@@eclectic9210 I also believe Kelly, but even in a video about fun critical fumbles, they're unable to show excitement about rolling a 1, so the reaction comes of disingenuous 🤣
In "True Lies" Jamie Lee Curtis rolls a 1 and she drops the gun. The gun is firing while going down the stairs. Because she rolled a 20 on the fumble table, she hits bad guys.
Wait, does this description mean I can stop being annoyed at this scene because firearms don't actually go off if dropped since the days of the percussion cap? Brilliant!
At my table, I use the One DnD rules for Exhaustion, which ties into missing an enemy's AC by 1. I let my players take a level of Exhaustion to make their attack hit. It gives a good balance of immediate reward for long term consequence and lets someone whose been unlucky get some work done.
I always had a problem with 5% of attacks hitting or missing critically. I like the way these crit misses tanging from bad to regular miss to a couple of decent reversals. Nice job!
Some things I've seen that I like are: 1. If an attack hits exactly the targets armor class it only does half damage. 2. If a character or monster makes the exact threshold of the saving throw it still takes half damage even if the spell doesn't say that. 3. Exceeding the AC of a target by 50% is a critical hit. (Ie if the ac is 20 and you roll a 30 or if the ac is 16 and you roll a 24) 4. If you roll a 1 on a saving throw, it's double damage unless you're total roll is 50% the needed save. (Ie: DC is 18 you roll a 1 but you have a +9 to that save) All of these can be modified slightly to make your combats harder or easier depending on your need.
I love your little upgrade to your recording system that somehow likens back to watching the news when the broadcasters would turn to each other and talk right after the audio goes out. It's the little things in life 🙂
D&D combat can already be really slow, especially with newer players or older players with new characters. I personally, would only add something like this to the game once everyone was comfortable with their toons and had fast attack rounds.
That's a good point. About to run another game, this time with 6 players. All but 1 are vets but still, it's a lot of players and can go a little slower based on this. Good to consider
This is the thing for me - not only are critical fumbles mechanically bad (it punishes people too much for making extra attacks, with demi-god like Fighters fumbling their weapon and such every few rounds) it also slows down game play in an edition that sacrifices so many good things to play fast. If I'm going to slow 5e down, well I'll play another edition. But if pushed, I'll choose to add something far better than this horrible mechanic.
I love the philosophy of this list: It's not that you suffer bizarre bad luck when you roll a nat 1, it's that you made a mistake in the heat of battle. You overextend yourself and give your foe a chance for a swift riposte, you make a bold swing compromising your grip on your weapon and it doesn't pay off, you put yourself off balance enough that you need to regain your footing if you try to move in the next few moments, you expose yourself to a good parry, you get tunnel vision that doesn't serve you well one way or another, you just... miss hard, or, if you're a bit lucky or skilled, you make use of your mistake, turning it into an opportunity. That... feels like things that would happen naturally in battle! I like it! With the extra attack feature giving an additional roll, I think it would even be reasonable to let each extra attack grant an extra roll, if that wasn't already the plan. The idea of a high-level fighter rolling a nat 1 and getting this smug grin as they pick up a handful of d20, more than happy to gamble on getting advantage for swing #2 or hitting anyway feels like it would be a lot of fun! I absolutely want to see the spell-fumble table, the crit-table, and the near miss table! With spell fumbles, my thoughts immediately go to things like pushing spells or Mythos magic-use rolls in Call of Cthulhu (Haven't actually played it, but it looks like a fun mechanic from reading it) and Shadowrun's Drain mechanic, where when you cast spells you roll against damage from handling all that mana (not as smooth for D&D when you aren't rolling to soak damage normally, but still comes to mind). On the near miss table, a thing I've seen talked about which is probably way too crunchy but also pretty fun conceptually is "hitting within the target's armour bonus," where you didn't miss, exactly, you just didn't do real damage because their armour worked. Again, Shadowrun comes to mind with the whole "every attack against a target, hit or miss, imposes a -1 penalty to their dodge rolls until the end of the round." -1 to dex bonus to AC until start of the target's next turn, maybe? Less apt to happen to high AC, low armour targets, and less impactful on low dex, high armour targets, but still has some impact? This is definitely just brainstorming and spitballing, but this video has been great for making that happen! ^v^ Fantastic work!
The scary thing about doing crit fails when your target hits a nat 20 save is that when you shoot off an AoE spell, you're much more likely to get boned for it.
@@carsonrush3352tbf, fighters might easily be fishing for those critical misses 3 times per round or more (Action Surge), so all in all, I still think critical misses just risk widenening the martial-spellcaster divide even more. But yeah, on those occasions where you get to target a big bunch of enemies with AoE, it's bad for the caster.
Two examples - First one, in game, Player shot an arrow, Rolled a 1 - Ruling your string broke, you have a spare and it will take until the beginning of your next turn to restring your bow and nock your dropped arrow. Second,. attacking a boss which is almost dead, player is the last in that round to attack and rolls a 1, but hits for 1 point which was all that was needed to kill the Boss player is asked to describe how he barely hit for the one point.
For near successes from professor dungeon Master and the ed6 system players have a set of d6s they can add to or subtract from any role or damage given. This is also the concept of Boons and banes from Shadow of the demon lord
I'm on my first DnD campaign and had a critical fumble and the DM made me hit my ally rather than the enemy. My damage was high enough to knock her out and start making death saving throws. I really didn't enjoy it, I wish he would have brought this up before we started.
On near misses and stuff, make it so that your attack "grazes" the target if you miss their AC by 1. You still hit but your attack deals half damage. If your attack would force a saving throw, the target has advantage on that saving throw. Monsters also benefit from this rule. Been using this rule for over a year now. Super fun and has worked wonders in negating that unfortunate circumstance of the "ooh you almost got them but you get nothing" effect.
The problem with crit fumbles compared to when I started in 2E is the greater number of attacks in later editions. While more attacks are naturally great, it also introduces a greater frequency of fumbles from higher level characters who should actually be more, not less, competent with their weapons. The solution I came up with is that a roll of a 1 creates a % chance of fumbles, rather than it being automatic. Fumbles are automatic levels 1-4, offer a chance that the fumble doesn't occur at level 5, and the chance it occurs becomes less likely at level 11 and even less likely at level 20. The problem created here is the addition of another roll to further slow down the action.
For the 2d10 hack of D&D that we're using at our table, we are using steps of 5 for Near Misses and degrees of success or failure. A Near Miss (within 5 of the target) can be a simple failure without further consequences, a partial success, success with a cost (PC decides whether to pay for success or accept a failure--could be gold for a bribe, or a level of exhaustion using the One D&D rules, or it just takes ten times as long), or a success with a consequence (DM decides, usually a condition like Prone, Blinded, or Slowed or Dazed from One D&D, generally only lasting until the end of the next round). I have not applied this to attack rolls, however.
I think the system I have seen that I personally like is the one used currently in the Power Rangers TTRPG is one where your skills (including attacks) are entirely skill based. So let's say your skill is Kung Fu and you want to make a Kung Fu attack on the enemy. For each skill point you put in you upgrade the dice you use D2>D4>D6>D8>D10>D12. So if you have 2 points in Kung Fu you roll the D4. Then that ability can be shifted up or down. Maybe the enemy casts a spell on you and shifts you down to D2 or maybe an ally helps you shifting you up to a D6. And I like this because it is a good way to 1) Let everyone have different strengths. and 2) It gives a good sliding scale of success. The more you practice at a thing the better your chances are but even those can still fail. It really is an interesting system imo.
I’ll share my recommendation to fellow DMs. When using a critical fumble table, avoid turning your players into fools with your description (unless that’s what they want) Player rolls a 1 and drops their weapon. It doesn’t have to slip out of their hand like a silly whoopsie. The enemy they are facing smashes it out of their hand. Player rolls a one and falls prone, they don’t slip on a banana, an errant spell crashes near them and knocks them over. So on and so forth. Using a fumble table to paint more cinematic moments in combat and having those moments backed by mechanics makes them very fun. Just don’t do too much of a good thing.
During one game session a few decades back, my gamemaster ruled that a natural one meant my Sword of Sharpness wielding dwarf Fighter has sliced his own arm off. If nothing else, this explains why dwarfs don't shave.
It’s too late, Monty, I couldn’t hear you over the sound of my soap making machine starting up. All of the boys are helping, too! Now, what am I supposed to use all of this leftover glycerin for? But more seriously, as someone who (maybe foolishly) decided to home brew a 5e campaign for six of his friends with zero prior dm experience and over ten years since I played any dnd game at all, your videos and the Drakkenheim campaigns have been a HUGE help! So, a big thanks to all of you, seriously! 😃
I'd be eager to try a blanket "fumbles on melee attacks allow the target to make a reaction for an opposed grapple check" and "fumbles on ranged attacks hit an unattended object in the room" kind of rule.
Slight modification, crit fumble melee attacks in confined quarters roll a D2 (aka flip a coin). Heads, the enemy gets an opposed grapple check, tails you roll a D8 to pick a direction and your strike goes wide and into that square. For the attack that goes wide, there are 4 cases I have considered: If the square is open, the first attack roll made against you in the next turn gains advantage (similar to the "dangerously exposed" debuff in this vid). If destructible items occupy that square, you roll for weapon damage on them as if you were attacking the group of them intentionally (as a group, distributing damage as if it was a Sleep spell, so the highest HP object takes damage first, and then carry on down the list until you're out of damage to distribute). If enemies are in the way you roll another attack roll to see if it "simply hits or not" (this one can't crit fumble, becuase we're already fumbling) and then you do damage if it does hit. Finally, if a player character or player-affiliated NPC/creature is in the square the attack has gone wide into, and that entity still has a reaction, they can use their reaction to attempt to dodge it with with a contested roll of "fumbling player Attack (rolled with no to-hit bonuses) vs the unintentionally targeted player's Dex check (with bonuses, as if dodging a trap, so Rogues still barely ever get hit). I just realized I made that a lot more complex than I wanted it to, but it all shakes out to a clear-cut set of decisions to make that I don't think many people could argue with from the standpoint of "It doesn't make sense".
Martials already struggle to feel cool in a Caster's game. The only thing they have going for them is combat. This rule basically punishes martials and makes casters look even cooler by comparison. If my DM said they were doing this I'd just never play a martial.
