The Art of the Fumble – Alternate Critical Miss Rule for D&D
DM's are always looking for new ways to spice up their game, and one of the most popular (and infamous) techniques is to introduce some sort of “critical miss” houserule. Normally, this is a bad idea, as the consequence of rolling a '1' is bad enough (ie, you miss no matter how skilled your character is), and anything else just adds insult to injury.
While going over the Dark Sun campaign guide, however, I was inspired by an optional rule in that book regarding weapon breakage (a common theme in a setting where weapons are not often made from metal).
So, without further ado, I present an optional rule you may wish to try out (or not)!
If, once per round, when making an attack roll, a player rolls a 1, they have the following option. They may simply accept the attack as an automatic miss, without further penalty. Alternately, they may re-roll the attack, but must accept the new roll, regardless of any ability or effect. Should the die come up as a 5 or less, however, once the attack is resolved, their character suffers a minor setback.
Fumble Results Table (roll 1d6):
- The character drops the weapon/implement that was used to make the attack, which falls in their space. They must use a minor action to retrieve the item. If the attack was not made with either a weapon or an implement, nothing happens.
- The character is slowed until the end of their next turn.
- The character grants combat advantage to the enemy they attacked until the end of the enemy's next turn.
- The character falls prone.
- If the character's next attack hits, it inflicts half damage. If the attack misses, it cannot deal damage or an effect that would occur on a miss.
- The character provokes an opportunity attack from the enemy they attacked.
The once per round limitation is there to keep characters who can attack multiple times per round from being unfairly punished by this optional rule. While it does penalize players, each player can decide to simply accept that they missed and be done, so it is completely optional. Allowing players a chance to recover from a bad roll, even if it can potentially disadvantage them, can make the characters feel more heroic.
Thought it may seem like a good idea to use this same rule for monsters, I personally advise against it- the PC's opponents may be quite powerful, but they aren't the stars of the show, and such feats as falling flat on your face while getting in a lucky hit should be reserved for the heroes.
Also, you should consider the fact that this rule can add additional time to an encounter, so you may not want to have the possibility of a fumble each turn! I tried to keep the penalties imposed reasonable, and it's entirely possible that a penalty may not apply to a character- if so, good for them!
Related articles
- Reconsidering combat fumbles from Geek Ken (geekken.blogspot.com)
- When Good Dice Turn Bad: A Lesson In The Improbable (campaignmastery.com)
Mistvale D&D Campaign: Technical Difficulties!
Define irony. Not long ago, I wrote an article about my first 4e adventure, sharing insights into my design process. So what happens when I get a chance to run it for my friends? Four dead PC's, only avoiding a TPK by pure chance!
So what went wrong?
The party had progressed into the final stages of the adventure, which consisted of three encounters. The first encounter had the party face a pair of animated ice statues, with a small gang of artillery minions spawning behind them.
Creating Worlds: My First Campaign
Yes, I know, I promised to talk about rules stuff next. Sue me. I'll get around to it, since I've noticed actions that change initiative, not to mention exactly how immediate actions work, tend to confuse even 4e veterans.
Well, to be fair, I've never seen a system where readied actions didn't confuse everyone! I'll expand on that more later. You may have noticed I haven't been as prolific in my writing of late, and the reason is- I didn't have much new to say!
I keep touching on the same points in my editorials, and often, I come off as way too critical- something else I've talked about before. It may seem paradoxical that someone who claims to enjoy gaming nitpicks about it so damn much!
Total Insanity- D&D 4E Rules in Review
I'm something of a 'mechanics guy'. The 'crunchy bits' of how a game functions intrigues me, both from a simulationist (how well the mechanic matches reality) and a gamist (how well-balanced the mechanic is within the framework of the game) perspective.
Often, mechanics that try and match reality tend to be somewhat over-complicated and even broken- simply put, the universe has a lot more variables running at any given time than anyone can keep track of.
So the best, and most balanced mechanics, are the simplest ones. And usually, the mechanics most divorced from 'reality'.
At both ends of the scale you get a lot of arguments. One of the features of 4e design is that the rules are made as simply as possible, using something that has been defined as “exception-based” design. There is a set of basic rules, which regulate the game. Unless a game element goes out of it's way to say it changes these rules, you always default to the basic rules.
For example:
A New Year of Gaming
Wow, 2011 already. That's one thing that always amazes me as I get older- how much faster the years go by! Well, so far, the new year is definitely better than the old in at least two respects. One, my health is a lot better, even though I still have a good 50-100 pounds of encumbrance I could stand to lose. Definitely need to work on that while there are still chairs that can support my weight!
And two, I've reconnected with an old flame. No, Cupid hasn't managed to hit me with an arrow lately- much like a dragon, my defenses only increase with time. I imagine he'll need a nat 20 to hitch me up with a girl at this point!
But I digress. Dungeons and Dragons remains my first true love. We've been through a lot, the game and I, ever since I discovered it back in Junior High. And despite the occasional break-ups and betrayals, we always get back together in the end.
As I've mentioned before, 4e felt like a betrayal to me. I'd spent a lot of time mastering the 3.5 ruleset, and purchasing many products. I was comfortable with the game, and I felt that it could only get better. Unfortunately, Hasbro/WotC had other plans.
Close Encounters of the Essential Kind! – Week 3
As promised, Tim was able to go to Encounters this week, and once again take over the Eladrin Mage, Berrian. I had made a Human Mage, Alaric, that I felt was superior to Berrian, but then it occurred to me; did the party really need two Controllers?
Well, technically, we already had two; the Ranger (Hunter) that Chuck was playing is billed as such. However, I haven't really seen much Control out of the build (more on this shortly).
Anyways, if one Mage makes Encounters too short, then two might be too much! So, just in case, I quickly threw together a second character. I haven't built a character this fast, well, ever! Even in my 1E/2E days, I carefully weighed every choice I had available. Most of my characters were Fighters, but once I allocated my stats, rolled for exceptional Strength (if I was so fortunate), decided on a race, selected weapon and non-weapon proficiencies, weapon specialization, Kit (the precursor to 4E's class builds), armor and equipment, name, and other miscellaneous things like height, weight, alignment, religion, and so on...well, let's just say I usually burned the better part of an hour!
Chaos Scar (Mis)Adventures: “Mud in the Water”

