighter moves and only makes one attack a round - otherwise, the fighter fumbles more often the more attacks he makes.) This is why I added a fumble check, which mirrors the crit check. The fumble check, however, is against a straight DC of 15, so your character's skill (BAB, feats, attributes, etc.) comes more into play - making fighters less likely to fumble than their less skilled companions. Also, having a flat DC means the opponent's armor bonus has no impact on the fumble. I also limit the check to the first attack a fighter makes in a sequence (which will be at his highest attack bonus, again making skill more important.) One other thing - I use a simple fumble table with about a dozen possible penalties, and provoking an AoO only happens on a roll of 5 on a d20 (5% of the time) - having it happen all the time is a little too harsh IMHO. If you want to see my entire system, click on the link in my sig, and go to Combat -> House Rules - > Fumbles.
Shinryouga 02-17-06, 05:32 PM	We avoid the "skilled fighter suffers more than inept mage" problem by making a 1 "threaten a botch". Here's how it goes. Natural 1 rolled. Roll a second d20 to "confirm" the botch. Subtract result of d20 roll from that roll's bonus (+15 attack bonus, rolled 16, equals -1) If the result is a negative number (0 is considered NOT negative) then you have "botched" and the DM determines something bad happens. Default is an attack of opportunity from all surrounding enemies that could make one. Dropped weapons, broken bowstrings, etc. This does technically mean that high level fighters can still technically hit low level opponents on a natural 1. But the whole lvl 20 fighter misses CR 1/3 goblin 5% of the time always bugged me anyway. :D Just my two coppers.
vardock 02-17-06, 06:31 PM	there is a variant rule in the core books with which a roll of one is treated as a -10 and a roll of 20 is consirered a 30. what you could do is if the roll resilts in negative treat it as a fumble. but provoking an attack of oppurnity is probably a bit much.
dontadow 02-20-06, 04:24 PM	If both a wizard and a fighter are skilled combatants, why does a fighter have less of a chance of making a mistake? I say keep a straight fumble rule as fumbling is a luck thing.
Oneiros 02-20-06, 06:29 PM	If both a wizard and a fighter are skilled combatants, why does a fighter have less of a chance of making a mistake?Umm... because they're not both skilled combatants? Fighters are more skilled at fighting than wizards (hence the name.) Therefore, they should succeed more often at "recovering" from a fumble (i.e., using a fumble confirmation roll just like criticals.) I say keep a straight fumble rule as fumbling is a luck thing. With a fighter making more attacks in a round as he goes up in levels (full attack and multple attacks of opportunity with the proper feats), that means there's a higher chance that he's going to be more "unlucky" than the wizard if you use a straight auto-fumble on a 1. And as the wizard starts casting spells more often than making melee attacks, the straight fumble is really only going to screw the fighter. And again, does a 20th level fighter having worse luck (because of multiple attacks) than a 1st level commoner make any sense?
Ra-Tiel 02-21-06, 06:44 AM	Hi. === Just what I said in this thread regarding this topic. === Greetings, _Ra-Tiel.
Kintara 02-21-06, 03:16 PM	My solution is to give a symetrical bonus on a 20. In this case, I kind of like the idea of getting a free AoO on a 20, along with the normal crit damage. That's very similar to another idea I had to balance out the "lose all your iteratives" fumble rule.