@@D_A_D_ The problem isn't that we want to overly punish martial characters, it's that we don't know how "fumbling a spell" works IRL, so we have nothing to go off of, unlike with the marital characters where humanity has been fighting mostly the same way for almost 10k years so we have a pretty good idea of the various ways things can, have, and do go wrong (only within the past 2-300 years has that really markedly changed with the introduction of firearms and the rest of "modern combat". Heck even combined arms doctrine isn't much different from how the Romans would incorporate horse calvary and war-wagons into their tactics, strategy, and forces).
@@fred_derf There are always factors in a ranged attack beyond the control of the shooter. For instance, you could have someone dive in front of your shot, or you could have the target not even aware of you and simply duck under it to reach something on the floor. 5% odds of something like that happening seems perfectly reasonable.
@@fred_derf To be honest I agree with you, but I haven't seen a good enough "magic misfire" table to warrant use yet, so NEITHER PART of those are getting used at my table currently. One of those "you must have all the Infinity Stones first" kinda things, I guess. I know better than to punish martial classes without punishing casters too. I was focusing on what IRL already tells me martial classes do. Oh and by the way, I'm not truly a believer that marital classes are underpowered when you can eventually get out a total of 9 attacks in a single turn (multi attack x3 + Action Surge + Haste), with an enchanted weapon dealing who knows how many dice of damage, Raging (to deal even more damage if a Barbarian), and using Reckless Attack to do YET MORE DAMAGE. As far as I can tell the only issue is that you have to be closer to the enemy as a martial class. If you actually play the game in 5e at least, martial and caster classes are rather well balanced, and mostly gone are the days of "linear martials, quadratic casters". Because in case you didn't know, Monk is also sort of a caster now (Ki Points are a lot like spell points with very specific uses, and an enemy isn't gonna be doing much on its turn if it's been Stunned or knocked Prone by use of those Ki points), and Paladin has ALWAYS been a half-caster/half-martial hybrid class. Ranger is the only real odd-one-out, with the skills it grants only being useful in a very story-driven campaign which might not happen all that often unless BOTH player AND DM are clever about it. And casters can miss too, just because they're casting Fireball doesn't mean that the targets can't all make their dex saves or be immune to fire damage. Fire is the most commonly resisted/immune damage type, and physical damage is not often granted total immunity in any case. Oh and then there's Paladins. Because everything I just said about Fighters applies to Paladins too (who would be under-selling themselves a lot if they didn't take at least a few levels in Fighter). Did you want all 9 of those attacks you can get from Fighter to also be casting Smites of various flavors? Paladin has you covered (and the enemy covered... in blood, and with Sentinel).
I like the idea of a near miss especially as hitpoints are supposed to represent a combination of damage and also stamina, so with a near miss you didn't hit them but they still had to expend energy to avoid or deflect your attack, maybe just have the attack deal minimum damage and of course be unable to trigger effects which only trigger on a hit such as sneak attack or divine smite etc (not that you'd waste a smite that would deal 2 damage baseline). I'm also glad you put something in there for martials, I've had a game with fumbles in before where any char with extra attack felt like they were the worst at martial combat due to being more likely to roll a 1 which is the exact opposite of how it should be. Also with the idea of having a success with a cost, how about being able to spend hit dice to boost a result, represents the kind of exertion that leaves you kind of hurting for a while as those hit dice are health you wont get back on your next short rest, and if you're out of hit dice, start spending your own HP to take 'em down so you can kill the BBEG and then die dramatically.
I think the ‘turning the near miss into a hit’ would be an interesting idea for a new feature that takes those things into account. I would see the blanket house rule too balanced toward the players if you didn’t give monsters the same options. Even if you did allow both to do those things on near misses I think it may bung up flow. I’ve found that the best vibe of gameplay is when turns are executed clearly and tight. Adding more minutes to each turn really slows down how much you can accomplish in one session. Love you guys. My Owlin, Ranger-Rogue assassin is directly built off one of your prior videos.
Quick thought on Critical Success: 20 - Target is stunned 19 - Next attack on target is at advantage regardless of offsetting disadvantages and target's next attacks are at disadvantage 18 - Next attack on target is at advantage (normal offsets apply) and target's next attacks are at disadvantage 2,3 - If your next attack is at advantage, you lose benefit of advantage 1 - Normal damage instead of doubled High roll has extra effect on target reducing their ability to attack and to defend themself. Low roll means you put so much into that attack that you're slightly debuffed or don't gain benefit of doubling.
This is a pleasant change from the fumble tables my old DMs used. With those DMs, if you rolled a 1, your character would take x2 or x4 weapon damage, or potentially do the same to a neaby ally instead. Weapons breaking was also a common occurrence as well on a fumble. And if you rolled a fumble, and followed it with another 1, you dropped unconscious.
There is one mechanic/table I would like to add and that's when you miss the AC, but hit the armor. Like when it's the armor that deflected the hit. I feel like, depending on what the hit was, there should be an effect there. Like, if I miss getting a clean hit with a war maul, but only just barely, and it was chainmail that saved them, that chainmail isn't going to stop all that force. I feel there should be a mechanic where the person getting hit is forced to move to avoid the hit, or is knocked prone, or the armor is damaged or you're locked in a weapon bind with the assailant. Something like that. I do love the idea of being in the bind with someone. You make a contested strength or dexterity check (if you're a martial class, you can use proficiency). If you win by less than 5 points, you break the bind and land a hit like a normal attack. If you win by more than 5, you break the bind, make the hit, and put the enemy on the backfoot. Maybe they fall prone, maybe they get disadvantage on their next strike if they don't use their movement to steady themselves, maybe you get advantage on your strike. If you lose by less than 5 points, they break the bind and get their attack off on you. If you lose by more than 5 points, they break the bind, make the hit, and put you on the backfoot. Maybe you fall prone, maybe you get disadvantage on your next strike if you don't use your movement to steady yourself, maybe they get advantage on their strike.
Knowing how hard of a blow to deliver to an enemy to render them unconscious but not kill them is very difficult. Knowing that, I like the idea of "If you eliminate an enemy with an attack roll that exactly matches their AC (bonuses included on both sides), the enemy is knocked out rather than simply killed". This also adds in the possibility of certain weaker PC's only being able to muster "exactly the required AC at best" to defeat some enemies with higher AC, which would also translate well to the result being "Knocked out rather than slain" from a narrative standpoint.
When I played 2E AD&D, there were both Critical Hit and FUmble tables, and they were a blast. They added so many random, bizarre, hilarious events, like "Random Head Explosion", that I thought really made the storytelling aspect of the game super fun. I miss those. Sure, it could kill a great character (if the DM so allowed), but it made for some great cinematic moments.
i've always wanted to implement degrees of success from powered by the apocalypse, where failures just mean you don't do what you do, half-success means you accomplish what you set out to do but at a cost, and a success means you just succeed. it might obviously be a bit trickier to implement, but i like the idea of a more dynamic combat system where players have to choose whether to land an attack but overstretched and lose their next attack or cast a spell that misfires and has a reduced range or something.
After you argued against critical fail tables before, I suggested ending them to my party before we started a new campaign, but they rebelled as crit fails had given us some great moments. However we have a rule that they only apply to the first roll of your turn (we have a lot of spellcasters and a monk so this was to be fair on him). I also have tables for melee fumbles, ranged fumbles and spellcasting fumbles. The spellcasting fumbles are a little more severe than weapon fumbles but that seems fair given they don’t risk a crit fail if they cast a spell with a saving throw. Still, the worst on that table are that they teleport 30ft in a random direction or have a wild magic surge. Monsters do also have to roll the crit fail table (for their first attack of each turn) but if that would really upset the tone, I’d just lie.
I'm curious to see your take on critical hits after this video. Every time I hear "critical hit table", I think about the nine wacky tables from 2E combat and tactics. My cousin and I spent some time rolling him up a dwarf fighter who had his head cut off on the first attack in the first round of combat because of some unlucky rolls on that table.
I keep it simple- if you roll a 1 in melee combat your opponent gets an attack of opportunity, if you roll a 1 at range you roll again to see if it hits the ally nearest to you or the enemy. There's another roll involved either way, it's quick and it feels like it has an effect on the battle without having to remember anything for the rest of the turn. It also breaks up the flow of combat without being confusing.
One potential idea is this. If you have advantage on an attack (assuming you have a crit success table) and you roll a crit, you can either choose to roll on the table or take whatever that extra roll from advantage was for the table choice. Or the inverse On disadvantage crit fail, if the second die is under a 10 you must take whatever was rolled, if over 10 you roll on the table as normal.
I am absolutely going to try this out and flip it for success, with minor adjustments (I.e. the enemies roll to see if they fall prone or lose their weapon) if my DM allows it this looks like fun
I still use the crit hit/fumble tables from the July(?) 1980 Dungeon magazine, however it is more of a guideline than a hard and fast rule (typically erring on the side of the players). This works for both PCs and enemies. The party loves seeing the enemy bulk up for a major attack then rolling a nat 1 and tripping or hitting one of their allies. Since my 2 campaigns are both high level, for ability checks and saving throws, a nat 1 is not an auto fail and nat 20 not an auto success. Nat 1 counts instead as a -5. If they still pass, they pass (showing they are amazing at that skill/ST). A nat 20 counts as a 25. If they still fail (rare), they fail. Additionally, sometimes a nat 20 on a ST may offer to avoid all damage instead of half damage (regardless of having evasion).
Role and play have got a little DM book that has critical hits and fumbles for ranged, melee and magic. I used it for the first time last week and my players really liked them
I use, in one of my games, a system I call AARDDass Mode. AARDDass Mode ensures players are testy, paranoid and set on edge for the entire gaming experience. AARDDass Mode causes a sharp increase in blood pressure and cortisol levels during gameplay (it's great.) The ARDD system is the "Armour and Attack Rating Differential Damage Alternative Scoring System." It's very simple:- Weapons deal Damage, and they deal Damage when they are applied to opponents. Weapons deal the average Damage for their Dice class, with no modifiers. Whenever an Attack is declared, an Attack Roll is made to determine the Attack Rating, then the difference between the Attack Rating and the Target's Armour Class is added directly to, or subtracted from, the Damage. In this way, if the Target's Armour Class is 14, and the Attack Rating is 19, an additional 5 Damage of the type the weapon would do is added. If the Target AC is 15 and the Attack Rating is 25, then 10 additional Damage is dealt. By corollary, if the Armour Class is 17 but the Attack Rating is 13, 4 Damage is removed from the Weapon's Damage. This makes a dynamic combat scenario when everybody deals and takes Damage every single Attack, but just how much or how little is dependent on kit and skills. Saving Throws are also affected, in the same way. For every digit below the Saving Throw DC, an additional point of Damage that the Spell or Trap would deal is applied. In this way, if the Dexterity Save DC for a "Lightning Bolt" Spell is 16, and the Dexterity Saving Throw is 12 after modifiers, an additional 4 points of Lightning Damage would be applied after Damage is calculated.
