More Anything Goes

[onlyme]

Reference: 08. Critical Hits and Misses
I actually was thinking about my critical miss rules the other day. (The troglodytes have rolled several 1's themselves, and the most recent was a natural 1 against Grimnail and his negative armor class.) This got me thinking about the second condition of my rule:

"a second attack roll is required when a natural 1 is rolled. If this second attack roll is also a miss, there is a 50% chance of the weapon breaking"

I don't think the outcome of the second attack roll should be dependent upon the armor class of the target missed. If anything, for future games I run, I would probably amend my rules to read that a second 1 (natural, or adjusted if there are penalties) would result in a weapon breakage?


Thoughts?

I mentioned that the last time Ewell broke a weapon. It sucks. But I truly believe it should be harder to break one than 33% each 1 rolled. Double 1s sound more fair.

[Alethan]

Dave, it's your game. Change it after this combat is over.

As long as a DM doesn't pull a rule change or suddenly announce a new rule RIGHT when it takes effect ("OK, Flargun failed his bend bars roll. Now, I DO have a house rule that several people can attempt to open a gate like this at the same time for a better chance of success. But Flargun can't help now, because he cannot attempt another bend bars roll for six more turns, per my other house rule I'm just now telling you about after the fact."), it isn't a big deal to me.

Obviously, that's just my opinion.

If you wanted, you could wait until the next chapter starts or something like that.

[Alethan]

Sorry, just read the action thread.

Feel free to make a change to this rule retroactively, if you want...

[tooleychris]

What about the item itself getting a savings throw? That's how I do breakage..

[Alethan]

As unfortunate as some of the results were, I believe all action rolls are in for round 7 now...

[wolfpack]

wait so roll a 1 and you have to roll a second to hit roll. If that is a miss then there is a 50% chance a weapon breaks?

It's your rules so we will abide by whatever you decide.

But the way it is set up anyone with a high armor class could mean a 50% chnace a weapon breaks on a roll of 1 in 20.

if someone is 1st level fighting someone with a AC of 0 then rolling a 1 then rolling a 19 could still mean a 50% chance of breakage. That seems excesive.

they way we have always done it is if you roll a 1 you then have to do a dex check (3d6 with the result being equal to or less than your dex) if you fail thatyour weapon has to make a saving throw versus crushing blow.

[dmw71]

if someone is 1st level fighting someone with a AC of 0 then rolling a 1 then rolling a 19 could still mean a 50% chance of breakage. That seems excesive.

Yes, that is how the current rule reads. It's also the reason I posted the following last night:

Reference: 08. Critical Hits and Misses
I actually was thinking about my critical miss rules the other day. (The troglodytes have rolled several 1's themselves, and the most recent was a natural 1 against Grimnail and his negative armor class.) This got me thinking about the second condition of my rule:

"a second attack roll is required when a natural 1 is rolled. If this second attack roll is also a miss, there is a 50% chance of the weapon breaking"

I don't think the outcome of the second attack roll should be dependent upon the armor class of the target missed. If anything, for future games I run, I would probably amend my rules to read that a second 1 (natural, or adjusted if there are penalties) would result in a weapon breakage?

Anyway, in a faster-paced game where fights take several minutes instead of several days, a much better system could be put into place. It just gets too tricky to track everything online (at least from a DM perspective) when there's so much break between the action.

Regardless, the current rules are what they are (unfortunately), but just throwing this out there as it's something I'm likely going to (re)consider if/when I end up running another game.


Thoughts?

This critical miss rule borrows from the critical hit rule, which I wrote up first, and it works better on the "hit" side. It wasn't until I rolled a couple of 1's against Grimnail and his negative armor class that it occurred to me that the rule doesn't translate well.

I've been thinking it, and believe I've come up with a better critical miss rule, but it can't/won't go into affect until after the current encounter at the earliest.

[dmw71]

As unfortunate as some of the results were, I believe all action rolls are in for round 7 now...

I will work on the update over lunch and should have it posted within the next few hours.

[Alethan]

The REAL question is, can the Cubs keep the Cards from taking the division title (something they haven't won since 2009)?

Cards only need one win (or a Pirate loss, which is, for all intents and purposes, out of the Cubs' hands). Cubs have three chances... all of them in Busch Stadium.

Gentlemen, THIS is the weekend to settle down in front of a TV and watch some really good rivalry baseball.