I'm going to open with a disclaimer; I, in no way, shape, or form, have any problems or issues with Jeff's Chaos Scar game, or his performance as a DM. I enjoy the game very much, and I, of all people, understand what a thankless job being a DM is.
You Sir, have my respect.
I do, however, have a few problems with how the Chaos Scar Adventure Path is designed. It's brutal, there's no doubt about it. I'm just going to hit some of the high points.
Close Encounters of the Essential Kind! – Week 2
Though one encounter per week does little more than whet my appetite for some real gaming, it's fun to get out of the house and hang out with my fellow gamers. I knew Chuck and Rob would be there, even if poor Tim was forced to miss out yet again.
I'm still a bit underwhelmed by the pre-gen Mage; it's not that he's bad, it's just that, as I've said before, I'd have done things a bit differently.
The Encounter started with a horrible Initiative; 5! While I grouse about not being able to go sooner in the round as a Controller, I did luck out in that by the time my turn came up, our enemies were nice and close to the party. I'd been doubly fortunate in that the kobolds decided not to try and get at the squishy Elf in the corner!
Serge’s Database Dump: A Rejects’ Recap

- Image via Wikipedia
I've mentioned the Rejects before; it's a real gem of a game, with a premise I really wish I'd monopolized on more. From a creative aspect, at least: the whole point is about being somewhat unoptimal.
In this game, I play Serge, a Warforged Sorcerer. His backstory (not that it matters much) is that he used to be a servant golem created by a Gnomish Invoker, who “died” defending the gnome's daughter while she was on a dangerous quest.
They rebuilt him (better, faster..etc.) using the prize the gnome recovered, and some Divine guidance. The essence of a magical storm, trapped in a gem. The newly-rebuilt golem was now a Warforged, possessed of a soul and the power of Sorcery...and indebted to Gond, the God of Invention.
Who sent our hapless hero to help out three others, on a quest of their own...
In this session, we wrapped up our excursion to the home of Jeff's character, Kip (real name withheld, for his own dignity), our Gnome Barbarian. Yes, I know. It's that kind of game.
















Recent Comments