So I was thinking about it, and what if there was an option to force your opponent to roll on the crit fail as part of your failure. It's kind of an "I'm going down but I'm taking you with me." It makes the crit fail less about "I suck", and more about "something went sideways."
Critical Hit Table entry: "Make an opening" - An ally can make a basic melee, ranged, or cantrip attack against the target. It could be set as an actual Attack of Opportunity, engaging the reaction rules, or just a free extra hit for the party.
Pathfinder 2e actually does have the 4-step degree of success for maneuvers and martial attacks, too, it's just that the effects aren't always as immediately apparent (though for maneuvers, they tend to be). For example: You attack with your longsword. Assuming you don't hit, you either miss (fail to hit the target's AC), or critically miss (fail to hit the target's AC by 10 or more, the inverse of a critical hit). From your perspective, both rolls are a miss, so what's the difference? The difference is this: Some classes (e.g. swashbuckler) and creatures have abilities that state "When someone critically misses you with an attack, you can ." For example: You critically miss the swashbuckler, who can now use his Opportune Riposte reaction to either make a melee strike against you, or attempt to disarm you.
At our table nat1 usually end in dropping weapon, weapon getting stuck in tree, door frame etc. And having to use an action to pick it up, uncover it from snow/mud or pull it from the tree. Some times we hurt our selfe or ally 1d4 dmg. On spells we some times also roll on wildmagic. Same goes for monsters. On a crit(nat20) we do a full weapon die + a weapon die rolled + extras. So with a d8 weapon you do; 8 + 1d8 + extras. This way you dont risk getting a snake eyes when you finally crit. Same with monsters.
I normally have the house rule that if the AC is met, the target takes half damage. Be it to an enemy or to a character. If i were to add anything for getting near the AC, it would be one below causes them to have disadvantage OR no attacks of opportunity until their next turn, OR they fall to one knee and advantage against them. I wouldn't bog it down by going to within 5 because that's a LOT in each combat
A bladed or pointed weapon gets damaged, get a stackable -1 until you spend 10min with a whetstone or smith's tools to repair it by 1, which can happen during a rest. Alternatively, the Mending cantrip can undo all in one casting. This reflect historical weapon maintenance and encourages use of gear
Lol on the rolling a 1! Still doesn't compare to rolling a 20 with disadvantage, that was epic! Like this table though, great ideas. Will have to talk to my group and see if we can implement it at our table. Love you guys!
For a near miss roll I'd start at 1 off from AC you can choose from one of the following, you can deal half damage but you get attacked for half damage, you get disadvantage, or the enemy gets advantage against you. I also like the one D&D exhaustion mechanic where you get 1-10 points of exhaustion that adds a negative to your d20brolls for each point of exhaustion. I'd say you could maybe force a full damage attack through but you then take a point of exhaustion in addition to one of the other things. The only difference is the enemy gets a full damage attack also.
3.5 had a degree of success/failure for some skills at 5 & 10 below/over the target number. Breaking lock picks if failed by 5 or more and setting off the trap if failed by 10 or more. A knowledge check gave you extra info every 5 above so you could gain quite a lot on monsters and spells from focusing on a particular knowledge skill.
This would be great to implement since we use dynamic fails/crits, where 10 under AC/DC is a crit fail, and 10 over is a crit. We’ve always kind of winged it with fails, from slipping and falling prone, to opportunity attacks or being disarmed.
this is a pretty good fumble table in my opinion! The only thing I never liked about critical hits and misses is when the extremes meet; if you have an AC of 25 and one of the 20 kobolds gets a crit, but only has an attack bonus of +4, then they could only really get 24! and if you have an attack bonus of +14, striking an AC of 15 or lower with a nat 1 still could hit! I personally like adding the rule if your bonus would normally hit on a nat 1 or miss on a nat 20, then you reroll with an additional -10 (nat 1) or +10(nat 20), I call it the roll extension: so there's brutal mode: rerolls of natural 20s that could not hit- 20 = critical hit, success=hit; failure = miss, and 1 = critical miss; and rerolls of natural 1's that could hit- 20 = hit, success = miss, failure = critical fail, and 1 = skip any rolls on critical table and take worst. or there's gentle mode: rerolls of natural 20's that could not hit- 20 = skip rolls on critical table and take best, success = critical hit, failure = hit, 1 = miss; and rerolls of natural 1's that could hit- 20 = critical hit, success = hit, failure = miss, and 1 = critical miss. you can play both 1 and 20 being brutal or gentle, or mix it up B/G or G/B for 1/20 respectively. so, would you add this to you next game? which version? (Full Gentle G/G, middle ground G/B, Extremes B/G, or Full Brutal B/B)
One rule I use for critical fumbles on ranged attacks is that if there's another creature with 5 feet of the attack target, you make a second attack roll against that creature. If there's more than one creature within 5 feet, then a d6 is rolled to determine who it hits. it cannot hit the original target though. Though after watching this I might use these new fumble rules :). One rule that I've thought of implementing is similar to what you talked about with barely missing a creatures AC by 1, I've been thinking you could maybe deal a little bit of damage; like just deal damage equal to your modifier used for that attack roll but I would rule this cannot be used to kill a creature and any additional effects of the attack would not apply (so no extra damage from a flametongue or abilities that trigger on a hit)
We had a method in AD&D where you would always roll another d20 after a Nat 1 or a Nat 20. If you "backed up" a Nat 1 w/ a Nat 1, it was the worst outcome -- drop melee weapon, fall prone, range weapon malfunction, wild/unpredictable magic -- DM choice. "Backing up" a Nat 1 w/ a Nat 20 meant a miss (i.e. no damage), but will a twist - pushed the adversary off balance. Backing up a Nat 20 meant 2x damage or cleaving or something situationally appropriate - DM choice. So, it wasn't as much of a table, as a spectrum of possible 'twists' the DM could throw out ... mostly flavor, but at either end of the 2nd d20, there would be gameplay consequences. And if you "backed up" a Nat 1 w/ a Nat 1, you had to roll another d20. Those could be very dire consequences. I've found a lot of more recent DMs not receptive to this. Hope your video changes hearts and minds. One thing tho -- Nat 1 as a "broken weapon" or a "broken focus"- no. Never. No weapon would ever last more than a few combats. Maybe if you backed up a Nat 1 w/ a Nat 1 your (non-magical) sword would do one less damage until you could have it sharpened...
Amber had a lot of great ideas for duels. I had house rules for stances so both duelists would have a stance and I would tell an attacker that their thrust was stopped but an inch from the target and give the option to choose to wind/bind or attempt footwork to try and get that hit in at the risk of taking a hit back. In real fights doubles or blow afterblow are extremely common. Famous curmudgeon george silver complained constantly about italian rapier fencers taking huge risks.
When you roll 1 on an attack roll, you roll your weapon’s damage die (dice) to determine the outcome (with increasing weapon damage, the results get more severe) Crits: Your house rule max dmg +1 extra roll is great, although some critics say it's too powerful. So, how about this: "When you crit, your damage dice roll results can never be lower than your Proficiency Bonus (even when it makes some light weapons more powerful after level13, why not?) ".
I would like to see a critical fumble table for ability checks. The same event can vary by who is the DM at our table. With 1 of our DMs, a rogue climbing a ladder could: Roll stealth to climb the ladder quietly Roll acrobatics to get to the top If either is a 1, a rung breaks. Roll acrobatics or athletics to catch yourself and to keep the ladder from falling Roll to see how many guards heard the noise. That is a lot of dice for a simple action. Having a new set of rules will help the flow of the game.
Our campaigns have gone back and forth with whether or not to use crit tables. At the end of the day, I've gotten most comfortable with using one that focuses mostly on flavorful outcomes -- rather than deadly -- and limiting them to a single effect, per PC, per turn. Love the idea of flipping a fumble into a hit!
I generally have improvved critical hits and misses in my games, but have been meaning to build an actual table. I've also always given a little bit of credit to a near miss, but usually only if they roll 1 short of the AC. For example, they just miss cleaving their head, but managed to cut off their ear. The target had disadvantage on attacks for two rounds because of shock/pain/fear. Something like that. Or maybe they hit, but don't find a gap in the armour. But still do 1d4 or something.
The only version of this I ever liked was 'Good Boy/Bad Boy Cards' that include rewards for good RP. Basically, any 20 rewards a GBC in addition, any 1 gives the DM a BBC, and vice versa for rolls the DM makes. The effects go from a re-roll for a specific type of roll to 'Rocks fall on the party' and 'The monster gets an additional attack every turn'. They are completely open, to the point of 'You see it. You just see it' and 'You have the perfect tool for this job' being part of it. Of course, this means that there has to be a lot of trust at the table for those cards to be honored and not used to argue some convoluted logic that goes against fun, but at a table that this applies to this gives everyone an additional reward for those extreme rolls. And since the cards can be used at ANY time there's always a chance that any situation can be salvaged or turn sour, as long as the cards are right.
The biggest problem I’ve always had with critical fumbles is that, because it is a flat 5% chance of happening on any given attack, a high level fighter - supposedly the master of combat - actually has a greater chance of getting a critical fumble due to their number of attacks than a doddering, old mage taking a clumsy swing with their staff or dagger. As for the “near miss” situation: I’ve always liked the idea of looking at AC in “stages”. You missed by 1 or 2? Your swing hit their shield. You missed by 3-4? You got past the shield to hit them, but your swing deflected off their armor. Effects could be added to take this into account: that miss by 1 could be a solid reverberating blow on their shield that does no damage, but costs them a point of their shield AC bonus, making the next swing more likely to get through their defenses.
