# Critical Failure chart



## Heir Raktus (Nov 7, 2010)

I was wondering if any fellow DM's might have a botch table that they use? I listen to a friend of mine DM all the time and he has his own botch table that he rolls to unleash on his groups. Just looking for some clever ideas for my group.


----------



## Morrus (Nov 8, 2010)

Why not use your friend's table?


----------



## Heir Raktus (Nov 8, 2010)

Becuase I may or may not be playing with him at some point, so he doesn't want to share.


----------



## Connorsrpg (Nov 8, 2010)

*Crit Hits & Fumbles*

Here are the charts I have developed and used (attached as word doc). Yes, we like things gritty.

If interested - discussion re the charts here: Rules Discussion: New Crit Charts

Cheers, C

Edit: Sorry - Can't seem to get attachment to work?? Here is a link to them. Look at files section at bottom.  
http://connorscampaigns.wikidot.com/dm-tools/

All of this can be found in the site in my sig. Cheers again. C

Edit2: I have attached a Word 97-2003 version to my post on page three of thread.


----------



## Lanefan (Nov 8, 2010)

I have a fumble chart, though I don't know how to attach it here.  It includes various combinations of the following:

- minor damage to self
- minor damage to friend
- full damage to self
- full damage to friend
- critical damage to self/friend
- weapon dropped
- weapon thrown near (10')
- weapon thrown far (20+')
- weapon broken (if magic, save or break)
- shield or helmet broken/slipped
- somehow leave self vulnerable, free attack for opponent

I also have a spell failure table, for when a caster is interrupted or something otherwise goes sideways; usually one of three things will happen:

- nothing (or maybe a small puff of smoke or quiet 'pffft' or 'pop')
- spell reverses if possible
- a wild magic surge

And there's a third table, for when a magic item breaks or magical energy is otherwise released in a way it shouldn't be, results can be:

- nothing
- an explosion of magical energy
- a wild magic surge

Wild magic surges can cause just about any effect you as DM can dream up, from the utterly trivial (a cup of tea appears in someone's hand) to the somewhat confusing (marching footsteps are heard approaching, tramping through party, then receding to silence) to the vaguely dangerous (a 2-12d6 fireball goes off somewhere nearby) to the always-useful (everyone in the party is affected as if by 'Heal') to the completely disastrous (gate in a demon lord or similar, it is not controlled and reacts accordingly) to the wonderful (the next time caster wishes for something it will come true as if 'wish' cast, caster does not know this).  

The tables, of course, trend toward the trivial.

Lan-"the only thing worse than wild magic is tame magic"-efan


----------



## Heir Raktus (Nov 8, 2010)

Screenshot it?


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 8, 2010)

Prior thread on this topic:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-legacy-house-rules/222528-my-games-critical-fumble-chart.html


----------



## Heathen72 (Nov 8, 2010)

Don't forget this Gem from MERP Critical fumble table (Rolemaster)


> Worst move seen in ages. -90 from pulled groin. Enemy stunned for 3 rounds laughing.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 8, 2010)

spunkrat said:


> Don't forget this Gem from MERP Critical fumble table (Rolemaster)




That would be a great way to kill dinosaurs.

Pull the worst move ever seen, and while the dinosaur is stunned from laughing for 3 rounds, the rest of the party can butcher it in safety. 

Any well thought out fumble chart makes the following considerations:

1) Skilled combatants are less likely to fumble than unskilled ones, and ideally this is true even if the skilled combatant attacks more often than the unskilled one.
2) Fumble results don't make unnecessary assumptions about the combat situation, so that any result applies equally well to any situation.  Fumbles generally shouldn't result in combat advantage of some sort.
3) Fumble results are significant enough to justify the bother of rolling for them, but not so significant that they usually determine the outcome of battles (and in particular the outcome of battles between skilled combatants).  The same should also be true of criticals.
4) The fumble results are cinematic in that from the fumble result it's easy to imagine in a visual manner what has happened and to describe the scene with evocative and visually compelling language.

So long as the table conforms to those basic principles, I'm likely to be ok with it.  I'm not really a fan of either criticals or fumbles, because in my experience they are so rarely well thought out and because on the whole they tend to favor NPC's more than PC's.