[wolfpack]

The questions is can the Indians hold onto their wildcard spot with Chris Perez in full melt down.

[dmw71]

The REAL question is, can the Cubs keep the Cards from taking the division title (something they haven't won since 2009)?

Now that football has started I haven't been following baseball as closely (though, I should be, since I'm about to get my tail handed to me in my fantasy baseball league), but the Cubs haven't quit. That said, they won't sweep the Cardinals on the road. I think the division is theirs. Congratulations to the Pirates, though.

Gentlemen, THIS is the weekend to settle down in front of a TV and watch some really good rivalry baseball.

There really are some good match-ups and some tight races for the wild card in the AL (Tampa Bay/Cleveland/Texas in the AL). There should be some interesting one-game playoffs in both leagues.

The questions is can the Indians hold onto their wildcard spot with Chris Perez in full melt down.

The better question is: Can they hold off Texas?

[Alethan]

The REAL question is, can the Cubs keep the Cards from taking the division title (something they haven't won since 2009)?

Now that football has started I haven't been following baseball as closely (though, I should be, since I'm about to get my tail handed to me in my fantasy baseball league), but the Cubs haven't quit. That said, they won't sweep the Cardinals on the road. I think the division is theirs.

You've not lived until you've been inside Busch stadium when the fans are in the throws of something exciting. I was in the old stadium when McGuire hit his 70th home run. The energy pulsating out of that building was intense, to say the least. All you can hear is the blood bouncing between your ears.

A friend of mine is throwing out the first pitch tonight. She's all of 95 lbs soaking wet. I don't really envy her. The stadium is sure to be packed. She was asking for advice on FB this morning; I told her to have someone else record her, as it was no time to make selfies with her iPhone...

[Computer +1]

I am just counting down the rounds until Strom gets less useless.

[dmw71]

A friend of mine is throwing out the first pitch tonight. She's all of 95 lbs soaking wet. I don't really envy her. The stadium is sure to be packed. She was asking for advice on FB this morning; I told her to have someone else record her, as it was no time to make selfies with her iPhone...

How exciting. That would be a pretty cool experience. Good suggestion on your part.

[dmw71]

I am just counting down the rounds until Strom gets less useless.

You're close. I wasn't going to say anything, but I will.

Because I use a round zero, the affects (or is it effects?) will wear off at the end of the next round (9, not 8, which I haven't posted yet). Things look... interesting, but that fact should hopefully offer some much needed assistance.

[dmw71]

I am just counting down the rounds until Strom gets less useless.

You're close. I wasn't going to say anything, but I will.

Correction: It still ends after round 9, but we're currently ending round 7, not 8. Sorry!

Because I use a round zero, the affects (or is it effects?) will wear off at the end of the next round (9, not 8, which I haven't posted yet) round 9. I was a round ahead of myself and am about to post the results of round 7, not 8. Things look... interesting, but that fact should hopefully offer some much needed assistance.

[Alethan]

I am just counting down the rounds until Strom gets less useless.

You're close. I wasn't going to say anything, but I will.

Because I use a round zero, the affects (or is it effects?) will wear off at the end of the next round (9, not 8, which I haven't posted yet). Things look... interesting, but that fact should hopefully offer some much needed assistance.

You want "effects". Affect means to act on, while effect is the result of a cause.

e.g.
The stink is the cause and weakness is the effect.

The stink of a trog can affect you in baaaaaaad ways, man.

[dmw71]

You want "effects". Affect means to act on, while effect is the result of a cause.

Thanks! I was too busy to bother to look it up.

[Alethan]

I'm still slightly confused about Fimmion being able to cast Enlarge, since it isn't memorized. I guess you're just talking about burning it from your spellbook, Ruk?

If so, then one option might be to enlarge a stone or someone's shield (making sure everyone in the party is behind that shield or stone, first) to block off the trogs from the north. I suspect, of course, that the tunnels are connected and they could come around from the other branch of the "Y" where the southern half of the party almost has them cleared out, but it might give us opportunity to flee, if done at the right time.

I'm still opposed to Fimmion burning a spell from his spellbook, but... I guess if it means party survival, then it should be considered an option.

[Rukellian]

I'm also opposed to burning a spell from my own character's book. That's why I'm trying to go with the whole blind the enemies with a light spell tactic.