Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 91
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhaegar View Post
    If you're giving creatures reaction abilities above and beyond what's naturally in their stat block, make sure you increase their challenge rating appropriately. Depending on what reactionary abilities you give them, it could easily increase their challenge rating by one, if not more.
    I don't use cr or exp. I haven't had any problems

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    gkathellar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Beyond the Ninth Wave
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Why? What will it add to the game? Do you find the game suffers from a lack of weapon breakage?

    If you need a fumble system, that feels fine, but examine carefully whether you need a fumble system. Fumbles make sense for something like WHFRP where "how bizarrely can I die?" is almost the point of the exercise. If that's the tone you're going for, go for it.
    Quote Originally Posted by KKL
    D&D is its own momentum and does its own fantasy. It emulates itself in an incestuous mess.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by ZorroGames View Post
    It seems people want those Crits but not the fumbles.
    Actually most people are fine with the RAW auto-miss.

    Plus, you know, the NPCs can crit as well.

    Fumbles add nothing except frustration for the players, and this specific rule just adds extra book-keeping and unfairly targets martial characters.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Why should a Nat 20 be a auto hit and extra damage. When a Nat 1 is just a auto fail. How is that fair? You should have equal consequences to failing and to succeeding.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Titan in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Fighting Demons!

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Then have a nat 1 make you lose your next attack. That's about fair.
    I have a LOT of Homebrew and a Patreon for it

    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Professor Gnoll!
    Show


    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Cdr. Fallout!
    Show

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir cryosin View Post
    Why should a Nat 20 be a auto hit and extra damage. When a Nat 1 is just a auto fail. How is that fair? You should have equal consequences to failing and to succeeding.
    Failure is already its own reward.

    As already stated by others, equal consequences is already enforced by the fact that the NPCs roll Nat 20s, too. What more "fairness" is required? What do you mean by "equal"?

    You are not looking at the full picture, which is exactly why most proposed rules such as this one are hopeless. They may make some sense in a very narrow way, but they will not work with any semblance of "fairness" at the table.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    Then have a nat 1 make you lose your next attack. That's about fair.
    If such is applied to all spells and similar effects, too, sure.

    If.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2011

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir cryosin View Post
    Why should a Nat 20 be a auto hit and extra damage. When a Nat 1 is just a auto fail. How is that fair? You should have equal consequences to failing and to succeeding.
    Even assuming that you really need perfect balance between the effects of a nat 1 and the effects of a nat 20, I don't think this argument works. With bounded accuracy and reasonably low ACs for most enemies, it's almost unheard of that a roll of 20 wouldn't hit even if you didn't treat nat 20s as automatic hits so the damage really is all that players get out of rolling a critical hit 99% of the time. (I mean, even if you're a level 1 character with only a +2 in your attack stat and a +2 proficiency bonus, rolling a 20 gives you a result of 24 vs. your opponent's AC; that hits almost anything in the Monster Manual besides maybe the Tarrasque, and even that's close.)

    As for damage, for a character without any abilities relevant to critical hits, a nat 20 adds an extra die of damage, taking you from 1d8+dex or 1d10+str for example to 2d8+dex or 2d10+str since you only double the dice. If your attack misses, you don't just lose a die worth of damage, but also the ability modifier because you aren't dealing damage at all. If anything, characters already lose more from a nat 1 on average than they gain from a nat 20.
    Last edited by Lord Il Palazzo; 2017-05-08 at 01:38 PM.

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Snails View Post
    That will never ever happen. This rule may look like it is even-handed on paper. But since the PCs will have to track accumulated damage because their many combats for are played out explicitly, they will be punished and the NPCs will always get off scot free. The DM will hand wave that the NPCs maintain their equipment well enough so that he does not have to track these things, thus negating the rule for NPCs.
    Read rule four.

