|
4 years ago ::
Mar 24, 2009 - 7:20AM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Dec 24, 2007
|
It's never made any kind of sense to me to punish people further for missing just because the number they rolled to miss was a 1. Missing is it's own friggin' punishment. Especially in 4e when using Encounter and Daily Powers. That's a fair hunk of your game that just got thrown away. And then someone wants to damage you on top of it? Yeah, that's fun. None of the "explanations" ever made sense to me, either. "You swung so wildly you hit yourself! With the tip of your Longspear!"  "You cast a range 10 single target spell so poorly that you chose yourself as the target instead of that guy 10 squares away!" This stuff is just bad. Always keep in mind that a miss is it's own punishment. If forced to use any rule, wrecan's proposal is the one that I'd find most tolerable. And I'd fight even that.
Resident Prophet of the OTTer.Section Six Soldier Front Door of the House of Trolls If you're terribly afraid of your character dying, it may be best if you roleplayed something other than an adventurer.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 24, 2009 - 7:23AM
#22
|
|
|
Critical fumbles are unfair, unfun, and unnecessary.
I categorically refuse to play at a table that uses fumbles.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 24, 2009 - 7:27AM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2003
|
It's enough that a natural 1 misses.
I've played with variation on fumble rules before and never liked them.
I guess they are fine for folks who like more complexity and randomness in their games.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 24, 2009 - 7:27AM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Apr 26, 2005
|
Rolling a 1 happens less then rolling a 20 so
THAT'S NOT HOW PROBABILITY WORKS :headexplo
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 24, 2009 - 7:28AM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
Critical fumbles are unfair, unfun, and unnecessary.
I categorically refuse to play at a table that uses fumbles.
Do you not use Critical Hits, then? They are as fair as Cit Misses. Why the double standard? I swing my sword once, get lucky, and do oodles of extra damage. I swing it again, get unlucky, and drop my sword. How is one any more fair or unfair than the other...aside from benefitting the PC? Keep in mind that I'm not disagreeing with you...I'm just asking.
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 24, 2009 - 7:29AM
#26
|
|
|
THAT'S NOT HOW PROBABILITY WORKS :headexplo
Nope, but that is how it works when playing. Just turf it for a few months. Just because math says there is equal chance to get 20's and 1's doesn't mean that it also occurs that way when actually playing.
When it comes to crit misses. I do find it a little to far fetched that you, an experienced weapon handler or arcanist suddenly wounds himself. Sure at Heroic stage it could be, but later on...nah. Next to that there would be a huge difference of damage dealt between a greataxe wielder or someone who casts a magic missile or uses a dagger. That seems unfair to me as well. This is why I prefer to use "penalties" such as granting CA or falling prone or whatever. Those are still relatively small and won't make too much of a difference. And it will definitely not do more damage on its wielder as bonuses start to stack as would happen with weapons.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 24, 2009 - 7:33AM
#27
|
|
|
Do you not use Critical Hits, then? They are as fair as Cit Misses. Why the double standard? I swing my sword once, get lucky, and do oodles of extra damage. I swing it again, get unlucky, and drop my sword. How is one any more fair or unfair than the other...aside from benefitting the PC? Keep in mind that I'm not disagreeing with you...I'm just asking.
Because PCs do not roll the same number of attack rolls, as stated above. A twin-strike ranger or AoE blaster is going to injure himself a lot more often than someone who only swings once a round. The multi-attackers are penalized for being good at what they do.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 24, 2009 - 7:35AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Dec 24, 2007
|
Nope, but that is how it works when playing. Just turf it for a few months. Just because math says there is equal chance to get 20's and 1's doesn't mean that it also occurs that way when actually playing.
Umm. Two weeks ago my DM rolled 14 nat 1s in a total of two combats. 14 nat ones. He nat 20'd one time, I think. Does that mean that where I live the dice gods have decided that 1s are more common than 20s? If so, can you tell me where you live so I can play there? :P
There's an even chance for each number to come up every time you roll. Unless you've got terrible dice, of course. That is how it works. Really. I suck at math and I get this. It's just how it is!
Resident Prophet of the OTTer.Section Six Soldier Front Door of the House of Trolls If you're terribly afraid of your character dying, it may be best if you roleplayed something other than an adventurer.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 24, 2009 - 7:37AM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
Because PCs do not roll the same number of attack rolls, as stated above. A twin-strike ranger or AoE blaster is going to injure himself a lot more often than someone who only swings once a round. The multi-attackers are penalized for being good at what they do.
I'm not asking why fumbles are bad...I know they're bad. What I'm asking is: Why are fumbles unfair but crit hit super-damage is? Aside from one simply benefitting the PC more, of course.
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 24, 2009 - 7:42AM
#30
|
|
|
Umm. Two weeks ago my DM rolled 14 nat 1s in a total of two combats. 14 nat ones. He nat 20'd one time, I think. Does that mean that where I live the dice gods have decided that 1s are more common than 20s? If so, can you tell me where you live so I can play there? :P
There's an even chance for each number to come up every time you roll. Unless you've got terrible dice, of course. That is how it works. Really. I suck at math and I get this. It's just how it is!
You just in-directly proven my point. 1's and 20's don't roll equally as the math says and logic dictates. In 1 session that was not equal in your case. Now you can "cheat" and make the math work again by saying...you need to look over more game sessions and not just the 100ish rolls in 1 session because that is not representative.
Sure you can play here in Europe, but I "rarely" roll either 1 or 20's. In the last 6 sessions I had twice a 1 and 3 times a 20.
|
|
|