----------



## jonesy (Nov 8, 2010)

Bit more generic fumbles:

1. You slip and fall. Luckily your face catches the ground. Take a point of damage.
2. You somehow tangle into your own clothing. It'll take a round to free yourself.
3. You are distracted by [something chosen by the DM]. Instead of finishing what you were doing you look at it. Isn't it amazing?
4. Somehow you drop everything you were holding. If you weren't holding anything, you still think you were and look down to find it.
5. Total fumble. Whatever you were doing is instead directed in a random direction [DM rolls] other than the original.
6. You make a momentary stumble, but quickly recover. Immediately redo the action with a -5 penalty. If you get this twice in a row choose #1 instead.
7. What you were trying to do succeeds, but also leaves you wide open. -1 AC until your next round.
8. You fail spectacularly, but make a perfect recovery and actually succeed exactly as you were trying to. Your closest opponent is stunned by this until his next round.


----------



## jonesy (Nov 8, 2010)

Celebrim said:


> 1) Skilled combatants are less likely to fumble than unskilled ones, and ideally this is true even if the skilled combatant attacks more often than the unskilled one.



How about a rule that says there can only be max one fumble per round. The rest are just regular misses.

Edit: although, that might mean that someone who always does a zillion attacks would almost always get a fumble per round. =)


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 8, 2010)

jonesy said:


> How about a rule that says there can only be max one fumble per round. The rest are just regular misses.
> 
> Edit: although, that might mean that someone who always does a zillion attacks would almost always get a fumble per round. =)




Yeah, that's exactly what it would mean.  

If you wanted hard protection against fumbles, a better rule might be that you can always cancel a fumble by forgoing a latter attack in the round.

So a character that could make a zillion attacks per round would simply lose X attacks.  Of course, any reasonable system where a character could make a zillion attacks per round would resolve this as a single attack anyway.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Nov 8, 2010)

Heir Raktus said:


> I was wondering if any fellow DM's might have a botch table that they use? I listen to a friend of mine DM all the time and he has his own botch table that he rolls to unleash on his groups. Just looking for some clever ideas for my group.



I like the Dark Sun botch rule - on a natural 1 you _may_ reroll.  Hit and you hit, miss and your weapon breaks.  Normal natural 1s without this risk/reward have the problem that the more attacks you make, the more botches you roll - so give this reroll risk option (miss you roll on the fumble chart, hit you narrate something stupid that should not work and catches the enemy offguard - e.g. slipping on a rock).  If the player wants to play safe, let them.


----------



## Kerranin (Nov 8, 2010)

Neonchameleon said:


> I like the Dark Sun botch rule - on a natural 1 you _may_ reroll.  Hit and you hit, miss and your weapon breaks.  Normal natural 1s without this risk/reward have the problem that the more attacks you make, the more botches you roll - so give this reroll risk option (miss you roll on the fumble chart, hit you narrate something stupid that should not work and catches the enemy offguard - e.g. slipping on a rock).  If the player wants to play safe, let them.



I am not a fan of 'weapon break' results in games where magical weapons are the norm, I suspect most players would play-it-safe if that could happen. 
Any risk which could have a long-term consequence would deter most players from taking the risk.
I would suggest that consequences need to be limited to the encounter.


----------



## jonesy (Nov 8, 2010)

Kerranin said:


> I am not a fan of 'weapon break' results in games where magical weapons are the norm, I suspect most players would play-it-safe if that could happen.



Because it isn't mandatory it presents an interesting option for certain situations where failure might mean more than just a broken weapon.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 8, 2010)

Kerranin said:


> I am not a fan of 'weapon break' results in games where magical weapons are the norm, I suspect most players would play-it-safe if that could happen.




Having an absolute 'weapon breaks' result that pays no attention to the quality of the weapon is an example of a rule that breaks my second guideline: "Fumble results don't make unnecessary assumptions about the combat situation, so that any result applies equally well to any situation."

Weapon breakage has to be equally reasonable of a result if you are using a poor quality of a weapon or if you are using an adamantium +6 holy avenger.  There have always been rules for handling breaking weapons, saving throws of items, hardness, hit points of objects and so forth, and yet too often the fumble result tables I see regardless of era just run clean past them.  It's not unreasonable that a weapon take some damage as a result of a fumble.  What's unreasonable is that no weapon is apparantly more resistant to taking damage than any other.


----------



## Dausuul (Nov 8, 2010)

Not a fan of critical fumbles, myself. I've never yet seen a critical fumble system that didn't result in a lot of silliness, mainly because the probability of a fumble is way too high--with a party of 4 to 6 PCs and a comparable number of monsters, a couple of natural 1s are more or less guaranteed in every combat that lasts more than a round or two, so you're forever seeing people flinging their weapons across the room or hitting their friends. Moreover, since high-level characters tend to get more attacks, they fumble _more_ often than low-level characters.

If I were going to make a crit fumble table, I'd definitely include some kind of confirmation roll. Beyond that, I'd stick to Celebrim's guidelines, especially #1.


----------



## Dragonhelm (Nov 8, 2010)

I was always a fan of Good Hits and Bad Misses, from the pages of Dragon magazine.  Paizo did a 3e version in their Best of Dragon book, though I personally preferred the original.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Nov 8, 2010)

Kerranin said:


> I am not a fan of 'weapon break' results in games where magical weapons are the norm, I suspect most players would play-it-safe if that could happen.
> Any risk which could have a long-term consequence would deter most players from taking the risk.
> I would suggest that consequences need to be limited to the encounter.



To clarify, the weapon breakage rules are for Dark Sun (and metal weapons are harder to break).  I was suggesting that instead of a weapon break that if you missed the reroll _then_ you rolled on the fumble table rather than have the weapon break as the only (or even likely) fumble.  What this means is that it's not skill that determines the probability of a fumble - it's _recklessness_.  If you're cautious, you never fumble - but get fewer hits.


----------



## Jon_Dahl (Nov 8, 2010)

I have a massive Fumble chart (charts actually) that I've done, tweaked and re-tweaked several times and my players have enjoyed it, because there are so many options that they are pretty much alwats surprised when I roll a result and the same result rarely comes up twice. My table takes into consideration weapon types, one-handed or two-handed weapons, firearms, ranged weapons, common injuries from martial arts, weapon safety precautions, surroundings, sudden fatigue (lactic acid), dropping or throwing your weapon away (highly unusual), tripping at your own feet (and the position you end up in), sudden lapses...
Nimbly characters and fighters are favoured in the chart.

Unfortunately my tables are not in English, so posting the whole thing here would be useless. Too bad, because I'd like to hear constructive criticism about it.


----------



## Celebrim (Nov 8, 2010)

Dragonhelm said:


> I was always a fan of Good Hits and Bad Misses, from the pages of Dragon magazine.




I used it extensively in 1e, and I can say that there is really only one thing good about it - it tries very hard to make fumbles rare for skilled combatants and conversely criticals rare for the unskilled.  It does this by making the confirmation roll for a fumble be rolling on a d% a number less than the difference between what you rolled and what you needed to hit.  In other words, if you couldn't miss except on a '1', you also couldn't fumble, and if you needed a '2' to hit, then at most you had a 1% chance of a fumble.  Probably more than any other attempt, this followed #1 on my list of guidelines the best.  If it wasn't so complicated, I'd still be using it.

The problems you are going to run into if you use the table are that fumble and critical results are far too significant, to the extent that you can almost garuantee that it is going to be the result of some fumble or critical that ends the life of the PC.  At some point, you are going to 'Critical Hit: Self' and/or be auto decapitated, and that will be all she wrote.   Also, if you use it, it will be a good way to remove magic weapons from your game, because it has the 'weapon breaks' or 'shield breaks, no save' problem discussed earlier.  Some bugbear with a wooden club is going to smash your +4 dwarf-forged mithril shield sooner or later.  Also, 'hit self' in some fashion is one of the more common fumbles, so don't be surprised in a battle if half the deaths occur to self-inflicted wounds.


----------



## Dragonhelm (Nov 8, 2010)

Celebrim said:


> The problems you are going to run into if you use the table are that fumble and critical results are far too significant, to the extent that you can almost garuantee that it is going to be the result of some fumble or critical that ends the life of the PC.





Or the DM.  I once ran a game, and I asked my player what he was doing.  He says, "I kill the DM."  Rolls a natural 20.  I had him roll on Good Hits and Bad Misses.  Double-zero.  Beheaded, immediate death.

I could only logically assume that with the death of the DM, the universe imploded.  Game over, man!


----------



## Connorsrpg (Nov 8, 2010)

Darsuul & Cerebrim: Fair comments on the 'use of fumbles' - though we don't mind a 'little' craziness. Could I request you check out (and maybe try) those we use. (As linked above, but word docs are available for download under my sig, under DM Tools Page). Hitting friends is in there, but rare, as is a system that a/cs for quality of weapon when break rolls come up.

To OP. No need for a screen shot. My links (and sig) take you to my site where the crits are available as a WORD doc that you can download and even modify until your heart is content. I cannot attach b/c Enworld won't support docx files apparently??? The discussion on our crits is on our forums.


----------



## turnip (Nov 9, 2010)

Connorsrpg said:


> ... I cannot attach b/c Enworld won't support docx files apparently??? ...




.docx is not backwards compatible with earlier Word programs/programs that recognize .doc files. 

Why Microsoft decided to utilize a format that can't be read by its own program just 3 years prior is beyond me.

btw...Word 2007 can save as .doc instead of .docx. Just so you know.


----------



## Connorsrpg (Nov 9, 2010)

Yeah, I realise that thanks Turnip (cool name).

Perhaps I should do that. Not wanting to threadcap, but why can't Enworld allow docx attachments?


----------



## Lanefan (Nov 9, 2010)

Celebrim said:


> Having an absolute 'weapon breaks' result that pays no attention to the quality of the weapon is an example of a rule that breaks my second guideline: "Fumble results don't make unnecessary assumptions about the combat situation, so that any result applies equally well to any situation."
> 
> Weapon breakage has to be equally reasonable of a result if you are using a poor quality of a weapon or if you are using an adamantium +6 holy avenger.  There have always been rules for handling breaking weapons, saving throws of items, hardness, hit points of objects and so forth, and yet too often the fumble result tables I see regardless of era just run clean past them.  It's not unreasonable that a weapon take some damage as a result of a fumble.  What's unreasonable is that no weapon is apparantly more resistant to taking damage than any other.



In our system, if a fumble result comes up as "damage to weapon" and the weapon is magical, it gets a save to avoid the damage.  The amount of enchantment it has affects the save; thus a +4 weapon is going to have a better save chance than a +1.

As for confirming, a natural '1' gets followed by a d6; roll '1' on that as well and you've fumbled on the main table.  If you don't fumble, you miss - a '1' always misses.

A to-hit roll brought to or below '1' by baneful or adverse effects - including missile fire into melee - also rolls a d6; a '1' there and you've fumbled but on a less damaging table where most results are either minor damage to self or to friend.  Baneful to-hit effects get applied first, so if you're at -2 to hit due to some adverse effect and you roll a '3' you check for fumble first; if you don't fumble then we add it up and see if you hit.

Lanefan


----------



## Hand of Evil (Nov 9, 2010)

I don't think D&D has ever been a good game for fumble tables but have tryed different ones over the years.  The best one I came up with was a fumble resulted in the foe(s) having a better chance to hit the character.  Just a simple -2 to AC during the next round/attack (whichever came first).  

Just could not see a X level fighter wounding themself or having weapon breaks, but could see them leaving an opening.


----------



## Evilhalfling (Nov 9, 2010)

The fair fumble rule I came up with for 3/3.5 specifies that:

1. only the first attack roll in a round can result in a fumble. 
2. fumbles can be averted with a dex check (DC 10 or 15 if the PC/monster is doing something stupid or precarious) 

my fumble charts were similar to others posted here.


----------



## Kerranin (Nov 9, 2010)

Neonchameleon said:


> To clarify, the weapon breakage rules are for Dark Sun (and metal weapons are harder to break).  I was suggesting that instead of a weapon break that if you missed the reroll _then_ you rolled on the fumble table rather than have the weapon break as the only (or even likely) fumble.  What this means is that it's not skill that determines the probability of a fumble - it's _recklessness_.  If you're cautious, you never fumble - but get fewer hits.



Encouraging recklessness? That is most unlike your characters.


----------



## Dausuul (Nov 9, 2010)

[MENTION=19265]Connorsrpg[/MENTION] - Sorry, I have Word 2003 and can't read .docx files. If you save it as a .doc, I'll be glad to have a look. (I play 4E, so I have to find another way to be grumpy and grognardy; my solution is to gripe about the new Word 2007 interface and refuse to upgrade on some kind of obscure principle.)

Here's a suggestion to address the multiple attacks issue: Roll on the critical fumble table if the attacker gets a natural 1 on at least one attack roll _and_ all of her other attack dice that round come up 10 or less. I just ran the numbers on this, and it results in a diminishing likelihood of fumbles as your number of attacks rises: 5% per round for one attack, 4.8% for two, 3.4% for three, 2.1% for four, 1.3% for five. (These calculations were made very hastily as I was getting ready for work, but they look about right.)

This does require people to roll all their attacks at once, though, or apply crits retroactively.

After that, I'd just make a crit fumble table in which 50% or more of the entries are minor, tactical fumbles--something like, "You miss badly and are thrown off balance. Lose your next move action." Throwing your weapon or hitting your ally would be a rare and nasty fumble.