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MonkGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Maplewood, MO
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonmuncher View Post
    Seems like it'd be annoying to track, and especially annoying if you couldn't fix the damage.
    I quite agree but it is an option i observed in the darkness of AD&D 1st...
    Preferences: Role play over optimization; Dwarf over Human over Elf over Gnome; War games over FRPG over SFRPG; Zorro over Batman over Robin Hood.

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MonkGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Maplewood, MO
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkathellar View Post
    Why? What will it add to the game? Do you find the game suffers from a lack of weapon breakage?

    If you need a fumble system, that feels fine, but examine carefully whether you need a fumble system. Fumbles make sense for something like WHFRP where "how bizarrely can I die?" is almost the point of the exercise. If that's the tone you're going for, go for it.
    I agree that it is not without its foibles. And as a player I dislike it and try not to sigh as the DM looks for some event to add "flavor" to the game. There is such a thing as too much spice in food or game.

    The expectation is for it to be there in many minds.

    RAW from page 194, "...roll for an attack is a 1, the attack missesregardless of any modifiers or the target's AC."

    Nothing more RAW and nothing less RAW.

    That seems fair enough to me. Read the section "Rolling 1 or 20." Anything else is a DM house rule pure and simple.
    Last edited by ZorroGames; 2017-05-08 at 01:47 PM.
    Preferences: Role play over optimization; Dwarf over Human over Elf over Gnome; War games over FRPG over SFRPG; Zorro over Batman over Robin Hood.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir cryosin View Post
    Why should a Nat 20 be a auto hit and extra damage. When a Nat 1 is just a auto fail. How is that fair? You should have equal consequences to failing and to succeeding.
    Because of several reasons. Note I also don't like buffing nat 20 rolls either.

    1) Comparing a nat 20 to a nat 1 is a false dichotomy. Nat 20's are balanced by the fact enemies get nat 20's. Nat 1's are balanced by the fact enemies get nat 1's.

    2) Any buffing to either nat 20 or nat 1 unbalances the game, either for or against the PCs. The PCs will roll more d20s in their characters life than any single NPC. As such, anything that enhances the 20 or 1 rolls throws the balance out of whack.

    3) It's needless accounting, and generally used for forced humor that's really not very funny.

    4) It breaks verisimilitude, especially the nat 1 roll. Oh, here comes David, destroyer of worlds, the level 20 fighter. In 10 rounds of combat he's X% more likely to trip and throw his sword than Guardsman Bob, the level 1 fighter.

    5) Most fumble rules are weighted unfairly against those with manufactured weapons, such as this one.
    Last edited by Mikal; 2017-05-08 at 01:53 PM.

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Il Palazzo View Post
    Even assuming that you really need perfect balance between the effects of a nat 1 and the effects of a nat 20, I don't think this argument works. With bounded accuracy and reasonably low ACs for most enemies, it's almost unheard of that a roll of 20 wouldn't hit even if you didn't treat nat 20s as automatic hits so the damage really is all that players get out of rolling a critical hit 99% of the time. (I mean, even if you're a level 1 character with only a +2 in your attack stat and a +2 proficiency bonus, rolling a 20 gives you a result of 24 vs. your opponent's AC; that hits almost anything in the Monster Manual besides maybe the Tarrasque, and even that's close.)

    As for damage, for a character without any abilities relevant to critical hits, a nat 20 adds an extra die of damage, taking you from 1d8+dex or 1d10+str for example to 2d8+dex or 2d10+str since you only double the dice. If your attack misses, you don't just lose a die worth of damage, but also the ability modifier because you aren't dealing damage at all. If anything, characters already lose more from a nat 1 on average than they gain from a nat 20.
    Are you kidding it is not a simple one extra weapon damage dice. You double any dice that are part of that attack example rogues sneak attack dice, Paladin's smite, hex, hurters mark, ect.... A crit adds way more then just missing. You can miss on a 2,3,4,5. The point being that a Nat 1 should mean something other then a miss. Just like a Nat 20 means something other a hit.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikal View Post
    Because of several reasons. Note I also don't like buffing nat 20 rolls either.