The way I handled the "if I barely miss the AC" idea was that the value required was based on the armor, making heavier armor more resilient to "near miss" attacks, whereas lighter armor is more likely to suffer an effect, but only where the armor itself was critical to the miss, meaning studded leather of AC 12 only suffered an effect if you missed by 1 or 2, the amount of AC you gain without considering your Dex score. This indicates the armor itself taking the hit, not the character dodging it. The effects aren't super hindering such as being pushed back or taking a small penalty to a later attack or something. Heavier armor had a wider range, meaning full plate might be affected by a full 8 since its the armor itself taking the hit, but an effect triggered only on a 19-20 second roll. The only issue with the concept was slowing things a bit with extra rolls, but was offset by rolling it alongside the usual attack die (different color dice were used and one was designated as the random effect die) as well as just the description of what happened filling that spot. Made combat take a bit longer, but also made it more interesting and engaging.
I remember once fighting some enemies - kobolds, maybe? - with poison-tipped blowdarts, and one of them rolled a natural 1. Though we weren’t actually using fumble tables, it was funny enough to say that they accidentally swallowed their own dart!
A simple idea for the critical hit table would be if you roll a 20 then you deal the max amount of damage for the critical hit and if you roll a 1 you deal the min amount of damage. No ideas for results 2-19 yet.
I'm a gloomstalker, I have advantage a lot. Back to back sessions I rolled double 1's. Had to roll to see who exactly I hit and broke my bow. Ended up hitting my spouse both times. In game and out it was a rough time.
I've not actually gotten a nat 1 with my gloomstalker yet I think the lowest I recall rolling was a 6 or 7 total with the sharpshooter penalty because we usually play level 5 or 6 (so she's either gloomstalker 4/rogue 1 or gloomstalker 5/rogue 1) and I I've played her at 4th level once too (gloomstalker 3/rogue 1) but rolled high enough with the two attacks done in that session to hit (myself and the soulknife rogue managed to 2 shot a cr6 creature with our high initiative and great single target damage that totalled 81 points 31 from the rogue and 50 from my ranger with Hunter's mark, 1d6 sneak attack and a crit on the dread ambusher attack so that attack alone ended up being 4d8 and 2d6 for hunter's mark)
I give players the choice of which good and bad things happen to them when they fumble or crit. They have to choose and if they describe and play a fumble it in a funny way I give them inspiration. It goes like that: Crits and Fumbles in Combat: There are no crit and fumble tables in combat, instead, the player or DM has to make a choice. If you fumble, you have to choose one of the following three: Friendly fire: You hit an ally. Out of balance: The next attack against the fumbler is made with advantage. Lost the grip: The fumbler has a disadvantage on attacks for his next attack.
If you crit your Damage Dice, a doublet, and you also have a choice, but the menu is better. However, the options are different depending on whether you use a finesse or strength-based weapon.
Finesse Weapons Crit Options: Effective footwork: Advantage on the next attack. Set him up: You can make an extra attack. low punch: the victim can have an action, bonus action, a reaction, or move until the end of his next turn but just one of those. Disarm: the victim loses the weapon he holds in his hands. Ranged weapons Crit Options: Bullseye: Regular hit dice give maximum damage, and extra hit dice are rolled. Pin him down: The victim is nailed to the ground and has to spend his action to free himself before he can move. Headshot: the victim can have an action, bonus action, a reaction, or move until the end of his next turn. Shot to the hand: the victim loses whatever he holds in one of his hands.
Strengths-based Weapons Crit Options: Brute force: Regular hit dice give maximum damage, and extra hit dice do average. Bullied: The victim is knocked prone if they are not more than two sizes larger. Ragdoll: The victim is pushed back 10 feet if they are not more than two sizes larger. Dazzled: the victim can have an action, bonus action, a reaction, or move until the end of his next turn.
honestly this is an interesting idea, as is the idea of a crit success table, perhaps a 1 on the crit table is just a normal ht, 2 to like 10 is standard crit rules, perhaps something like 11 to 15 adds an aditional weapon damage die on top of the doubling of a crit, 16 to like 19 gives you advantage on the next attack roll, and maybe a 20 maxes out the damage of all your damage dice. So a double 20 means your greatsword wielding paladin;s 4th level smite it practically a tactical nuke. With that said, I would say that any extras you can throw out on an attack, like paladin smites, batlemaster menuvers, have to be applied before the critical success roll, since getting to decide to throw out a smite after you confirm a second 20 is a bit broken. this way you're not fishing for super crits.
i dont actually use a random table, but i carry the fail forward/succeed with a cost with me through all the games i run. it goes something like this: skill roll = DC +5 or more - success with flair. I will improvise these during play, but normally something along the lines of one of the many minor debuffs from BG3 (Dazed, Off-Balance, etc), or adv/disadvantage as the scenario dictates skill roll = DC-5 or more: - success with a cost. I will offer the player a choice, often letting them come up with the cost they will pay for success
I have always believed that both extremes of the die lead to great stories. As a result, people should not be resistant to the fumble end. This portion has actually led to some of the best adventures that I took part in. They actually turned out better and more exciting than when people made those critsuccesses.
I really like your ideas here! I want to add critical fail and success to my next game. Thank you! I'd love to tie in a wild magic table to spells as well, I need to find whatever video of y'all's mention that. Thanks again
Our home brew rule for *barely* missing that pesky AC works really smoothly, gives players a choice, and doesn’t involve a table: If your attack roll misses breaking the AC by 1, you may choose one of the two below options: 1. Glancing blow - your attack partially misses, but has some effect. Roll all damage normally, but then halve the damage done (rounded down) 2. Overextend - you press the attack and hit the target, but in doing so open up a gap in your defenses. Your attack hits and does full (normal) damage, but the target can immediately use its reaction to make an attack of opportunity against you. Feel free to steal!
Lose your Weapon random direction could be 1d8 for the eight directions around the pc Consider changing Lose your Weapon to include the caster's spell focus if the attack was a spell requiring an attack roll.
It's much easier to think of a balanced critical miss table than a critical hit table without making it too powerful. I would love to see your take on a critical hit table
Give and take. If you fail on your attack roll you get advantage on your next attack roll. However, if you roll a one, you gain disadvantage on your next attack roll
A wild magic surge is something you can't change from happening even with skill and training where as a fumble would be able to be prevented by a more experienced fighter who though might miss wouldn't fumble and have a serious negative effect from it.
For bonus on critical hit on my table (actually I only applied it to some BOSS): 1 - The crit damage become RAW crit damage instead of our homerule extra full damage dice. 2 to 9 - Nothing happened 10 - Target pushed 10 feet 11 - Target is prone 12 - Target's next attack has disadvantage 13 - Target's speed is halved 14 - Target's speed become 0 15 - Target's weapon or spellcasting focus sent flying 15 feet 16 - Any 2 combination of 10 - 13 17 - Any 3 combination of 10 -13 18 - All the 4 of 10 - 13 19 - Target lose 1 of their limbs or eyes 20 - Target die
At my table the critical fumble has 3 outcomes. An enemy in melee range makes an attack of opportunity, the character's next attack it at disadvantage or the next attack against the character is at advantage. They also don't stack so a character with extra attack can only fumble once per turn.
This is fun. But it's very forgiving. I would get rid of the *You just Miss* rolls. Cuz then that extra time spent using the table is just wasted time. We use PC specific Nat 1 rules at our Table. On my Barbarian a Nat 1 causes a Charisma save that if I fail that too, I break my weapon. And as a Boon for having this Fail state, my crit range was increased to 19-20. Awesome Risk Reward system.
Two issues I see here: Lose your grip - what about ranged weapons or casters? Spellcasting foci can be like an amulet around your neck, or individual materials that I can't imagine being thrown 15ft accidently. Same with a bow, you might drop it, but not throw it. Clumsy footwork - what if you didn't move at all? Sometimes ranged players stay in the same spot for a few turns.
I usually have comical relief when monster crit fail, such as a wizard shoots scorching rays and and nat ones and lights themselves on fire or rips his pants or something that sounds fun at the time .
@dungeoncoach has the AC/EV/ARV system. I think that's the best way I've seen for almost hits to be handled. It also makes armor so much cooler and meaningful
I think if martials get critical fumbles then casters need something too, martials are already more likely to roll them in the first place making them more punishing is just conpounding things
If a fighter does their cool thing "IE: 3 attacks, action surge for 3 more, then bonus action for another" they've got almost a 30% chance of fumbling at least once. Almost 50% if they're hasted. They're likely to fumble at least once every single encounter. That doesn't seem fair to me considering most classes get to do their cool thing without any random extreme failure chance.
In regards to the Extra Attack bonus: I would like to suggest that Eldritch Blast be included within that feature, due to its unique scaling with more attacks than more damage.
Although, for the Lost Grip, I would say that your arcane focus flies away instead, maybe? I just feel that some warlocks would get shafted by this fumble table.
Our DM uses a Fate die. It has a “+”, a “-“, and blanks on it. Blank nothing happens and you miss. A “+” and you still hit either the intended target or one next to it for 1/4 damage. A “-“ and you hit an ally or yourself for 1/4 damage.
Kelly rolled a 1 on his deception check at the start
I believe the die was a 1. Kelly I believe!
@@eclectic9210 I also believe Kelly, but even in a video about fun critical fumbles, they're unable to show excitement about rolling a 1, so the reaction comes of disingenuous 🤣
Possibly... but might you have instead rolled a 1 on your perception check, when you evaluated Kelly's claim? 😁
Yes, please make a Critical Success table, that would be great fun!
In "True Lies" Jamie Lee Curtis rolls a 1 and she drops the gun. The gun is firing while going down the stairs. Because she rolled a 20 on the fumble table, she hits bad guys.
comedic genius
Wait, does this description mean I can stop being annoyed at this scene because firearms don't actually go off if dropped since the days of the percussion cap? Brilliant!
At my table, I use the One DnD rules for Exhaustion, which ties into missing an enemy's AC by 1. I let my players take a level of Exhaustion to make their attack hit. It gives a good balance of immediate reward for long term consequence and lets someone whose been unlucky get some work done.
I always had a problem with 5% of attacks hitting or missing critically. I like the way these crit misses tanging from bad to regular miss to a couple of decent reversals. Nice job!
Roll a nat 1. Everyone sees you miss your attack and have a deep feeling of disappointment towards you. Your target is also disappointed in you.
Barbarian party member loses Rage, gains Disappointment.
@@CoffeeStained love it.
... you gain the Shamed condition
Your parents also disappointed. They send you letter, accusing you of bringing shame to the family.
