Habololy Forum
House Rules => Critical Misses => Topic started by: Asinjin on July 30, 2015, 10:05:24 AM
-
Thoughts?
-
Too many rules.. leave it be
-
I would just add a simple chart. If you miss on a 1 then your roll on the chart. The majority of the chart nothing happens but a miss. Then add random things that you normally do on a critical miss to the chart. If you would get a bonus on the chart based on your BAB so it is less likely for something bad to happen to you if your are skilled warrior
If you want to make it a little more complex then you could only use this chart for people who have a class that uses the best BAB and monks with flurry of blows because I only think it is a problem for people who are skilled warriors and then critically miss a lot. I think you could use the same thing now for all other classes.
-
While I was looking for the magical missile thread I stumbled upon this. I was just curious what others had to say about this.
-
I can see 2 options.
- I would say that if a players BAB is higher or equal to an opponents AC, then it should just be a miss on a roll of a 1. This would only come into play at higher levels, and only in certain situations.
- Make a feat that negates the added effects of a critical miss. Set the Prerequisites high so that players can only take it at higher levels. Maybe add some feat requirements that only martial classes usually take to narrow down who can take the feat even more.
Either way, critically missing as a high level martial class would have a lessened effect, but still keep it the same at low levels.
-
I can see 2 options.
- I would say that if a players BAB is higher or equal to an opponents AC, then it should just be a miss on a roll of a 1. This would only come into play at higher levels, and only in certain situations.
- Make a feat that negates the added effects of a critical miss. Set the Prerequisites high so that players can only take it at higher levels. Maybe add some feat requirements that only martial classes usually take to narrow down who can take the feat even more.
Either way, critically missing as a high level martial class would have a lessened effect, but still keep it the same at low levels.
The current rule is if you only miss on a 1, then you can't critically miss, so that would take care of BAB higher than AC.
Perhaps if you are attacking with an attack bonus higher than a certain number, you can't critically miss? This stop high level attacks from missing on their initial attack, but perhaps critically miss later in their attack string. Perhaps +25 attack (not BAB) or higher can't critically miss.
-
Penalties on a critical miss are worse the more attacks you have.
I had run the statistics awhile back and can't find them now, but the more d20s that are rolled means increased odds of a "1" showing up. Here's what I remember: the chance of not rolling a 1 on "n" number of dice = (19/20)n. So the odds of rolling a "1" = 1 - (19/20)n
So...
| n | P |
| 1 | 5% |
| 2 | 9.75% |
| 3 | 14.26% |
| 4 | 18.55% |
| 5 | 22.62% |
-
Based on this, a 1st level character has less of a chance of a potential critical miss than a 20th level character. Even worse if you factor in two weapon fighting because the number of d20s increases and therefore so do the odds of seeing a 1.
We've tried to mitigate this by adding that rule about no critical fumble if you can only miss on a 1, but the problem with that is that it uses the bonus for that particular attack roll - which makes iterative attacks a dangerous decision since a the attack bonus trails off significantly and will likely be less than the opponent's AC for the 3rd, 4th and 5th attacks.
I think a potential solution might be to use the character's highest attack bonus when evaluating if a 1 is just a miss or a critical fumble. I think this is similar to how a defender's opposed grapple check is made, so there is precedent.
-
Do critical misses only apply to weapon attacks?
What happens with spells that require an attack toll? I think by core rules, you can critically hit with spells so you should also be able to critically fumble.
-
Do critical misses only apply to weapon attacks?
What happens with spells that require an attack toll? I think by core rules, you can critically hit with spells so you should also be able to critically fumble.
A critical miss can occur, but the only type I've allowed with spells is that you hit someone near. There is no chance of spell failure, dropping things, falling, or hitting yourself.
-
I think a potential solution might be to use the character's highest attack bonus when evaluating if a 1 is just a miss or a critical fumble. I think this is similar to how a defender's opposed grapple check is made, so there is precedent.
I like this with the caveat that bonuses to the first attack and only the first attack do not count for determining if you can critically miss later in that round. True Strike being an example of a bonus that only applies to the first attack of the round.
-
I like this with the caveat that bonuses to the first attack and only the first attack do not count for determining if you can critically miss later in that round. True Strike being an example of a bonus that only applies to the first attack of the round.
As I sit here contemplating how this may fall apart I think we have a couple things to consider.
I'm not sure how opponent AC scales with character AB - if a typical encounter for a 10th level fighter is a creature with AC 25, this modification won't make a difference.
High attack bonus does not necessarily equal skill. Haas can jack up his attack bonus for an encounter by pumping up his Strength to obscene levels. Just because he has a 50+ strength and a corresponding attack bonus in the 30's doesn't mean he is a skilled combatant.
Should the target's AC factor in to how big of an error the attacker made? Target AC already established that the attack was a miss. Seems to me that attacker skill is what would keep a regular miss from turning into something disasterous.
Perhaps using just BAB vs a fixed DC (independent of opponent AC) would be better as an indicator of skill to avoid a critical fumble. You could effectively treat it like a BAB-based skill check (e.g., d20+BAB vs DC20). That way low level characters can avoid a critical fumble if they get lucky, and skillet warriors can skill fail if they are especially unlucky.
-
As I sit here contemplating how this may fall apart I think we have a couple things to consider.
I'm not sure how opponent AC scales with character AB - if a typical encounter for a 10th level fighter is a creature with AC 25, this modification won't make a difference.
High attack bonus does not necessarily equal skill. Haas can jack up his attack bonus for an encounter by pumping up his Strength to obscene levels. Just because he has a 50+ strength and a corresponding attack bonus in the 30's doesn't mean he is a skilled combatant.
Should the target's AC factor in to how big of an error the attacker made? Target AC already established that the attack was a miss. Seems to me that attacker skill is what would keep a regular miss from turning into something disasterous.
Perhaps using just BAB vs a fixed DC (independent of opponent AC) would be better as an indicator of skill to avoid a critical fumble. You could effectively treat it like a BAB-based skill check (e.g., d20+BAB vs DC20). That way low level characters can avoid a critical fumble if they get lucky, and skillet warriors can skill fail if they are especially unlucky.
It's a clever idea, but I don't want to gum things up with more rolls. What do others think?
-
I am happy with what ever changes this rule because I really dislike what it does to high level fighters. I like both of Hero's suggestions.
-
As I sit here contemplating how this may fall apart I think we have a couple things to consider.
I'm not sure how opponent AC scales with character AB - if a typical encounter for a 10th level fighter is a creature with AC 25, this modification won't make a difference.
High attack bonus does not necessarily equal skill. Haas can jack up his attack bonus for an encounter by pumping up his Strength to obscene levels. Just because he has a 50+ strength and a corresponding attack bonus in the 30's doesn't mean he is a skilled combatant.
Should the target's AC factor in to how big of an error the attacker made? Target AC already established that the attack was a miss. Seems to me that attacker skill is what would keep a regular miss from turning into something disasterous.
Perhaps using just BAB vs a fixed DC (independent of opponent AC) would be better as an indicator of skill to avoid a critical fumble. You could effectively treat it like a BAB-based skill check (e.g., d20+BAB vs DC20). That way low level characters can avoid a critical fumble if they get lucky, and skillet warriors can skill fail if they are especially unlucky.
So , basically, we're rolling to confirm a critical miss. I like the DC based save idea. The chance of a critical miss lessens as characters advance. More so for those of a martial discipline, which makes sense.