    1) Comparing a nat 20 to a nat 1 is a false dichotomy. Nat 20's are balanced by the fact enemies get nat 20's. Nat 1's are balanced by the fact enemies get nat 1's.

    2) Any buffing to either nat 20 or nat 1 unbalances the game, either for or against the PCs. The PCs will roll more d20s in their characters life than any single NPC. As such, anything that enhances the 20 or 1 rolls throws the balance out of whack.

    3) It's needless accounting, and generally used for forced humor that's really not very funny.

    4) It breaks verisimilitude, especially the nat 1 roll. Oh, here comes David, destroyer of worlds, the level 20 fighter. In 10 rounds of combat he's X% more likely to trip and throw his sword than Guardsman Bob, the level 1 fighter.

    5) Most fumble rules are weighted unfairly against those with manufactured weapons, such as this one.
    This is not unfair to manufactured weapons I included spell focus as well. Also spell books can be burn. Lute cruched.

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir cryosin View Post
    The point being that a Nat 1 should mean something other then a miss. Just like a Nat 20 means something other a hit.
    False dichotomy, as posted before.
    Nat 20 and Nat 1 are balanced by the fact everyone has them. They aren't meant to balance each other.

    This is not unfair to manufactured weapons I included spell focus as well. Also spell books can be burn. Lute cruched.
    Even more unbalanced, in the case of spell books. "Oh, you spent thousand gold over the course of several levels building up this entire repository that represents your main class abilities? Well you rolled something you get 5% of the time so F-U LOLZ!".

    Also, that's answers only part of one point. Out of five.
    Last edited by Mikal; 2017-05-08 at 02:29 PM.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2011

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir cryosin View Post
    Are you kidding it is not a simple one extra weapon damage dice. You double any dice that are part of that attack example rogues sneak attack dice, Paladin's smite, hex, hurters mark, ect.... A crit adds way more then just missing. You can miss on a 2,3,4,5. The point being that a Nat 1 should mean something other then a miss. Just like a Nat 20 means something other a hit.
    I'm not remotely kidding and I'm not sure why you'd think I was. Yes, there might be dice besides the base weapon dice and you still you lose those same dice if you miss. If a rogue would deal 10d6 sneak attack damage, then they both gain an extra 10d6 sneak attack damage on a critical hit and lose all of those 10d6 plus their ability score modifier on a miss. 10d6+weapon die isn't "way more" than 10d6+weapon die+ability score; it's pretty clearly slightly less.

    The only cases where you gain more from upgrading a hit to a critical hit than you lose from downgrading a hit to a miss are those when something happens on a critical hit beyond just doubling the dice that were already involved. The only abilities I can think of like that come with very small and specific subsets of characters with the half-orc or barbarian abilities that grant extra dice on critical hits. You could argue this also applies to abilities like Battle Masters' combat superiority and Paladins' smites where you can chose to add damage dice after seeing your roll, but in those cases (which only apply to a small subset of characters) there's a cost to pay for the extra damage rather than just being built into the critical hit so it isn't completely free extra damage.
    Last edited by Lord Il Palazzo; 2017-05-08 at 02:15 PM.

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2015

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    I understand the surface attraction, "This would be fun! Shenanigans! It will hurt the monsters as well!"

    I've played campaigns with nasty critical miss house rules. We also played with a house rule that critical saving throw failures doubled either damage or duration of the saved effect.

    Honestly I hated it and it is unfair to the player. Heaven forbid you're playing a fighter and have multiple attacks a round. The 5% chance to screw yourself every time you swing your sword hurts the players far more than the monsters. Here's the thing, the monsters don't care if they die. They don't have to fight over and over. If Bob the hobgoblin dies because his sword breaks in the middle of a fight, nobody gets frustrated because they are having a bad dice night.

    Now if you want to add a little whimsy to combat, try something slightly different.