Some things I've seen that I like are:
1. If an attack hits exactly the targets armor class it only does half damage.
2. If a character or monster makes the exact threshold of the saving throw it still takes half damage even if the spell doesn't say that.
3. Exceeding the AC of a target by 50% is a critical hit. (Ie if the ac is 20 and you roll a 30 or if the ac is 16 and you roll a 24)
4. If you roll a 1 on a saving throw, it's double damage unless you're total roll is 50% the needed save. (Ie: DC is 18 you roll a 1 but you have a +9 to that save)
All of these can be modified slightly to make your combats harder or easier depending on your need.
This is basically Pathfinder, isn't it?
@@heatoncustomwoodworkingflo1769you do full damage if you meet AC in pathfinder tho. Also yea the rest is PF
I love your little upgrade to your recording system that somehow likens back to watching the news when the broadcasters would turn to each other and talk right after the audio goes out.
It's the little things in life 🙂
D&D combat can already be really slow, especially with newer players or older players with new characters. I personally, would only add something like this to the game once everyone was comfortable with their toons and had fast attack rounds.
That's a good point. About to run another game, this time with 6 players. All but 1 are vets but still, it's a lot of players and can go a little slower based on this. Good to consider
This is the thing for me - not only are critical fumbles mechanically bad (it punishes people too much for making extra attacks, with demi-god like Fighters fumbling their weapon and such every few rounds) it also slows down game play in an edition that sacrifices so many good things to play fast.
If I'm going to slow 5e down, well I'll play another edition. But if pushed, I'll choose to add something far better than this horrible mechanic.
I love the philosophy of this list: It's not that you suffer bizarre bad luck when you roll a nat 1, it's that you made a mistake in the heat of battle. You overextend yourself and give your foe a chance for a swift riposte, you make a bold swing compromising your grip on your weapon and it doesn't pay off, you put yourself off balance enough that you need to regain your footing if you try to move in the next few moments, you expose yourself to a good parry, you get tunnel vision that doesn't serve you well one way or another, you just... miss hard, or, if you're a bit lucky or skilled, you make use of your mistake, turning it into an opportunity.
That... feels like things that would happen naturally in battle! I like it!
With the extra attack feature giving an additional roll, I think it would even be reasonable to let each extra attack grant an extra roll, if that wasn't already the plan. The idea of a high-level fighter rolling a nat 1 and getting this smug grin as they pick up a handful of d20, more than happy to gamble on getting advantage for swing #2 or hitting anyway feels like it would be a lot of fun!
I absolutely want to see the spell-fumble table, the crit-table, and the near miss table! With spell fumbles, my thoughts immediately go to things like pushing spells or Mythos magic-use rolls in Call of Cthulhu (Haven't actually played it, but it looks like a fun mechanic from reading it) and Shadowrun's Drain mechanic, where when you cast spells you roll against damage from handling all that mana (not as smooth for D&D when you aren't rolling to soak damage normally, but still comes to mind). On the near miss table, a thing I've seen talked about which is probably way too crunchy but also pretty fun conceptually is "hitting within the target's armour bonus," where you didn't miss, exactly, you just didn't do real damage because their armour worked. Again, Shadowrun comes to mind with the whole "every attack against a target, hit or miss, imposes a -1 penalty to their dodge rolls until the end of the round." -1 to dex bonus to AC until start of the target's next turn, maybe? Less apt to happen to high AC, low armour targets, and less impactful on low dex, high armour targets, but still has some impact?
This is definitely just brainstorming and spitballing, but this video has been great for making that happen! ^v^ Fantastic work!
Shout out to the Dungeon Dudes for sitting down and rolling a die at the start of each take until they got a one.
Legit. It was the first take. That’s why we were both so surprised. You can see it on my face.
@@DungeonDudesInsight check!
The table for spell-casters should also be based on saving throws. Not a lot of spells actually have attack rolls.
The scary thing about doing crit fails when your target hits a nat 20 save is that when you shoot off an AoE spell, you're much more likely to get boned for it.
@@carsonrush3352do something similar to their solution for extra attack, basically the same problem
@@carsonrush3352tbf, fighters might easily be fishing for those critical misses 3 times per round or more (Action Surge), so all in all, I still think critical misses just risk widenening the martial-spellcaster divide even more. But yeah, on those occasions where you get to target a big bunch of enemies with AoE, it's bad for the caster.
I would add a "channeling" skill check that they can crit & fumble on.
Yeah but it's hard to increase spell DC :(
Two examples - First one, in game, Player shot an arrow, Rolled a 1 - Ruling your string broke, you have a spare and it will take until the beginning of your next turn to restring your bow and nock your dropped arrow. Second,. attacking a boss which is almost dead, player is the last in that round to attack and rolls a 1, but hits for 1 point which was all that was needed to kill the Boss player is asked to describe how he barely hit for the one point.
For near successes from professor dungeon Master and the ed6 system players have a set of d6s they can add to or subtract from any role or damage given. This is also the concept of Boons and banes from Shadow of the demon lord
I'm on my first DnD campaign and had a critical fumble and the DM made me hit my ally rather than the enemy. My damage was high enough to knock her out and start making death saving throws. I really didn't enjoy it, I wish he would have brought this up before we started.
On near misses and stuff, make it so that your attack "grazes" the target if you miss their AC by 1. You still hit but your attack deals half damage. If your attack would force a saving throw, the target has advantage on that saving throw. Monsters also benefit from this rule.
Been using this rule for over a year now. Super fun and has worked wonders in negating that unfortunate circumstance of the "ooh you almost got them but you get nothing" effect.
The problem with crit fumbles compared to when I started in 2E is the greater number of attacks in later editions. While more attacks are naturally great, it also introduces a greater frequency of fumbles from higher level characters who should actually be more, not less, competent with their weapons. The solution I came up with is that a roll of a 1 creates a % chance of fumbles, rather than it being automatic. Fumbles are automatic levels 1-4, offer a chance that the fumble doesn't occur at level 5, and the chance it occurs becomes less likely at level 11 and even less likely at level 20. The problem created here is the addition of another roll to further slow down the action.
For the 2d10 hack of D&D that we're using at our table, we are using steps of 5 for Near Misses and degrees of success or failure. A Near Miss (within 5 of the target) can be a simple failure without further consequences, a partial success, success with a cost (PC decides whether to pay for success or accept a failure--could be gold for a bribe, or a level of exhaustion using the One D&D rules, or it just takes ten times as long), or a success with a consequence (DM decides, usually a condition like Prone, Blinded, or Slowed or Dazed from One D&D, generally only lasting until the end of the next round). I have not applied this to attack rolls, however.
I think the system I have seen that I personally like is the one used currently in the Power Rangers TTRPG is one where your skills (including attacks) are entirely skill based. So let's say your skill is Kung Fu and you want to make a Kung Fu attack on the enemy. For each skill point you put in you upgrade the dice you use D2>D4>D6>D8>D10>D12. So if you have 2 points in Kung Fu you roll the D4. Then that ability can be shifted up or down. Maybe the enemy casts a spell on you and shifts you down to D2 or maybe an ally helps you shifting you up to a D6. And I like this because it is a good way to 1) Let everyone have different strengths. and 2) It gives a good sliding scale of success. The more you practice at a thing the better your chances are but even those can still fail. It really is an interesting system imo.
I’ll share my recommendation to fellow DMs. When using a critical fumble table, avoid turning your players into fools with your description (unless that’s what they want)
Player rolls a 1 and drops their weapon. It doesn’t have to slip out of their hand like a silly whoopsie. The enemy they are facing smashes it out of their hand.
Player rolls a one and falls prone, they don’t slip on a banana, an errant spell crashes near them and knocks them over.
So on and so forth. Using a fumble table to paint more cinematic moments in combat and having those moments backed by mechanics makes them very fun. Just don’t do too much of a good thing.
During one game session a few decades back, my gamemaster ruled that a natural one meant my Sword of Sharpness wielding dwarf Fighter has sliced his own arm off. If nothing else, this explains why dwarfs don't shave.
It’s too late, Monty, I couldn’t hear you over the sound of my soap making machine starting up. All of the boys are helping, too! Now, what am I supposed to use all of this leftover glycerin for?
But more seriously, as someone who (maybe foolishly) decided to home brew a 5e campaign for six of his friends with zero prior dm experience and over ten years since I played any dnd game at all, your videos and the Drakkenheim campaigns have been a HUGE help!
So, a big thanks to all of you, seriously! 😃
Bonus episode!
A table of near misses or a table for exessively exceeding AC would be awesome
I'd be eager to try a blanket "fumbles on melee attacks allow the target to make a reaction for an opposed grapple check" and "fumbles on ranged attacks hit an unattended object in the room" kind of rule.
Slight modification, crit fumble melee attacks in confined quarters roll a D2 (aka flip a coin). Heads, the enemy gets an opposed grapple check, tails you roll a D8 to pick a direction and your strike goes wide and into that square.
For the attack that goes wide, there are 4 cases I have considered:
If the square is open, the first attack roll made against you in the next turn gains advantage (similar to the "dangerously exposed" debuff in this vid).
If destructible items occupy that square, you roll for weapon damage on them as if you were attacking the group of them intentionally (as a group, distributing damage as if it was a Sleep spell, so the highest HP object takes damage first, and then carry on down the list until you're out of damage to distribute).
If enemies are in the way you roll another attack roll to see if it "simply hits or not" (this one can't crit fumble, becuase we're already fumbling) and then you do damage if it does hit.
Finally, if a player character or player-affiliated NPC/creature is in the square the attack has gone wide into, and that entity still has a reaction, they can use their reaction to attempt to dodge it with with a contested roll of "fumbling player Attack (rolled with no to-hit bonuses) vs the unintentionally targeted player's Dex check (with bonuses, as if dodging a trap, so Rogues still barely ever get hit).
I just realized I made that a lot more complex than I wanted it to, but it all shakes out to a clear-cut set of decisions to make that I don't think many people could argue with from the standpoint of "It doesn't make sense".
Martials already struggle to feel cool in a Caster's game. The only thing they have going for them is combat. This rule basically punishes martials and makes casters look even cooler by comparison. If my DM said they were doing this I'd just never play a martial.
@@D_A_D_
The problem isn't that we want to overly punish martial characters, it's that we don't know how "fumbling a spell" works IRL, so we have nothing to go off of, unlike with the marital characters where humanity has been fighting mostly the same way for almost 10k years so we have a pretty good idea of the various ways things can, have, and do go wrong (only within the past 2-300 years has that really markedly changed with the introduction of firearms and the rest of "modern combat". Heck even combined arms doctrine isn't much different from how the Romans would incorporate horse calvary and war-wagons into their tactics, strategy, and forces).
@@fred_derf
There are always factors in a ranged attack beyond the control of the shooter. For instance, you could have someone dive in front of your shot, or you could have the target not even aware of you and simply duck under it to reach something on the floor.
5% odds of something like that happening seems perfectly reasonable.
@@fred_derf
To be honest I agree with you, but I haven't seen a good enough "magic misfire" table to warrant use yet, so NEITHER PART of those are getting used at my table currently. One of those "you must have all the Infinity Stones first" kinda things, I guess.
I know better than to punish martial classes without punishing casters too. I was focusing on what IRL already tells me martial classes do.
Oh and by the way, I'm not truly a believer that marital classes are underpowered when you can eventually get out a total of 9 attacks in a single turn (multi attack x3 + Action Surge + Haste), with an enchanted weapon dealing who knows how many dice of damage, Raging (to deal even more damage if a Barbarian), and using Reckless Attack to do YET MORE DAMAGE.
As far as I can tell the only issue is that you have to be closer to the enemy as a martial class. If you actually play the game in 5e at least, martial and caster classes are rather well balanced, and mostly gone are the days of "linear martials, quadratic casters". Because in case you didn't know, Monk is also sort of a caster now (Ki Points are a lot like spell points with very specific uses, and an enemy isn't gonna be doing much on its turn if it's been Stunned or knocked Prone by use of those Ki points), and Paladin has ALWAYS been a half-caster/half-martial hybrid class.
Ranger is the only real odd-one-out, with the skills it grants only being useful in a very story-driven campaign which might not happen all that often unless BOTH player AND DM are clever about it.
And casters can miss too, just because they're casting Fireball doesn't mean that the targets can't all make their dex saves or be immune to fire damage. Fire is the most commonly resisted/immune damage type, and physical damage is not often granted total immunity in any case.
Oh and then there's Paladins. Because everything I just said about Fighters applies to Paladins too (who would be under-selling themselves a lot if they didn't take at least a few levels in Fighter). Did you want all 9 of those attacks you can get from Fighter to also be casting Smites of various flavors? Paladin has you covered (and the enemy covered... in blood, and with Sentinel).
I like the idea of a near miss especially as hitpoints are supposed to represent a combination of damage and also stamina, so with a near miss you didn't hit them but they still had to expend energy to avoid or deflect your attack, maybe just have the attack deal minimum damage and of course be unable to trigger effects which only trigger on a hit such as sneak attack or divine smite etc (not that you'd waste a smite that would deal 2 damage baseline).
I'm also glad you put something in there for martials, I've had a game with fumbles in before where any char with extra attack felt like they were the worst at martial combat due to being more likely to roll a 1 which is the exact opposite of how it should be.
Also with the idea of having a success with a cost, how about being able to spend hit dice to boost a result, represents the kind of exertion that leaves you kind of hurting for a while as those hit dice are health you wont get back on your next short rest, and if you're out of hit dice, start spending your own HP to take 'em down so you can kill the BBEG and then die dramatically.
YES! Please make more tables! These will spice combat up so much! I would love to see Crit Success, Spellcasting Crit Fails, and Near Hit tables!
I think the ‘turning the near miss into a hit’ would be an interesting idea for a new feature that takes those things into account.
I would see the blanket house rule too balanced toward the players if you didn’t give monsters the same options.
Even if you did allow both to do those things on near misses I think it may bung up flow. I’ve found that the best vibe of gameplay is when turns are executed clearly and tight. Adding more minutes to each turn really slows down how much you can accomplish in one session.
Love you guys. My Owlin, Ranger-Rogue assassin is directly built off one of your prior videos.
Quick thought on Critical Success:
20 - Target is stunned
19 - Next attack on target is at advantage regardless of offsetting disadvantages and target's next attacks are at disadvantage
18 - Next attack on target is at advantage (normal offsets apply) and target's next attacks are at disadvantage
2,3 - If your next attack is at advantage, you lose benefit of advantage
1 - Normal damage instead of doubled
High roll has extra effect on target reducing their ability to attack and to defend themself. Low roll means you put so much into that attack that you're slightly debuffed or don't gain benefit of doubling.
This is a pleasant change from the fumble tables my old DMs used. With those DMs, if you rolled a 1, your character would take x2 or x4 weapon damage, or potentially do the same to a neaby ally instead. Weapons breaking was also a common occurrence as well on a fumble. And if you rolled a fumble, and followed it with another 1, you dropped unconscious.
There is one mechanic/table I would like to add and that's when you miss the AC, but hit the armor. Like when it's the armor that deflected the hit. I feel like, depending on what the hit was, there should be an effect there. Like, if I miss getting a clean hit with a war maul, but only just barely, and it was chainmail that saved them, that chainmail isn't going to stop all that force. I feel there should be a mechanic where the person getting hit is forced to move to avoid the hit, or is knocked prone, or the armor is damaged or you're locked in a weapon bind with the assailant. Something like that.
I do love the idea of being in the bind with someone. You make a contested strength or dexterity check (if you're a martial class, you can use proficiency).
If you win by less than 5 points, you break the bind and land a hit like a normal attack.
If you win by more than 5, you break the bind, make the hit, and put the enemy on the backfoot. Maybe they fall prone, maybe they get disadvantage on their next strike if they don't use their movement to steady themselves, maybe you get advantage on your strike.
If you lose by less than 5 points, they break the bind and get their attack off on you.
If you lose by more than 5 points, they break the bind, make the hit, and put you on the backfoot. Maybe you fall prone, maybe you get disadvantage on your next strike if you don't use your movement to steady yourself, maybe they get advantage on their strike.
Knowing how hard of a blow to deliver to an enemy to render them unconscious but not kill them is very difficult.
Knowing that, I like the idea of "If you eliminate an enemy with an attack roll that exactly matches their AC (bonuses included on both sides), the enemy is knocked out rather than simply killed".
This also adds in the possibility of certain weaker PC's only being able to muster "exactly the required AC at best" to defeat some enemies with higher AC, which would also translate well to the result being "Knocked out rather than slain" from a narrative standpoint.
Loved this video, guys! Especially loved Kelly kind of showing more of a goofy/silly side. Keep up the great work 🤙🏾
I would absolutely love to see you guys make both a critical success table as well as a critical fumble table for spellcasters
When I played 2E AD&D, there were both Critical Hit and FUmble tables, and they were a blast. They added so many random, bizarre, hilarious events, like "Random Head Explosion", that I thought really made the storytelling aspect of the game super fun. I miss those. Sure, it could kill a great character (if the DM so allowed), but it made for some great cinematic moments.
i've always wanted to implement degrees of success from powered by the apocalypse, where failures just mean you don't do what you do, half-success means you accomplish what you set out to do but at a cost, and a success means you just succeed. it might obviously be a bit trickier to implement, but i like the idea of a more dynamic combat system where players have to choose whether to land an attack but overstretched and lose their next attack or cast a spell that misfires and has a reduced range or something.
After you argued against critical fail tables before, I suggested ending them to my party before we started a new campaign, but they rebelled as crit fails had given us some great moments.
However we have a rule that they only apply to the first roll of your turn (we have a lot of spellcasters and a monk so this was to be fair on him). I also have tables for melee fumbles, ranged fumbles and spellcasting fumbles. The spellcasting fumbles are a little more severe than weapon fumbles but that seems fair given they don’t risk a crit fail if they cast a spell with a saving throw. Still, the worst on that table are that they teleport 30ft in a random direction or have a wild magic surge.
Monsters do also have to roll the crit fail table (for their first attack of each turn) but if that would really upset the tone, I’d just lie.
I'm curious to see your take on critical hits after this video. Every time I hear "critical hit table", I think about the nine wacky tables from 2E combat and tactics. My cousin and I spent some time rolling him up a dwarf fighter who had his head cut off on the first attack in the first round of combat because of some unlucky rolls on that table.
I keep it simple- if you roll a 1 in melee combat your opponent gets an attack of opportunity, if you roll a 1 at range you roll again to see if it hits the ally nearest to you or the enemy. There's another roll involved either way, it's quick and it feels like it has an effect on the battle without having to remember anything for the rest of the turn. It also breaks up the flow of combat without being confusing.
One potential idea is this.
If you have advantage on an attack (assuming you have a crit success table) and you roll a crit, you can either choose to roll on the table or take whatever that extra roll from advantage was for the table choice.
Or the inverse
On disadvantage crit fail, if the second die is under a 10 you must take whatever was rolled, if over 10 you roll on the table as normal.
I am absolutely going to try this out and flip it for success, with minor adjustments (I.e. the enemies roll to see if they fall prone or lose their weapon) if my DM allows it this looks like fun
I still use the crit hit/fumble tables from the July(?) 1980 Dungeon magazine, however it is more of a guideline than a hard and fast rule (typically erring on the side of the players). This works for both PCs and enemies. The party loves seeing the enemy bulk up for a major attack then rolling a nat 1 and tripping or hitting one of their allies.
Since my 2 campaigns are both high level, for ability checks and saving throws, a nat 1 is not an auto fail and nat 20 not an auto success. Nat 1 counts instead as a -5. If they still pass, they pass (showing they are amazing at that skill/ST). A nat 20 counts as a 25. If they still fail (rare), they fail. Additionally, sometimes a nat 20 on a ST may offer to avoid all damage instead of half damage (regardless of having evasion).
A few nitpicks:
The next attack against you needs a time limit, otherwise it could be years later
Role and play have got a little DM book that has critical hits and fumbles for ranged, melee and magic. I used it for the first time last week and my players really liked them
I use, in one of my games, a system I call AARDDass Mode.
AARDDass Mode ensures players are testy, paranoid and set on edge for the entire gaming experience. AARDDass Mode causes a sharp increase in blood pressure and cortisol levels during gameplay (it's great.)
The ARDD system is the "Armour and Attack Rating Differential Damage Alternative Scoring System." It's very simple:- Weapons deal Damage, and they deal Damage when they are applied to opponents. Weapons deal the average Damage for their Dice class, with no modifiers. Whenever an Attack is declared, an Attack Roll is made to determine the Attack Rating, then the difference between the Attack Rating and the Target's Armour Class is added directly to, or subtracted from, the Damage.
In this way, if the Target's Armour Class is 14, and the Attack Rating is 19, an additional 5 Damage of the type the weapon would do is added. If the Target AC is 15 and the Attack Rating is 25, then 10 additional Damage is dealt. By corollary, if the Armour Class is 17 but the Attack Rating is 13, 4 Damage is removed from the Weapon's Damage.
This makes a dynamic combat scenario when everybody deals and takes Damage every single Attack, but just how much or how little is dependent on kit and skills.
Saving Throws are also affected, in the same way. For every digit below the Saving Throw DC, an additional point of Damage that the Spell or Trap would deal is applied. In this way, if the Dexterity Save DC for a "Lightning Bolt" Spell is 16, and the Dexterity Saving Throw is 12 after modifiers, an additional 4 points of Lightning Damage would be applied after Damage is calculated.
So I was thinking about it, and what if there was an option to force your opponent to roll on the crit fail as part of your failure. It's kind of an "I'm going down but I'm taking you with me." It makes the crit fail less about "I suck", and more about "something went sideways."
Interesting concepts. Looking forward to more ideas and tables
Monty immediately putting the kibosh on D&D fight club was hilarious
Critical Hit Table entry: "Make an opening" - An ally can make a basic melee, ranged, or cantrip attack against the target. It could be set as an actual Attack of Opportunity, engaging the reaction rules, or just a free extra hit for the party.
Pathfinder 2e actually does have the 4-step degree of success for maneuvers and martial attacks, too, it's just that the effects aren't always as immediately apparent (though for maneuvers, they tend to be).
For example: You attack with your longsword. Assuming you don't hit, you either miss (fail to hit the target's AC), or critically miss (fail to hit the target's AC by 10 or more, the inverse of a critical hit). From your perspective, both rolls are a miss, so what's the difference?
The difference is this: Some classes (e.g. swashbuckler) and creatures have abilities that state "When someone critically misses you with an attack, you can ."
For example: You critically miss the swashbuckler, who can now use his Opportune Riposte reaction to either make a melee strike against you, or attempt to disarm you.
At our table nat1 usually end in dropping weapon, weapon getting stuck in tree, door frame etc. And having to use an action to pick it up, uncover it from snow/mud or pull it from the tree. Some times we hurt our selfe or ally 1d4 dmg. On spells we some times also roll on wildmagic. Same goes for monsters.
On a crit(nat20) we do a full weapon die + a weapon die rolled + extras. So with a d8 weapon you do; 8 + 1d8 + extras. This way you dont risk getting a snake eyes when you finally crit. Same with monsters.
I normally have the house rule that if the AC is met, the target takes half damage. Be it to an enemy or to a character.
If i were to add anything for getting near the AC, it would be one below causes them to have disadvantage OR no attacks of opportunity until their next turn, OR they fall to one knee and advantage against them.
I wouldn't bog it down by going to within 5 because that's a LOT in each combat
A bladed or pointed weapon gets damaged, get a stackable -1 until you spend 10min with a whetstone or smith's tools to repair it by 1, which can happen during a rest. Alternatively, the Mending cantrip can undo all in one casting.
This reflect historical weapon maintenance and encourages use of gear
Lol on the rolling a 1! Still doesn't compare to rolling a 20 with disadvantage, that was epic! Like this table though, great ideas. Will have to talk to my group and see if we can implement it at our table. Love you guys!
Ever roll two 1s when your rolling with advantage?
@@celestwarrior That's so saaaad! 😆
For a near miss roll I'd start at 1 off from AC you can choose from one of the following, you can deal half damage but you get attacked for half damage, you get disadvantage, or the enemy gets advantage against you. I also like the one D&D exhaustion mechanic where you get 1-10 points of exhaustion that adds a negative to your d20brolls for each point of exhaustion. I'd say you could maybe force a full damage attack through but you then take a point of exhaustion in addition to one of the other things. The only difference is the enemy gets a full damage attack also.
3.5 had a degree of success/failure for some skills at 5 & 10 below/over the target number. Breaking lock picks if failed by 5 or more and setting off the trap if failed by 10 or more. A knowledge check gave you extra info every 5 above so you could gain quite a lot on monsters and spells from focusing on a particular knowledge skill.
This would be great to implement since we use dynamic fails/crits, where 10 under AC/DC is a crit fail, and 10 over is a crit. We’ve always kind of winged it with fails, from slipping and falling prone, to opportunity attacks or being disarmed.
this is a pretty good fumble table in my opinion! The only thing I never liked about critical hits and misses is when the extremes meet; if you have an AC of 25 and one of the 20 kobolds gets a crit, but only has an attack bonus of +4, then they could only really get 24! and if you have an attack bonus of +14, striking an AC of 15 or lower with a nat 1 still could hit!
I personally like adding the rule if your bonus would normally hit on a nat 1 or miss on a nat 20, then you reroll with an additional -10 (nat 1) or +10(nat 20), I call it the roll extension:
so there's brutal mode: rerolls of natural 20s that could not hit- 20 = critical hit, success=hit; failure = miss, and 1 = critical miss; and rerolls of natural 1's that could hit- 20 = hit, success = miss, failure = critical fail, and 1 = skip any rolls on critical table and take worst.
or there's gentle mode: rerolls of natural 20's that could not hit- 20 = skip rolls on critical table and take best, success = critical hit, failure = hit, 1 = miss; and rerolls of natural 1's that could hit- 20 = critical hit, success = hit, failure = miss, and 1 = critical miss.
you can play both 1 and 20 being brutal or gentle, or mix it up B/G or G/B for 1/20 respectively. so, would you add this to you next game? which version? (Full Gentle G/G, middle ground G/B, Extremes B/G, or Full Brutal B/B)
One rule I use for critical fumbles on ranged attacks is that if there's another creature with 5 feet of the attack target, you make a second attack roll against that creature. If there's more than one creature within 5 feet, then a d6 is rolled to determine who it hits. it cannot hit the original target though. Though after watching this I might use these new fumble rules :). One rule that I've thought of implementing is similar to what you talked about with barely missing a creatures AC by 1, I've been thinking you could maybe deal a little bit of damage; like just deal damage equal to your modifier used for that attack roll but I would rule this cannot be used to kill a creature and any additional effects of the attack would not apply (so no extra damage from a flametongue or abilities that trigger on a hit)
We had a method in AD&D where you would always roll another d20 after a Nat 1 or a Nat 20. If you "backed up" a Nat 1 w/ a Nat 1, it was the worst outcome -- drop melee weapon, fall prone, range weapon malfunction, wild/unpredictable magic -- DM choice. "Backing up" a Nat 1 w/ a Nat 20 meant a miss (i.e. no damage), but will a twist - pushed the adversary off balance. Backing up a Nat 20 meant 2x damage or cleaving or something situationally appropriate - DM choice.
So, it wasn't as much of a table, as a spectrum of possible 'twists' the DM could throw out ... mostly flavor, but at either end of the 2nd d20, there would be gameplay consequences. And if you "backed up" a Nat 1 w/ a Nat 1, you had to roll another d20. Those could be very dire consequences.
I've found a lot of more recent DMs not receptive to this. Hope your video changes hearts and minds.
One thing tho -- Nat 1 as a "broken weapon" or a "broken focus"- no. Never. No weapon would ever last more than a few combats. Maybe if you backed up a Nat 1 w/ a Nat 1 your (non-magical) sword would do one less damage until you could have it sharpened...
Amber had a lot of great ideas for duels. I had house rules for stances so both duelists would have a stance and I would tell an attacker that their thrust was stopped but an inch from the target and give the option to choose to wind/bind or attempt footwork to try and get that hit in at the risk of taking a hit back. In real fights doubles or blow afterblow are extremely common. Famous curmudgeon george silver complained constantly about italian rapier fencers taking huge risks.
When you roll 1 on an attack roll, you roll your weapon’s damage die (dice) to determine the outcome (with increasing weapon damage, the results get more severe)
Crits: Your house rule max dmg +1 extra roll is great, although some critics say it's too powerful.
So, how about this: "When you crit, your damage dice roll results can never be lower than your Proficiency Bonus (even when it makes some light weapons more powerful after level13, why not?) ".
I would like to see a critical fumble table for ability checks. The same event can vary by who is the DM at our table. With 1 of our DMs, a rogue climbing a ladder could:
Roll stealth to climb the ladder quietly
Roll acrobatics to get to the top
If either is a 1, a rung breaks.
Roll acrobatics or athletics to catch yourself and to keep the ladder from falling
Roll to see how many guards heard the noise.
That is a lot of dice for a simple action. Having a new set of rules will help the flow of the game.
I like this better than what I have seen elsewhere by a wide margin!
~_~
Our campaigns have gone back and forth with whether or not to use crit tables. At the end of the day, I've gotten most comfortable with using one that focuses mostly on flavorful outcomes -- rather than deadly -- and limiting them to a single effect, per PC, per turn.
Love the idea of flipping a fumble into a hit!
I generally have improvved critical hits and misses in my games, but have been meaning to build an actual table. I've also always given a little bit of credit to a near miss, but usually only if they roll 1 short of the AC.
For example, they just miss cleaving their head, but managed to cut off their ear. The target had disadvantage on attacks for two rounds because of shock/pain/fear. Something like that. Or maybe they hit, but don't find a gap in the armour. But still do 1d4 or something.
The only version of this I ever liked was 'Good Boy/Bad Boy Cards' that include rewards for good RP.
Basically, any 20 rewards a GBC in addition, any 1 gives the DM a BBC, and vice versa for rolls the DM makes. The effects go from a re-roll for a specific type of roll to 'Rocks fall on the party' and 'The monster gets an additional attack every turn'. They are completely open, to the point of 'You see it. You just see it' and 'You have the perfect tool for this job' being part of it.
Of course, this means that there has to be a lot of trust at the table for those cards to be honored and not used to argue some convoluted logic that goes against fun, but at a table that this applies to this gives everyone an additional reward for those extreme rolls. And since the cards can be used at ANY time there's always a chance that any situation can be salvaged or turn sour, as long as the cards are right.
The biggest problem I’ve always had with critical fumbles is that, because it is a flat 5% chance of happening on any given attack, a high level fighter - supposedly the master of combat - actually has a greater chance of getting a critical fumble due to their number of attacks than a doddering, old mage taking a clumsy swing with their staff or dagger.
As for the “near miss” situation: I’ve always liked the idea of looking at AC in “stages”. You missed by 1 or 2? Your swing hit their shield. You missed by 3-4? You got past the shield to hit them, but your swing deflected off their armor. Effects could be added to take this into account: that miss by 1 could be a solid reverberating blow on their shield that does no damage, but costs them a point of their shield AC bonus, making the next swing more likely to get through their defenses.
I just like that Kelly's hoodie laces make the eyes on his hoodie look like they have slit pupils.
I like a lot of this, definitely would like a magical version
The way I handled the "if I barely miss the AC" idea was that the value required was based on the armor, making heavier armor more resilient to "near miss" attacks, whereas lighter armor is more likely to suffer an effect, but only where the armor itself was critical to the miss, meaning studded leather of AC 12 only suffered an effect if you missed by 1 or 2, the amount of AC you gain without considering your Dex score. This indicates the armor itself taking the hit, not the character dodging it. The effects aren't super hindering such as being pushed back or taking a small penalty to a later attack or something. Heavier armor had a wider range, meaning full plate might be affected by a full 8 since its the armor itself taking the hit, but an effect triggered only on a 19-20 second roll. The only issue with the concept was slowing things a bit with extra rolls, but was offset by rolling it alongside the usual attack die (different color dice were used and one was designated as the random effect die) as well as just the description of what happened filling that spot. Made combat take a bit longer, but also made it more interesting and engaging.
Heck yes! Let the shenanigans begin!
I remember once fighting some enemies - kobolds, maybe? - with poison-tipped blowdarts, and one of them rolled a natural 1. Though we weren’t actually using fumble tables, it was funny enough to say that they accidentally swallowed their own dart!
A simple idea for the critical hit table would be if you roll a 20 then you deal the max amount of damage for the critical hit and if you roll a 1 you deal the min amount of damage. No ideas for results 2-19 yet.
A free called shot on the critting attack would be nice.
I'm a gloomstalker, I have advantage a lot. Back to back sessions I rolled double 1's. Had to roll to see who exactly I hit and broke my bow. Ended up hitting my spouse both times. In game and out it was a rough time.
I've not actually gotten a nat 1 with my gloomstalker yet I think the lowest I recall rolling was a 6 or 7 total with the sharpshooter penalty because we usually play level 5 or 6 (so she's either gloomstalker 4/rogue 1 or gloomstalker 5/rogue 1) and I I've played her at 4th level once too (gloomstalker 3/rogue 1) but rolled high enough with the two attacks done in that session to hit
(myself and the soulknife rogue managed to 2 shot a cr6 creature with our high initiative and great single target damage that totalled 81 points 31 from the rogue and 50 from my ranger with Hunter's mark, 1d6 sneak attack and a crit on the dread ambusher attack so that attack alone ended up being 4d8 and 2d6 for hunter's mark)
I give players the choice of which good and bad things happen to them when they fumble or crit.
They have to choose and if they describe and play a fumble it in a funny way I give them inspiration.
It goes like that:
Crits and Fumbles in Combat:
There are no crit and fumble tables in combat, instead, the player or DM has to make a choice.
If you fumble, you have to choose one of the following three:
Friendly fire: You hit an ally.
Out of balance: The next attack against the fumbler is made with advantage.
Lost the grip: The fumbler has a disadvantage on attacks for his next attack.
If you crit your Damage Dice, a doublet, and you also have a choice, but the menu is better. However, the options are different depending on whether you use a finesse or strength-based weapon.
Finesse Weapons Crit Options:
Effective footwork: Advantage on the next attack.
Set him up: You can make an extra attack.
low punch: the victim can have an action, bonus action, a reaction, or move until the end of his next turn but just one of those.
Disarm: the victim loses the weapon he holds in his hands.
Ranged weapons Crit Options:
Bullseye: Regular hit dice give maximum damage, and extra hit dice are rolled.
Pin him down: The victim is nailed to the ground and has to spend his action to free himself before he can move.
Headshot: the victim can have an action, bonus action, a reaction, or move until the end of his next turn.
Shot to the hand: the victim loses whatever he holds in one of his hands.
Strengths-based Weapons Crit Options:
Brute force: Regular hit dice give maximum damage, and extra hit dice do average.
Bullied: The victim is knocked prone if they are not more than two sizes larger.
Ragdoll: The victim is pushed back 10 feet if they are not more than two sizes larger.
Dazzled: the victim can have an action, bonus action, a reaction, or move until the end of his next turn.
honestly this is an interesting idea, as is the idea of a crit success table, perhaps a 1 on the crit table is just a normal ht, 2 to like 10 is standard crit rules, perhaps something like 11 to 15 adds an aditional weapon damage die on top of the doubling of a crit, 16 to like 19 gives you advantage on the next attack roll, and maybe a 20 maxes out the damage of all your damage dice. So a double 20 means your greatsword wielding paladin;s 4th level smite it practically a tactical nuke.
With that said, I would say that any extras you can throw out on an attack, like paladin smites, batlemaster menuvers, have to be applied before the critical success roll, since getting to decide to throw out a smite after you confirm a second 20 is a bit broken. this way you're not fishing for super crits.
Love it all! My table is watching this! I think 1 2 4 for a near miss table
If you're trying to roll a 1, and you actually roll a 1......is it still a critical fail?
It's a real philosophical conundrum!
i dont actually use a random table, but i carry the fail forward/succeed with a cost with me through all the games i run. it goes something like this:
skill roll = DC +5 or more - success with flair. I will improvise these during play, but normally something along the lines of one of the many minor debuffs from BG3 (Dazed, Off-Balance, etc), or adv/disadvantage as the scenario dictates
skill roll = DC-5 or more: - success with a cost. I will offer the player a choice, often letting them come up with the cost they will pay for success
I have always believed that both extremes of the die lead to great stories. As a result, people should not be resistant to the fumble end. This portion has actually led to some of the best adventures that I took part in. They actually turned out better and more exciting than when people made those critsuccesses.
I really like your ideas here! I want to add critical fail and success to my next game. Thank you! I'd love to tie in a wild magic table to spells as well, I need to find whatever video of y'all's mention that. Thanks again
Our home brew rule for *barely* missing that pesky AC works really smoothly, gives players a choice, and doesn’t involve a table:
If your attack roll misses breaking the AC by 1, you may choose one of the two below options:
1. Glancing blow - your attack partially misses, but has some effect. Roll all damage normally, but then halve the damage done (rounded down)
2. Overextend - you press the attack and hit the target, but in doing so open up a gap in your defenses. Your attack hits and does full (normal) damage, but the target can immediately use its reaction to make an attack of opportunity against you.
Feel free to steal!
Lose your Weapon random direction could be 1d8 for the eight directions around the pc
Consider changing Lose your Weapon to include the caster's spell focus if the attack was a spell requiring an attack roll.
It's much easier to think of a balanced critical miss table than a critical hit table without making it too powerful. I would love to see your take on a critical hit table
Give and take. If you fail on your attack roll you get advantage on your next attack roll. However, if you roll a one, you gain disadvantage on your next attack roll
A wild magic surge is something you can't change from happening even with skill and training where as a fumble would be able to be prevented by a more experienced fighter who though might miss wouldn't fumble and have a serious negative effect from it.
For bonus on critical hit on my table (actually I only applied it to some BOSS):
1 - The crit damage become RAW crit damage instead of our homerule extra full damage dice.
2 to 9 - Nothing happened
10 - Target pushed 10 feet
11 - Target is prone
12 - Target's next attack has disadvantage
13 - Target's speed is halved
14 - Target's speed become 0
15 - Target's weapon or spellcasting focus sent flying 15 feet
16 - Any 2 combination of 10 - 13
17 - Any 3 combination of 10 -13
18 - All the 4 of 10 - 13
19 - Target lose 1 of their limbs or eyes
20 - Target die
Thanks guys. I like your concept and I'm going to use it.
Thanks, I’d test this next session!
At my table the critical fumble has 3 outcomes. An enemy in melee range makes an attack of opportunity, the character's next attack it at disadvantage or the next attack against the character is at advantage. They also don't stack so a character with extra attack can only fumble once per turn.
This is fun. But it's very forgiving.
I would get rid of the *You just Miss* rolls. Cuz then that extra time spent using the table is just wasted time.
We use PC specific Nat 1 rules at our Table. On my Barbarian a Nat 1 causes a Charisma save that if I fail that too, I break my weapon. And as a Boon for having this Fail state, my crit range was increased to 19-20. Awesome Risk Reward system.
I agree if you are going to do it for melee/ranged weapon attacks there needs to be a comparable table for spell casting.
I like options for each level of non-success so it can be mixed up and less predictable.
Two issues I see here:
Lose your grip - what about ranged weapons or casters? Spellcasting foci can be like an amulet around your neck, or individual materials that I can't imagine being thrown 15ft accidently. Same with a bow, you might drop it, but not throw it.
Clumsy footwork - what if you didn't move at all? Sometimes ranged players stay in the same spot for a few turns.
I usually have comical relief when monster crit fail, such as a wizard shoots scorching rays and and nat ones and lights themselves on fire or rips his pants or something that sounds fun at the time .
@dungeoncoach has the AC/EV/ARV system. I think that's the best way I've seen for almost hits to be handled. It also makes armor so much cooler and meaningful
Armor class/evasion class/ armor reduction value. Really cool crunchy system
I think if martials get critical fumbles then casters need something too, martials are already more likely to roll them in the first place making them more punishing is just conpounding things
If a fighter does their cool thing "IE: 3 attacks, action surge for 3 more, then bonus action for another" they've got almost a 30% chance of fumbling at least once. Almost 50% if they're hasted. They're likely to fumble at least once every single encounter. That doesn't seem fair to me considering most classes get to do their cool thing without any random extreme failure chance.
In regards to the Extra Attack bonus: I would like to suggest that Eldritch Blast be included within that feature, due to its unique scaling with more attacks than more damage.
Although, for the Lost Grip, I would say that your arcane focus flies away instead, maybe? I just feel that some warlocks would get shafted by this fumble table.
Our DM uses a Fate die. It has a “+”, a “-“, and blanks on it. Blank nothing happens and you miss. A “+” and you still hit either the intended target or one next to it for 1/4 damage. A “-“ and you hit an ally or yourself for 1/4 damage.