I wouldn't use this approach in 4E, since in 4E there isn't much correlation between level and number of attacks; it all depends on the attack power you're using, and you could easily be making four attacks in a round* at 1st level or one attack at 30th. For 4E, I'd just stick with "fumble on a natural 1" and then factor attacker level into the fumble table somehow.

[size=-2]*Not _every_ round, obviously, but there are a number of "sweep" attacks where you attack each enemy adjacent to you.[/size]


----------



## turnip (Nov 9, 2010)

Connorsrpg said:


> Yeah, I realise that thanks Turnip (cool name).
> 
> Perhaps I should do that. Not wanting to threadcap, but why can't Enworld allow docx attachments?




I have no idea! 
It's been really, _really_ frustrating for me at school; I have a Mac with Office 2004 on it, so anything that my professors send me I cannot open on my computer (as the entire school has gone to Office 2007 [which, btw, I hate....they really buggered the Office programs and made them _less_ user-friendly and intuitive to use]) unless the professor knows to save in the older format. 

On a side note, the Apple programs Pages, Numbers, and Keynote (Apple versions of Word, Excel, and Powerpoint) all open the newer files. Which is weird, that the Apple programs open the MS files, but the MS programs won't...


----------



## Janx (Nov 9, 2010)

turnip said:


> .docx is not backwards compatible with earlier Word programs/programs that recognize .doc files.
> 
> Why Microsoft decided to utilize a format that can't be read by its own program just 3 years prior is beyond me.
> 
> btw...Word 2007 can save as .doc instead of .docx. Just so you know.




MS has a plug-in for some of the older versions of Office to handle the .docx format.

My Office 2003 prompted me to GET the plug-in and auto-install it for me on the first .docx I had to open.

I agree with Celebrim that crits and fumbles aren't good for PCs.

In actuality, a monster or NPC only fights about  6 rounds in his entire existance (before being killed by a PC).  Whereas, a PC fights 13 encounters per level times 6 levels times 20 levels is 1560 rounds of chances of getting a fumble, or being critted against in their 20 level lifespan.

Thats not even counting multiple attacks.

While there are a couple of weapons (like whips and flaily things) that you can hit yourself on, it's not that likely.  It is possible to catch a weapon on your clothes, (it happened this weekend to me while I was training with Oskar the weapons master at the TX renfair).  

But still, not that likely, not impeding (had it been an actual weapon, I'd have pressed on, rather than worry about it).  And ultimately, its demeaning.  Nobody wants their character to be incompentent.  And having fumbles happen is just that.

From a player's perspective, they initially think it's an opportunity to get the advantage over the enemy.  But statistically, it's more likely to be BAD for a PC in the long run.  It's all because they're thinking about individual encounters.  Fact of the matter is, yesterday's crit on an orc matters little.  You were going to kill him slowly or quickly.  Today's fumble with a criticl hit to Self is going to kill you in a fight that would have been less likely to be fatal.


----------



## Connorsrpg (Nov 10, 2010)

OK - saved a copy of our crits as Word 97-2003.

Hope this works 

As stated - disc for these and the actual docs are on website in my sig.

They will not please all those number-crunchers that work out, yes, PCs are more likely to suffer, but we have always played with and enjoyed crits.

Cheers, C


----------



## Neonchameleon (Nov 10, 2010)

Kerranin said:


> Encouraging recklessness? That is most unlike your characters.



They aren't all that reckless...  Well... Maybe all the 4e ones.  Except Vashtar (who you haven't met).


----------



## Lanefan (Nov 11, 2010)

Connorsrpg said:


> OK - saved a copy of our crits as Word 97-2003.
> 
> Hope this works



Looks good - there's some interesting ideas in there, I might yoink a few. 

Lanefan


----------



## Dausuul (Nov 11, 2010)

Wow, that's... very elaborate. I like the tens-ones combination system, and the doubles effects are a nice idea for those "one in a hundred" things that you don't want to happen too often.

It's more detailed than I'm generally inclined to go with, but that's obviously a matter of taste. To be fair, I'm not inclined to go with fumble rules at all, so any level of fumble rules is going to seem like a lot to me.

There do seem to be more hit-on-self effects than I'd be happy with. I've always found hit-on-self fumbles very hard to narrate convincingly. On the other hand, the weapon breakage system, with different "levels" of breakage required to destroy weapons of various qualities, is quite good. I also like the random movement effects; 4E players tend to move their characters around the battlemat like chess pieces, analyzing every position to a nicety, so adding a little randomness to shake up their elaborate schemes is always good.


----------



## Connorsrpg (Nov 11, 2010)

Thanks guys.

RE charts being very detailed, remember to ONLY apply what seems appropriate. There are usually sev effects on one roll. This was intentional, so you don't have to search the chart for an appropriate entry.

@ Darsuul. Actually, there isn't one entry on there where it explicitly says 'you hit yourself'. You could narrate the Struck condition that way if you choose, or come up with a myriad of other of other ways to say you hurt your leg/arm etc. Some ideas at start, but off top my head, tear muscle, jarred in combat, struck by parrying enemy, etc.

Cheers, C


----------



## Hand of Evil (Nov 11, 2010)

Connorsrpg said:


> OK - saved a copy of our crits as Word 97-2003.
> 
> Hope this works
> 
> ...




You know there is plug-in for save in Word to PDF...


----------



## Haltherrion (Nov 14, 2010)

Skip the table. Make the players come up with some interesting failure. It is pretty hard to make a table that really covers all the necessary situations. Plus, the player is probably annoyed enough at rolling the '1' that you don't have to break a prize magic item or break a leg or what not.

Ask yourself, does the pause created by consulting such a table really add much to the game? It can depending on the game and the group but don't create a failure table just cuz it seemed like a fun idea. Make sure it fits with your campaign and players.


----------



## Connorsrpg (Nov 23, 2010)

Good point Marcq - and yes, the Crit Fumble chart certainly does go with our style of play - we love the 'getting percentage' out.

Also, if using these charts, remember it is up to the DM to come up with a rational explanation for the result. Our charts used to do that, but when the same description comes up a few times, it does sound odd. Now the end result is given, with the description left open.


----------



## hagor (Nov 23, 2010)

Evilhalfling said:


> The fair fumble rule I came up with for 3/3.5 specifies that:
> 
> 1. only the first attack roll in a round can result in a fumble.
> 2. fumbles can be averted with a dex check (DC 10 or 15 if the PC/monster is doing something stupid or precarious)
> ...




This is very similar to my situation:
also 3.x, fumble (like critical) needs "confirmation" (i.e. fail a dex check or (usually) reroll attack roll & miss again).

I have some fumble charts similar to these in this thread, but lately I have been using Paizo's fumble deck. Or I just make something up based on the situation.

Hagor


----------



## tehuber (Nov 23, 2010)

Rolemaster/Spacemaster critical hit/failures charts were full of funny descriptions that were perhaps a bit too extreme at times.  

One I recall from (I believe) the arcane magic failure table went something like:

_You convert yourself into pure energy and hurl yourself at your opponent.  Opponent takes (_insert some hideous amount of damage_).  You, of course, are dead._


----------



## Haltherrion (Nov 23, 2010)

tehuber said:


> Rolemaster/Spacemaster critical hit/failures charts were full of funny descriptions that were perhaps a bit too extreme at times.
> 
> One I recall from (I believe) the arcane magic failure table went something like:
> 
> _You convert yourself into pure energy and hurl yourself at your opponent. Opponent takes (_insert some hideous amount of damage_). You, of course, are dead._




Those are in fact the charts I was thinking of as an extreme case. Some folks love them but I always found them way over done. And you spelled the game system wrong. It's _Roll_master


----------



## Lanefan (Nov 24, 2010)

Connorsrpg said:


> Good point Marcq - and yes, the Crit Fumble chart certainly does go with our style of play - we love the 'getting percentage' out.
> 
> Also, if using these charts, remember it is up to the DM to come up with a rational explanation for the result.



Rational?  What's rational got to do with it? 

But yes, that's about how we do it too - the chart might say "damage to friend" and it's up to the DM to determine who gets nicked and for how much.

Lan-"is slapstick a style of play?"-efan


----------



## Connorsrpg (Nov 24, 2010)

Yes, quite often the damage a friend is the backswing, follow-through etc. And those Rollmaster charts are where i started too, but as stated, most entries were not that 'believable' (I know we play in a world of dragons and magic) and when the same result occurred again it got too odd. There are only so many times you can swallow your tongue!

Love the idea of a card deck for fumbles. Are these good. I really like that idea, as you could keep adding to the deck. I have recently downloaded Adventure Cards from Savage Worlds and am thinking of moving several subsystems like crits, fumbles and even encounters to cards. What are people's XP with these (if this is not threadjacking).

Anyone put the Fumble charts to use?


----------