    On a roll of one, call it a "fluke" roll. The make a second chart with a wide variety of possible effects, ranging from really good to bad. Rolling a one and then a twenty might give you an auto crit against your enemy, in a funny way. Maybe the character falls prone. Maybe they trip themselves and their enemy as well. On a roll of one and another one, maybe they drop their weapon or strike a friend.

    That would be far more entertaining and fun that a 1 is a critical failure.
    Awaken an animal and you make them smart for the rest of their life; Teach your Awakened animal to be a druid and they will create a new race and take over the world.

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Rolling a 1 is supposed to be a upsetting thing. That's why it a auto miss. A Nat 20 is a positive thing that's why it's a auto hit plus extra dice. There is no different if I roll a 2 or a 1 for the most part. But there is a different between a 19 and 20.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Beastrolami's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    The Undernet

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Battlebooze View Post
    On a roll of one, call it a "fluke" roll. The make a second chart with a wide variety of possible effects, ranging from really good to bad. Rolling a one and then a twenty might give you an auto crit against your enemy, in a funny way. Maybe the character falls prone. Maybe they trip themselves and their enemy as well. On a roll of one and another one, maybe they drop their weapon or strike a friend.

    That would be far more entertaining and fun that a 1 is a critical failure.
    Halflings already have this without the "funny" descriptions. Obviously each dm has their own ideas of what could "add" to the game or not. I do think that there should be a reason to add degradation to weapons other than "make nat 1s interesting." If you give a good world reason for degrading weapons/armor (i.e. you want your players to participate in the economy) then tell them up front why you have the custom rule, and the cool rp bonuses they can gain by participating in the economy of the world. If they don't do that, and decide to be murdurhobos, their weapons will degrade.... very slowly.
    Name none of the fallen, for they stood in our place. And stand there still in each moment of our lives. Let my death hold no glory, and let me die forgotten and unknown. Let it not be said that I was one among the dead to accuse the living.

    -Deadhouse Gates (Book 2 in the Malazan Book of the Fallen) by Steven Erikson

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir cryosin View Post
    Rolling a 1 is supposed to be a upsetting thing. That's why it a auto miss. A Nat 20 is a positive thing that's why it's a auto hit plus extra dice. There is no different if I roll a 2 or a 1 for the most part. But there is a different between a 19 and 20.
    Where does it say that rolling a 1 is supposed to be an upsetting thing?

    Historically in D&D, the natural 1 was meant to show that even the greatest of fighters can sometimes have misses or flukes. It wasn't meant to have the greatest of fighters trip over their own feet, throw their weapons away, or accidentally skewer their teammates more often than the lame, one eyed, one armed farm boy who picked up a longsword and started swinging wildly.

    Regardless, missing does upset me, so the natural 1 effects work in that regard.

    And there is a difference between a 2 and 1. I can potentially hit something on a 2. I can't with a 1. Period, end of discussion.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2011

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir cryosin View Post
    Rolling a 1 is supposed to be a upsetting thing. That's why it a auto miss. A Nat 20 is a positive thing that's why it's a auto hit plus extra dice. There is no different if I roll a 2 or a 1 for the most part. But there is a different between a 19 and 20.
    And I think that this right here is the problem with this thread. "Rolling a 1 is supposed to be a upsetting thing" isn't a fact, it's an opinion or a preference and as this thread has demonstrated, it isn't a universal one. You want a nat 1 to be more upsetting than a 2. It seems like most people don't. You made this thread asking what people think of your house rule. It seems like you've gotten an answer. If you're DMing, you're free to use whatever house rules you want, but you should probably be ready for your players to have reactions to this one similar to the ones you've seen here.

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    As long as Nat 1's are not "Oh you hit yourself or friend" I think they are fine. One of the DMs we have does that is it royally sucks.

    How I do them is if you roll a 1 you roll a d20 again. If you roll 9 or lower something bad happens. The bad thing is based on fight or terrain. On hill? You are forced to move 5' down or might fall. Near rocks? You hit your weapon off of them and it chips the blade (give no mechanical pro or con but it will sure make them nervous and they might actually repair their weapon in town). In mud? You are stuck in mud, your speed is 0 unless you pass a Str check 10 but you can opt to just lose your boot. Sometimes it is given the enemy(or pc if foe rolled 1) advantage on next attack. It adds flavor that makes sense, even the most legendary warrior can be forced down a hill, or stuck in mud. But hitting yourself with your own weapon is down right stupid.

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikal View Post
    Where does it say that rolling a 1 is supposed to be an upsetting thing?

    Historically in D&D, the natural 1 was meant to show that even the greatest of fighters can sometimes have misses or flukes. It wasn't meant to have the greatest of fighters trip over their own feet, throw their weapons away, or accidentally skewer their teammates more often than the lame, one eyed, one armed farm boy who picked up a longsword and started swinging wildly.

    Regardless, missing does upset me, so the natural 1 effects work in that regard.

    And there is a difference between a 2 and 1. I can potentially hit something on a 2. I can't with a 1. Period, end of discussion.
    Ya you can hit on a 2 if you pass level ten and still fighting that chicken on the farm. A 20th lv pc has a to attack of +11 with out any magic items. Now there are abilitys to boost that like archery fighting style or bless. So unless you fighting things as powerful or weaker then a goblin's your not hitting on a 2. And why is a lv 20 pc fighting things that weak.

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Mar 2014

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Anything that has a long term effect based on the dice roll will matter more to PC than their opponents. If you had the PCs lose a finger if they roll a 1, pretty soon they would all retire and be named lefty. If you gave them a bonus to their strength score for every 20 made when doing an athletics check they would rival Hercules. Since the monsters only exist for one combat, this will have little change for them.
    The proposed fumble will do nothing to the baddies, as they can all be expected to have recently rested and repaired. All it does is add book-keeping and hassle for the players. It is not terrible, but I don't see that it adds more to the game than it detracts.
    Last edited by Mellack; 2017-05-08 at 02:55 PM.

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir cryosin View Post
    Ya you can hit on a 2 if you pass level ten and still fighting that chicken on the farm. A 20th lv pc has a to attack of +11 with out any magic items. Now there are abilitys to boost that like archery fighting style or bless. So unless you fighting things as powerful or weaker then a goblin's your not hitting on a 2. And why is a lv 20 pc fighting things that weak.
    Negatives to the enemies AC.
    Positives to your to-hit.
    Environmental factors.

    All of those can be factors in letting a roll of 2 land a hit.

    None of those can be factors in letting a roll of 1 land a hit, because a 1 can never hit.

    One example that can be used is a Kensei with sharpen the blade, 20 dex, and a powerful magic weapon. Said Kensei can get Proficiency+3+5+3 to their roll.

    Without the proficiency bonus that's a 13, assuming a 2 on the roll. With proficiency it's up to 17 (starting at level 11 for Sharpen the Blade) to 19. And that's before any other effects such as bless.

    Enemies with an AC of 17 are not impossible to imagine at or around 11th level.
    Last edited by Mikal; 2017-05-08 at 03:31 PM.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Titan in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Fighting Demons!

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir cryosin View Post
    Ya you can hit on a 2 if you pass level ten and still fighting that chicken on the farm. A 20th lv pc has a to attack of +11 with out any magic items. Now there are abilitys to boost that like archery fighting style or bless. So unless you fighting things as powerful or weaker then a goblin's your not hitting on a 2. And why is a lv 20 pc fighting things that weak.
    +5 (Ability Mod) +6 (Proficiency) +3 (Magic Item) +2 (Archery Style) gives me +16. I hit an enemy in Full Plate, but without a shield, on a 2, or an enemy in chain mail with a shield.

    Such as the numerous guards surrounding the evil king's castle.
    I have a LOT of Homebrew and a Patreon for it

    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Professor Gnoll!
    Show


    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Cdr. Fallout!
    Show

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2011

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikal View Post
    Advantage on your rolls.
    Negatives to the enemies AC.
    Positives to your to-hit.
    Environmental factors.

    All of those can be factors in letting a roll of 2 land a hit.

    None of those can be factors in letting a roll of 1 land a hit, because a 1 can never hit.

    One example that can be used is a Kensei with sharpen the blade, 20 dex, and a powerful magic weapon can get Proficiency+3+5+3 to their roll, and, depending on level, have an additional re-roll of an attack die.
    Without the proficiency bonus that's a 13. With proficiency it's up to 17 (starting at level 11 for Sharpen the Blade) to 19. And that's before any other effects such as bless.

    Enemies with an AC of 17 are not impossible to imagine at or around 11th level.
    Agreed. Also, one of the biggest effects on DMing and adventure planning styles that 5e has had is that the lower scaling of bonuses has made more types of monsters viable for longer, especially if you use them in groups. Pair that with the fact that some monsters do have really low ACs for their CRs (Flesh Golems have 8 or 9 and are CR 5 or 6, if I'm remembering right and oozes have pretty universally low ACs). It isn't unheard of for a 2 to hit in this edition. (Heck, I ran a campaign with a lot of undead, and a number of my players did score hits on 2s and 3s as late as level 6 or 7. Zombies, including Ogre Zombies, have an AC of about 8 but make up for it with the Undead Fortitude feature.)

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    SamuraiGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir cryosin View Post
    Why should a Nat 20 be a auto hit and extra damage. When a Nat 1 is just a auto fail. How is that fair? You should have equal consequences to failing and to succeeding.
    the consequence for auto hit and extra damage on a NAT20 is that is also happens TO you when the monsters roll a NAT 20. Crit fumbles are NOT the balance for Crit hits. there have been a ton of posts upthread that explained that much more eloquently than I can.

    this just seems like adding another rule just for the sake of adding another rule. A rule that in practice will only ever really effect the players and serves only to punish them.

    Back in the day we experimented with all sorts of critical hit and fumble tables. and all they ever did was break the flow of the game, and more often than not make the players and their characters feel like clueless idiots.

    IF, and that is a very strong IF I were to ever use a Crit fumble rule again (or even play under one to be honest) it would have to be something simple, balanced, effect everyone equally and be resolved quickly. It should not be something npcs or monsters can ignore, it should result in additional book keeping and it should break the flow of combat.

    stealing some ideas from above: When you roll a Natural 1 on an attack roll, the next attack against you has Advantage. This can only happen once per round.

    Like someone said up above I would rather give up critical hits than suffer another ill-implemented critical fumble rule. And I don't think I would play at all in a game that used Crit Fumble (or even Crit Hit) tables simply because of how much they slow down gameplay.
    Rule 0: What the DM says goes.
    Rule 0.5: What the DM says goes. And if the DM says enough dumb **** the players go too.

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir cryosin View Post
    Rolling a 1 is supposed to be a upsetting thing. That's why it a auto miss. A Nat 20 is a positive thing that's why it's a auto hit plus extra dice. There is no different if I roll a 2 or a 1 for the most part. But there is a different between a 19 and 20.
    And when the dragon rolls a Nat 1, what penalty are you going to impose?

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Euphonistan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: House rule for Nat 1's what do y'all think.

    KILL IT WITH FIRE!!!

    But in all seriousness there is a reason why in the the decades that D&D has been around there have been MANY attempts at critical failure tables and they have all remained overall so unpopular that none of have been kept (including ones similar to the posted to this thread). Critical hits was originally a house rule that did become an actual rule so they have over the years changed to dd things like this but they have not added in these types of critical fumbles because on the whole they tend to go over poorly with many players.

    I am especially not a fan of a rule that harms weapon users and does little against non-weapon users and in addition one that hurts players more than NPCs and monsters. A well done rule should hit all in a similar fashion.
    A vestige for me "Pyro火gnus Friend of Meepo" by Zaydos.

    http://www.giantitp.com/forums/shows...5&postcount=26

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •