Five Horrible House Rules for Dungeons & Dragons 5e

[@DungeonDudes]

Lots of folks disagree with us about Critical Fumbles, and that's fair. If you have a Critical Fumble table that you think is well-balanced and fun... let's see it! As long as you are open to honest and frank feedback about it, share it with us!

[@AcSlaytah56]

Critical fumbles should not be rolled for at the very least. The dm should come up with an appropriate action for what the character is doing to avoid severity being a random chance.

[@thepoetoffall7820]

Dungeon Dudes I think the best way to deal with critical fumbles is having at least half, if not more, of the table being “no effect”. That way, you can still have the fun of the critical failure, but spread out more evenly. I don’t typically use a table, if someone roles a natural one, I select I just choose the most appropriate affect for the moment. Edit: And this can often include, failures that are negligible in the long term or no effect at all if none is appropriate. Edit 2: Same for natural 20s.

[@TheBeelzboss]

I don't use a table, I come up with what makes sense in the moment. Broken or slipped bow strings. Blood flowing to the handle and you lose your grip on the weapon. Tripping on a fallen body or slipping on arrow fragments throwing off your strike. Critical fails on spells activating wild magic

[@dormetheus]

@@AcSlaytah56 There could be a "fumble confirm" roll (same as critical hit)

[@jamespatrickcooper1601]

What would you guys suggest for a "low roll failure" in the first place? I'm fairly new to dnd and the thought of DMing, so I am constantly looking for advice about how to inact failures for skill checks

[@tjnova972]

One of the first things I was taught as a DM was that a natural 20 means the best possible outcome, not necessarily the desired outcome

[@Greywander87]

"Hey king, gimme your kingdom." Rolls nat 20. King guffaws and slaps his knee. "Ha, good one! Now about those bandits I sent you to kill..."

[@KIHarder]

Exactly. I might say the king takes an instant kindness to you in that they would appoint you as a jester. Or the ability to challenge the prince for lines of succession. Depending on presentation. Nothing instant but long term story threads.

[@KIHarder]

As for the wall climb, something like stating they would have to get out of their armor because it would weigh them down, see if the player still wants to. Considering spider climb is a 2nd level spell that exists, it’s not unreasonable for someone to do a simple enough feat.

[@TheDIrtyHobo]

@@Greywander87 The easy answer to that is that if there is 0 chance of success, the GM shouldn't be calling for a roll to begin with. And if the player is just randomly spouting "I want to do this, I'm rolling persuasion" without any consideration for the GM, they should be talked to after the game.

[@jacobstaten2366]

You mean like something out of Get Smart?

[@NoNameC68]

Senile Mage: I want to examine that rock. DM: Roll *rolls 8* DM: You examine the rock and you find... that it's a rock. Senile Mage: I want to examine that other rock. DM: You know what to do. *rolls natural 20* DM: You examine the rock and you find... that it's a *very nice* rock.

[@Felixr2]

"You examine the rock and, when you look at it very closely, you notice that it's probably the same kind of rock as the one you just examined."

[@arionerron4273]

As a geologist, I could have so much fun with this XD. "You discover that it's a red sandstone rock from the Permian, looking around yourself you discover that you're in the middle of an anticline..."

[@xSephironx]

@@arionerron4273 that may be a nature or survival check, depending on the circumstances. Perhaps if you had some kind of specific geological knowledge, but a perception check doesn't necessarily mean you understand what you're looking at. Just that you see any important details

[@arionerron4273]

@@xSephironx That's fair

[@fantomp1773]

Ooo, so does that mean it’s also very rare?

[@O4C209]

Bard tries to convince King to give away his kingdom. Rolls a 20. King: You're right, I hate being the King. Nothing but paper work. From now on, you're the king. And now I'm joining the party. Player loses bard character and now has to start over as a level 1, out of shape, going through a mid life crisis, former king.

[@nickcarpenter7904]

Orion Foresee rofl oh that’s funny!

[@raymondthrone7197]

I disagree on principle for forcing a player to give up their character, but I respect your ability to turn lemons into lemonade.

[@O4C209]

@@raymondthrone7197 I can understand your position. Perhaps the King just joins your party as an NPC and consistently charges into battles without strategy, causing mayhem. And that king's name was... Leeroy Jenkins. And now you know the rest of the story.

[@lluewhyn]

That....is awesome.

[@smirk-in-progress4800]

bahahahaha

[@IkedaHakubi]

At a convention, there was a GM who ruled that since you get a -1 to perception per 5 feet distance, no one can see *anything* past 100 feet away. No one in this world has ever seen the Sun.

[@Voldrim359]

if it goes with people and enviroment and other things, well, yeah, sure, i can't see well in that distance, but that doesn't mean i can't see what is obvious, like the Sun or a giant ass building scrachting the sky or mountains

[@garretthafeli7499]

Damn, tell that to my 120ft dark vision.

[@saberxzero]

Must of happened in the UK, constant gray fogs. Also fast flying creatures are FUCKED

[@inkfae9916]

@@garretthafeli7499 you must be a god!

[@acetraker1988]

I can see that being a lol event with Sun Believers being viewed as flat earthers in that world setting.

[@AvengerAtIlipa]

"I persuade the guard to betray the king... I rolled a Nat 20!" "Good. Since he can tell you're obviously joking, the guard does not immediately attack you."

[@Katie-hj5eb]

Exactly this is a much better middle ground. The example of the request for the kings crown could result in the king thinking the PC is funny and having a better disposition towards them.

[@bleddynwolf8463]

"the guard begins a frank discussion on his frustrations with the ruling class"

[@heartfelt_hero]

I think that convincing a guard to commit a small act of betrayal isn't that implausible, so that could probably happen, unlike the king giving up the crown example

[@apepmedia3059]

@@heartfelt_hero This, a betrayal of the king is for the guard to look the other way, or take a bribe.

[@gurberyt]

That's why I think it's better as a player to describe what you want to do and let the DM do the "roll for persuasion" bit, if there even is any.

[@hunterpark3446]

Rogue: id like to stealth. Me: sure, roll stealth Rogue: Nat 1 Me: you believe you are stealthed Rogue: ? Ok i try to steal the guards sword Me: you proceed behind him dodging their sight, however you are unaware you are making the mission impossible theme out loud instead of in your head. The guards hear you

[@FredRedFrred]

THATwas funny. Thanks.

[@funguy398]

What if player metagame this? Like he rolls bad for stealth and now, when he is aware of result he don't do what he was supposed to be doing?

[@mayube9292]

@@funguy398 then you talk to the player after the session about metagaming and how to avoid it

[@PyroMancer2k]

Yeah we have done that sort of thing with our rouge as well on Nat 1. Only we make references to the Johnny English movies and other Mr. Bean type scenes where he is trying to be stealthy but instead is really obvious.

[@hunterpark3446]

@@funguy398 only hurting himself and missing out on future inside jokes to the table. Our group also generally has an understanding that if they say theyre going to do something, theyre doing it. Very rarely though, if i want to make things a genuine suprise, ill make the roll myself (i have their stats for certain things like stealth, passive perception, insight etc.)

[@Alarrick]

My party has always handled Natural 20s as "The character achieves the greatest degree of success realistically possible."

[@CidGuerreiro1234]

I always assumed that was what a nat 20 was supposed to be. Rolling a 20 in Acrobatics doesn't allow you to fly, or a 20 in Persuasion doesn't give you mind control powers. Like you said, you performed the absolute best you could with a nat 20, but no more than that.

[@charmer129]

My dm does that. The ones I get are mainly knowledge or perception base "pathfinder witch" and once I was searching for a scroll, and rolled a nat 20 with a very high modifier so I found that scroll and the greater version of it

[@Sylphina1]

Every player achieve the most heroic feats every 20th roll (statistically). Not in my world, I denied a roll of 23 with a "crit" because they needed a 25. And ofc, immediately a player goes "what!?"... yup I said, crit is only for combat attack-rolls.

[@lucasvermeulen7215]

sombrero4321 thats not true though, but if you think its fair and so do your players the you do you

[@Sylphina1]

@Biggus Dickus RAW says that a crit in combat is a auto-hit no matter the AC. This is to represent that even a farmer with a pitchfork can harm a ancient dragon. That includes spells, like a novice mage can also hurt if he cirts. Somewhere down the line this got lost that it's only RAW in combat and people started to get way to excited when they roll a 20, like "yes! I made it" while they persuade the king to give up his kingdom.

[@gongarcia8814]

Our DM allows us to call shots... at the hit that finally kills the enemy. The "how do you want to do this" is amazing because it both creates a sense of success at us finally beating that tough opponent, and a bit extra of roleplaying for our characters. Plus, a recent example is that, since we didn't actually behead the enemy, he gave some final words for us to chew on. It's neat, and maybe everyone does it, but I feel like it gives a lot of flavor to the fights

[@dmore]

We do this in our game as well and it's lots of fun! There's been some awesome, epic kills through it.

[@_lexi]

a lot of people do this but i think its less of a "calling shots" in the tactical sense the video is talking about where you aim to disable the opponent in some way, but more of just a fun flavor/roleplay thing

[@gongarcia8814]

@@_lexi I see. If I were DMing I guess I would allow it for example on a nat20, foregoing the extra dice rolled for some sort of permanent debuff. Players get the roll, and choose what they want to do, either straight extra damage or some sort of lasting physical damage. No decapitation please, that's way too much, but idk, half the attack bonus for damaging the arms, disadvantage on INT/WIS/CHA saving throws for a concussion (or the like). It would definitely need some clear rules and a ton of playtesting, but could allow for some realism in fights.

[@Chaossidy-117]

​@@gongarcia8814critical hit and miss decks are wonderful.

[@khalilismail666]

I actually like this rule

[@BigTtheTyrant]

In response to the "I'm going to try and convince the king to give up his kingdom" *nat 20* "The king simply says 'no' and has you and the party escorted out of his halls." "What? But I rolled a natural 20!" "I know, if you had rolled any lower, he would have had you executed for the worst coup he has ever seen in his life." Stupid ideas followed by a nat 20 just means no harsh consequences, not success.

[@yargolocus4853]

If something is impossible, then the best possible result is a partial success. If you are rolling for persuading a king for something ridicilous, there is not chance for that to happen, but they might like your unique(?) attitude and laugh, making your connection with them better. That's what a critical success would look like. Using the best performance that you can give at that moment, what could be at least somehow favorable outcome of a given situation. ...And in the most extreme case it could even be: "you didn't get executed". I actually like that IF the players know what the stakes are and are still willing to risk in hopes of something- anything to go well.

[@raymondthrone7197]

@@yargolocus4853 Yeah, giving it some thought, I think this is basically the best tack to take on that. A Nat 20 shouldn't be a simple success, it should be "an unexpectedly good thing happens". The King probably shouldn't agree to hand over his kingdom, but he should probably have an unexpectedly positive reaction, maybe liking the character's gumption, or if the king's an antagonistic character it might enflame local antiomonarchist feeling.

[@arqueiroXD]

I kinda have one ideia of how to give a kingdom...if the king gave to you...there is something wrong about being king.

[@Phyrior]

@@arqueiroXD Dragon Quest 3 did that. the King role is just full-on ceremony and pomp to the point the king prefers being a beggar wasting his few coin at the monster arena than take the position back.

[@Dazecat11]

Imagine a natural 1 in that situation. The King would execute the character and maybe pays some high priest or klerik to bring said character back to live just to execute him again. Could be turned into a fair activity in the region.

[@superb_ray_of_light]

The most annoying rule I had to deal with was that natural 1s on attack rolls meant that you damaged yourself. Cue my 1st level wizard casting chromatic orb, rolling a 1 on attack, and instantly killing herself while at max health

[@SomeYouTubeTraveler]

In a similar story, in my first D&D session ever (as a player), our paladin rolled the first attack of the campaign and got a 1. The DM ruled that his greatsword _[roll]_ flew out of his hands and _[roll]_ hit the wizard for _[roll]_ 12+3=15 damage. Seeing as the Wizard had 4 HP and this was 3.5e, he went to -11 and was thus Instantly Dead. Everyone at the table laughed our heads off. Everyone but one of us, who never came back.

[@ninjasaga4703]

SPELL ATTACKS TOO AND EVEN CHROMATİC ORB!!! I diagnose your DM with Chaotic Evil.

[@noahdukat1968]

I do occasionally have players take damage due to fumbles, but it’s almost always negligible and more like a slap across the face than an being shot through the heart. Then the DM is to blame, and he gives love a bad name.

[@ericmurotake5180]

One DM I rolled with had a "double roll crit" system. So if you rolled a natural 1, you'd roll a second d20 to determine the outcome. Double nat1s led to some form of humiliating self-damage (in your example, something like the orb firing off wrong, hitting the ground/walls/environment, and you getting beaned by debris for like 2 damage tops). 2-5 was failure and disadvantage, with 2 being the worst (say, a fighter losing their grip on their weapon and dropping it a few feet away), and 5 being a relatively minor penalty (losing 1-3 AC because they're in a bad position to react to the next attack). 6-19 was a failure in some embarrassing way with no penalty. Nat1-Nat20 meant you failed successfully (losing a weapon which hits another enemy or whatnot). Same for Nat20s, with a Nat20-Nat1 being an embarrassing success (trying to flourish, bobbling your weapon, but having it fall exactly to lodge in your opponent).

[@hariodinio]

@@noahdukat1968 nice one

[@Calebgoblin]

I hate it when every 20th time I swing my sword that I've been training with for years, it just turns inside out and whacks my head off.

[@vesavius]

A fumble isn't just there to reflect your character screwing up personally, it is there to reflect the chaos and uncertainty of combat and the field. These things can trip up the best of fighters... Blood on the floor as you step back that you slip on? That table you jumped on has a weak leg? The sword that you are using had an unseen flaw, causing it to shatter? All these are possible fumbles results. TBH, it sounds like you just need a more creative DM when dealing with them. I think this dislike of fumbles is a symptom of the 5e 'superhero' mentality. It just seems , in general, that 5e players have a problem with failing.

[@Anegor]

@@vesavius the problem is people dont like getting double screwed over by luck. Nat 1 is already the chaos of the battlefield fucking you up. Fumbles is your weapon moving by its own right after to enter your arse

[@Calebgoblin]

@@vesavius the term "fumble" that you're defending somehow falls short of describing decapitation and subsequent death

[@Kaemonarch]

@@vesavius Nah, most of the hate for the Fumbles is because most Fumbles rules/sets are poorly made and punish over the top. You can't Fumble everytime you Roll a 1 on an Attack in games where more skilled Attackers make more Attacks (and hence Fumble more often). When your Lv1 Fighter slips on blood once every 2 minutes, but your waaay more skilled Lv12 Fighter slips on blood every 40 seconds... You know your Fumble system is poorly constructed and has some obvious problems in it. If you are interested in some reading about the subject, allow me to suggest you googling "Fumbles Kung Fu Kraken", it has some quite nice examples on how to tell if the Fumble system you are using is flawed at its core by checking what happens in 2 scenarios: while fighting a dummy target, and when comparing an untrained fighter against the Kung Fu Kraken master himself.

[@Dust_in]

Your combat round is six seconds. You are probably swinging more than once, while moving around. You are also fighting someone. Your fumble could very easily be your opponent pushing you on an over-swing, disarming your weapon, or directing a blow into yourself or an ally.

[@birubu]

For the “boss monster with body part health pools” idea, the easiest way to tell your player this mechanic is available is to just ask them what they’re targeting. “I want to attack the dragon.” “Okay, which part of the dragon?” “Uh… wait you can do that.” “For this fight, at least, yes.”

[@RandomDumGuy]

I use this mechanic in every encounter since if my players happen to crit I usually give the enemy a disadvantage (for example if they crit while aiming for the monster's arm his weapon might slip out of their hand, or if they target the legs the enemy could lose a bit of movement speed) plus I think that having the players describe their attacks slightly improves immersion (of course I decide if the effects apply and how they apply)

[@clovislapointe3126]

Battletech is a tabletop wargame about mechs. It has a very interesting system for hit location. Every limb on the mech's body has a certain number of armour points for the front and rear of the mech and structure hit points under the armour. When a part is destroyed, the mech can no longer use it. When you shoot something, you first make your hit roll, and then you roll to see which part you hit. It's not a called shot system but it is very balanced and entertaining.

[@toxicteapot7941]

i use this for big monsters due to being a Monster Hunter vet. I'm a fan of different health bars on a powerful boss that give more control to players as the battle goes on. It blends well since most bosses tend to grow in power as the fight goes on to increase tension, but these MH bosses feel like hunts where a boss gets weaker as you break most parts, and then you need to watch for enraged states. It creates nice options.

[@Barrlounge]

I use HP pools the same way Lair Actions or Legendary Actions are used. Only certain powerful creatures have them, and its usually to disable a powerful ability (Dragons out in the open who are able to fly, Beholders losing a random eye ability). But once that ability is gone, a new one is unlocked (Dragon recharges their breath weapon, Beholders main eye starts draining magic as well as nullifying it, players losing spell slots or magic item charges)

[@AnarchySystem]

I have it set similar to Witcher RPG. x3 the damage on the head, normal for torso, etc. As for the checks. It is -3 + Proficiency Bonus to the head and just - proficiency bonus for arms, and legs. The issue with D&D is at higher levels this feature can be abuses thanks to Proficiency bonus, to avoid this, I just reduce it for a call shot.

[@bulldozer8950]

"here at my table we use the critical fumble table" Look down and sees horrible punishments the next day: so what race are you each playing? every player: Halfling

[@promisingchaos]

One single player: Human... DM: See!? Why can’t you all try to be unique the table isn’t that bad- Player: Variant Human. With the Lucky feat. DM: GOD DAMMIT

[@jaredeastin8830]

@@failfort7822 the only problem with that plan is that you have to choose to use a portent roll before you roll a d20. So it doesn't do very much for avoiding nat 1s.

[@Vessekx]

Human divination wizard with the Lucky feat where all spells require saving throws, not attack rolls.

[@memorylapsedm8262]

@@promisingchaos Bans feats from the game. However, you should take a look at the PHB on page 194, the game already punishes PC's enough as it is for rolling a natural 1 on a d20, they automatically miss no matter what regardless of modifiers and AC. On the flip side of the coin, though, the opposite is true if they roll a natural 20, they hit regardless of any modifiers and AC. So a monster could have an AC of 100, and the PC's would still have at least at all times, every single time they roll for an attack roll, a 5% chance to hit the target; and likewise, they always have at least at all times, every single time they roll for an attack roll, a 5% chance to miss even if the target's AC is 1.

[@kitnal4143]

@@failfort7822 Div wizard won't help you if you get a nat 1, you have to choose to use it before the dice is rolled.

[@alanschaub147]

I allow players to “call” their shots when they roll a Nat 20, or when they deliver the killing blow. It is more about narrative than damage.

[@alanschaub147]

Any roll of a Nat 1 is an unexpected setback for that creatures goals, and roll of a Nat 20 is an unexpected advance. I use this for all rolls, including attacks, skills, saves, or whatever. They are only automatic success or failure with attacks.

[@CidZAER]

I can definitely see some specific applications where I like using unexpected advances and setbacks, particularly with skill checks that take more than 1 round. A cleric in my group was repairing a mangonel on our ship; a 1-minute action during combat. After seeing the DM have him make a single roll and then basically get sidelined for the rest of the fight, I suggested after the session that going forward, we could do a skill check every round with brief narrative. On a nat 20, "you start replacing a pin on the swinging arm of the mangonel, and realize the one that's in there is still good. Speed up the repairs by a round" or nat 1; "you accidentally over-tighten one of the ropes and it snaps. Add an extra round to the repairs", etc.

[@oOPPHOo]

Well, that's quite different from what's being discussed here. Calling shots is about getting a mechanical benefit for harder to make hit. You're talking about adding flavor to killing blows which isn't a homebrew rule. It's just the game :P

[@Zarlos01]

In my play group always when someone try to do a called shoot, me or the other DM says that if the players can do it, the enemys can to. This makes the players give up to do it everytime.

[@PersonMan1234]

I was just going to say this. After reading the called shot mechanism on www.5esrd.com/gamemastering/called-shots/#Called_Shot_Mechanics , I figured I would give characters who crit in the future the option of calling their shot using these effects instead of doing additional damage. So, you either get extra damage, or a fun status, like stun or blindness or whatever. I think that is fairly balanced.

[@SpitfiretheCat16]

One thing I love to do instead of the Critical Shark Jump is to give them a neat reward but not what they asked for. Trying to ask for the king's abdication to you? He laughs heartily, slaps you on the back and orders a feast and a noble title to be awarded to you because you're just such an awesome, funny guy that he wants to keep you around as a friend. Running up a wall? You do a really sick parkour wall backflip, landing perfectly on your feet exactly in the place you started at. Every non hostile witness claps.

[@AuntLoopy123]

@@MaxMallard That kind of distraction is actually quite useful. I'd go with that.

[@aprinnyonbreak1290]

Hostiles clap, too. One of the goblins gets so excited it throws its weapon in celebration.

[@kenzied1831]

I think of nat 20s on ability checks as "it goes as well as it possibly could," rather than automatic success. It keeps it feeling epic without guaranteeing success. Even if you fail, something great could come out of it!

[@finnikey]

2:45 - Killing Blow Experience 5:14 - Critical Fumble Tables 9:09 - Automatic Impossible Success of a Natural 20 12:14 - Called Shots 17:14 - Greyhawk Initiative Rules

[@felicitywark6045]

THANK you so much! i skipped to the last one because i have had personal experience with the middle three! so helpful!

[@Myrrhlin]

You're doing God's work.

[@MasterrangerABR]

My group uses the critical fumble table, but we have separate tables based on the type of fumble. Like spell attacks of weapon attacks. I once had Mook break his arm on my shield, a nat 1 followed by a 2.

[@barfchugger]

Thanks!

[@nonomen6665]

Okay so only one part of the video is worth watching.

[@Astrein0017]

players: "trying to convice a king to give away his kingdom" charismatic player rolling persuacion check: *natural 20* me: the King laughs, the whole court laughs, its taken as a joke ...*congrats you have managed to not get arrested or killed on sight* #fixed

[@blixer8384]

The rule of thumb I have is. If there is absolutely no way for an individual to succeed in doing something: don't let them roll. That way you don't have to worry about the King having to give away his kingdom to the Bard who rolled at nat 20.

[@EnderSpy007]

@@blixer8384 i wouldn't do that if I were you. Just set the DC to 100, give them the illusion of chance

[@lucario9054]

@@blixer8384 I think Astrein1 here makes a good example of how to handle it, a nat 20 doesn't mean instant success it just means the best possible outcome is achieved, and somtimes that just means you don't die for your reckless actions

[@LadyArtemis2012]

I was thinking the same thing for the running up the wall example. “Charging are the wall, you burst into a full sprint. Your feet strike the wall and you begin running straight up. After gaining about 10 feet, your momentum starts to fail you. As you fall back to the ground, you roll and immediately regain your feet. This truly feels like the best you could possibly have performed and it seems the task may simply be impossible without some other means or assistance.” I know that’s really wordy but that’s for a reason. When people roll a critical success, they expect something amazing. Instead of just rewarding them with the result the expected, you can reward them through your own storytelling abilities by describing exactly how great their attempt was...even though it ultimately failed.

[@lucario9054]

@@LadyArtemis2012 I like this, although IRL people can climb 18 ft walls "running into them", in this specific case I would allow it if the character had an 18-20 in dex or str because if a human cam climb an 18 ft wall why cant a Super human climb a 30 ft wall? A commoner is 10 str/dex so using that 11-14 would be someone really athletic, 15-17 the peak of human phisique and 18-20 superhuman levels, or thats how I see it anyway. But for other instances where it would literally be impossible even by a super human, I totally agree with your take.

[@drunkenrobot7061]

With the "impossible natural 20" rule, I once DM'd for a group who, at one point, walked into the treasury of an abandoned castle and found a sleeping dragon. The druid managed to roll a natural 20 on convincing the dragon not to instantly kill them for accidentally disturbing it's rest, so I ruled that he gave them a task: collect some of its hoard that was stolen from it while it slept by imps. They did so under the condition they received a single pendant from the hoard (a magic item of great importance to one character). The dragon hated the idea, but in it's eyes, if it got the large portion of its hoard that was stolen back, what was a single lost pendant in return?

[@poilboiler]

Haven't read The Hobbit have you? Smaug instantly knows that Bilbo has stolen a single item and he is NOT happy. :)

[@drunkenrobot7061]

@@poilboiler I was a first-time DM and I wanted to give them proper incentive.

[@sillyking1991]

@@drunkenrobot7061 that was a fine way to rule it. Dont let anyone get down on you.

[@drunkenrobot7061]

@@sillyking1991 thanks!

[@carpedm9846]

The best way of ruling it ESPECIALLY if the dragon was way too powerful for the players. Otherwise it is perfectly reasonable a dragon may delay killing someone because it is simply curious. Yknow. Its a dragon. And then giving them a nice quest is always amazing, and it allows the monster to feel like an organic creature instead of "big cr monster that kills"

[@Nachovyx]

I thought using a called shot to shoot someone in the knee was to prevent someone to continue being an adventurer. I have been decieved.

[@GoodOldGamer]

I like what Matt Mercer says when his players want to try something crazy. 'You can certainly try.' He says it in such a way that conveys just how unlikely it is to work or even be possible.

[@ParanormalEncyclopedia]

I use the same tactic (always have). Let em try, let them roll.Oh they rolled a natural 20 while trying to leap to the moon? Well they didn't reach the moon but they looked really cool when they fell on their ass.

[@cryofpaine]

But the key is that they CAN try. If someone said they wanted to try jumping to the moon, I doubt he'd even allow the roll. There's a difference between crazy, and impossible.

[@dapperghastmeowregard]

@@cryofpaine You can absolutely try jumping to the moon (but you can tell at a glance you have a 0 in 20 chance of succeeding).

[@cryofpaine]

@Biggus Dickus Has there ever been a roll where any of the players rolled a nat20 and failed? Not that I can think of. If he's allowing the roll, he's allowing some element of success. Even if it's the longest longshot. The only time I can possibly think of is if he's forgotten what their stats are, and doesn't realize that even with a 20 it wouldn't pass the CR. That doesn't mean impossible though - there would have been a chance for someone with higher skills. If there's no chance at all of success in any form, then there's no point in rolling. And no, that doesn't have to mean boring - you can still do stupid things and "succeed" in a fun fashion. Persuade the king to give up the kingdom, roll a nat 20, the king makes you a duke because he likes your gravitas. That's not a failure, that's a limited success. You didn't achieve what you set out to do, but you did get something out of it.

[@dustinbucy8019]

The thing my first DM would say that would make me question everything was just three words. "Are you sure?"

[@scottclowe]

2:45 Killing blow gets all xp 5:20 Critical fumbles 9:12 Impossible outcomes on nat 20 12:23 Called shots 17:22 Greyhawk Initiative Rolls

[@radishman6563]

Thanks

[@alek100001]

Hero

[@werdpankuen9183]

killing blow reminds me of the xp to level 3 skit where the dragon was in 1hp and the bard used vicious mockery to say deez nuts

[@alphathehedgehogx96]

>Greyhawk Initiative Rolls >Flashbacks to trying that one time >Crying

[@Nitram4392]

thx stranger.

[@louismasters9299]

*rolls a 1 on charisma check* *accidentally decapitates himself on the critical fumble table*

[@DungeonDudes]

Pretty sure this happens in the first episode of “disenchantment” although it was more of an impale.

[@jacthing1]

Even better. You accidentally manage to attract a male dragon looking for some snu snu

[@FredRedFrred]

Critical hits and failures add flavor. At my table, the critical failure makes the circumstance that caused the roll a bad effect. As Louis described accurately: You try to convince a barmaid to give you free beer and roll a 1 Charisma check. She calls you a rude name and stalks away. The worst effect on the fumble failure table is a 00 on a percentile concerning combat and you drop your weapon out of reach, with no decapitations or hitting yourself. And the rules apply to antagonists and protagonists alike.

[@elbruces]

I just use nat 1's to flavor the description to make the character have failed extra awkwardly. There's no need to apply actual mechanics or consequences beyond a miss, just play it up to make them seem extra clumsy for a second. If they can laugh at themselves, it can make for a fun moment, which makes enough of a difference as it is.

[@axelfirekirby]

who tries to seduce a princess by sticking there head in the royal Guillotine?

[@stephenwells2464]

Before allowing an impossible role like running up the vertical wall I’ll usually say “Do you have an ability that lets you do that?” If they do, no roll needed. If they don’t… also no roll needed. Sometimes even helps remind the monk maybe they should be trying to run up the wall not the wizard. Or remind the wizard they have spider climb that this is a perfect opportunity for.

[@hellterminator]

@themakerstoolbox9688 Kelly was talking about a 30 foot wall. No one IRL can pull that off.

[@Tancred672]

My group has always used a natural 1 to just describe you doing something embarrassing with your miss, so it's more about the comedy than punishing you for rolling a 1.

[@ambisinisterr5735]

Exactly. I guess the rules I usually apply are "Critical Fails" more so than "Critical Fumbles." I actually really enjoy Critical Fails because it means you can't succeed by default and still have suspense on skill checks. I. E. In my current campaign I am playing a Way of the Shadow Monk and I am basically an auto success for stealth. However if I happen to roll a 1 I do something stupid like kick a bucket out the ground and fail to hide and all nearby creatures are alerted. Fumbles with flavor can by fun, like slipping when doing an acrobatics check and taking 1d4 damage but it should be flavorful and fun rather than a punishment.

[@raeishimura]

My group does this. It was hilarious during one campaign, where my Rogue was guiding my party stealthing through a warehouse. Our Firbolg Druid rolled a 1 on his stealth check. The result? "Your stomach gurgles and rebels against you, the human cooking from the tavern not agreeing with your digestive system and you break wind with the force of a thunderclap and an odor like a skunk that had been left in the sun for several days" Everyone at the table was just laughing our heads off. We had to fight our way out of the warehouse, but the DM even flavored it that two of the guards fled the warehouse, vomiting and retching. It was hilarious and we all were just dying of laughter.

[@That_Guy_Ty]

Exactly, because it is inevitable that a player will roll a nat one.

[@AuntLoopy123]

Me, too. Face plants are funny. Turning your "attack" into a pie in your own face (I don't know what spell that might be, but if it comes up, I'll definitely use it), is FUNNY. Basically, we're like Roger Rabbit. You can only do it, if it's funny. If you accidentally hit your party member, it gives a bruise and annoys them, but does not damage them, because none of us want that. I remember those days from the 80's though. Oh, golly, the critical and fumble tables scared me to death.

[@LoveSasukeKai]

I'll always remember when my Warlock was too distracted by a sexy fighter to properly cast an illusion.

[@ninjabuddy1]

"I roll to ask the king to give up his kingdom" *Rolls 20* "the king decides not to have you executed on the spot"

[@dolphinboi-playmonsterranc9668]

He went about it the wrong way. He has to cast Friends on the king first. Or Charm Person.

[@kingzut]

in a game id run it would go more like this.. (the king stops and looks you over.. starts to laugh. "you know, i like you, you got balls." pauses " you know, i might just have the thing for you if your really interested in ruling".. then the king goes on to explain that a minor lord has been a bit lazy. has been behind on taxes and hasnt done well dealing with the orc tribes that have been pushing into the area. he even suspects that he has been scheming with them and a few other lords to try and usurp the king. if you and your group can go down there, clear the orcs and remove the lord, you may keep the land so long as you swear loyalty, and of course pay the taxes on time.)

[@Entropy67]

@@dolphinboi-playmonsterranc9668 Charm person informs the king after one hour that he was bewitched. Likely going to still result in an execution of the player characters.

[@Zulk_RS]

This reminded me of an awesome reward choice I saw in a video game. After doing a quest for the king, the king asks you what you would want for your reward. The options the game gave you were: -Money -Princess -King -Nothing. Obviously it was an SNES game so you were going to get gold no matter what but the fact that you could ask for the King, not the kingdom, the King was humorous to me.

[@That_one-guy192]

I did this when I was younger. My Dm said “you convinced the King, as he stands up and begins to offer you his crown the queen, his wife walks in and says no. The king retracts his crown and sheepishly sits back down”.

[@robinthrush9672]

First rule: "Hey healer, you can keep us topped off in end game at level 1, right?"

[@davidgantenbein9362]

I just hope that everybody playing a healer walks away when this rule gets implemented, really no reason at all to play with people that would enforce such a thing on a healer.

[@scook9999]

Oh, you asked for a cleric, you didn't say anything about healing.....until now.

[@frsfsbxgs4492]

To be fair, it rules for the killing(!) blow, whereas one first falls unconscious at 0HP. So the big bad melee guys can always just have some downed monsters lying about, passing the knife to the the cleric: "This one is yours, kid!"

[@robinthrush9672]

@@frsfsbxgs4492 It's rare for enemies to not die when they hit 0 hp, unlike players.

[@benjaminolson7206]

Look bard, we appreciate you giving us inspiration, throwing us healing words whenever we went down, hypnotizing all the enemies so that we could slaughter them, talking us past those other encounters, handling the majority of our skill checks, and generally just being helpful in everything we ever do. But really if you want to get past level five we expect you to focus more on hitting people with that rapier.

[@somedm3080]

They mentioned how the critical fumble table makes it so that someone with an insane bonus can fail catastrophically. It made me think about my house rule where, if someone has a high enough bonus, I just don't bother asking for a roll, I just let them do it. Unless they're under duress, in which case, I feel that even someone who's incredibly skilled might fuck up. My favourite example is someone trying to pick a lock during a fight. Even a simple lock can become difficult when you've got arrows and fireballs flying all around you.

[@lowestoftmattyhere]

With skill checks I still use the pathfinder concept of taking 10

[@saddlerrye6725]

Unfortunatelly a lot of critical fumbles happen in combat, where you can't really dodge rolling. Like, okay, your Fighter is really good at hitting enemies - so he'll never have to roll to hit again? It doesn't work. And then you have a critical fumble and the fighter hit the wizard instead of the goblin. I've had a lvl 1 game where I went down in a single turn by friendly fire: the Fighter hit me, then I managed to shoot myself. The attack rolls were shit, the damage dice were great. It wasn't too much fun.

[@somedm3080]

@@saddlerrye6725 Yeah, that's why the crit fumble in that example is just failing. When you already have people trying to kill you, failure is already bad enough.

[@somedm3080]

@@lowestoftmattyhere Yeah, that's what the homebrew is based on, the idea that, if your score is high enough and nothing is going to get in the way, then it's only a matter of time before you get it, so why waste time rolling? All it does is slow down your game and keep your from getting to something impactful.

[@johnnye87]

There's a L11 Rogue ability, Reliable Talent, that says any skill you're proficient in, you treat any d20 roll as a 10 at lowest. I've seen arguments for making that a flat houserule for any character of that level, but that feels a bit like picking the rogue's pocket (ha). But I think making it a rule for anyone's keystone skills could make sense. Pick say 1-3 (DM's discretion) skills that your character is reliably good at - you now can't screw them up.

[@krisgardner7160]

My table has the “Rule of Cool” where if you want to take an action that would violate a rule, but it is believable, fair, not immersion breaking, and cool, we will let you roll on it and if you succeed you can do it

[@HermitOfSwords]

Same! I pretty much let my players do what they want and try to get whatever outcome they want IF it's reasonable, and not game breaking. Otherwise I tell them why it wouldn't work, but still immersed like "the walls are slick, with no areas for purchase, you don't think you could scale one" and that usually makes them come up with another plan. If they wanna try to hook their rope on the chandelier and climb up that way, go for it. 😂

[@cdnamy8832]

Thats why I tweeked a feat for my rogue, its believable he could do more than the feat allows, but barely because he has such a high af dex.

[@MDMDMDMDMDMDMDMDMD]

That's what inspiration points do too, right?

[@topsyturvy1097]

@@MDMDMDMDMDMDMDMDMD inspiration sucks

[@MDMDMDMDMDMDMDMDMD]

@@topsyturvy1097 only if your DM makes it suck. It's not uncommon to let it cause a rule of cool. It's rare enough that it's practically a "daily", or rarer.

[@JadeDRail]

Killing blow seems like a big middle finger to the healer.

[@ironwolf56]

The killing blow only gets the xp rule usually comes from those groups who only love the worst parts of old school gaming. It's a very 70s/early 80s rule.

[@SpencerCJ]

Do people ignore than D&D is a group game?

[@JadeDRail]

@@ironwolf56 As the healer, I approve this message.

[@JadeDRail]

@@SpencerCJ Some seem too. Some people also ignore it is an RPG. I've had DMs look at me funny for role playing my character.

[@nateschultz8973]

In AD&D, fighters' *bonus* exp. was dependent on getting the final blow. Healers, though, got theirs from healing. Both shared the exp. for the encounter, though.

[@kalebrodenhausen3606]

Players: “Give us your kingdom.” Rolled Nat 20 *Expectation of something special.* King: “I like your style kid, you're bold, driven, and you lack deception. I could use that on my court. I have a plot of land that i require someone with your nature to look over. It’s not much, but I imagine over time, you can make a decent barony out of it.” *Quest log updates* Players *shocked* “why would you do that instead of banishing us. Or throw us in the prison or laugh us out of your throne room?” King: “I like you, I want to help you. And maybe in due time, you can help me when I need it.” Sometimes, you can turn a bad scenario into a quest chain to save you time while you finish working on your megadungeon. And you may not be handed a kingdom, but you're given the opportunity to manage a barony, be careful what you ask for. Everyone wins.

[@harperthegoblin]

This is genius! where did you learn this?

[@elsupernico]

BRILLIANT!

[@Getz-Da-Chompy]

I feel like, unless the party had worked pretty closely with the king in question and/or had pulled off plenty of impressive feats at this point in the game, that can still feel like too much of a reward for a random d20 roll, especially if it is worded so simply as just "give us your kingdom". You can also just have it twisted in a way where the players are rewarded in different, more indirect ways. For example, most kings would execute you on the spot for being so bold to make that demand. The player's reward for a nat 20 at this point is that they're rewarded by being told to leave, instead of immediately executed by the 12th level fighter standing behind them. Or, perhaps, you could take things in a different direction. If the players want to rule this kingdom and have made such a bold display, perhaps the next morning they'll happen to run into a shifty looking guy who's heard all about their passionate display on why they should rule the kingdom, and how he and his 'organisation' are looking for some help to 'redistribute' the king's wealth and power. BAM, new questline that doesn't immediately give the players a massive reward but has driven the narrative in a direction that A) the players clearly want to go on and B) can let them work towards and earn the kingdom that they just showed that they want.

[@dokchampa9324]

This is exactly how I would've ruled it. Nat 20s are meant to be special even if they're not the exact desired outcome of the check

[@bulldozer8950]

@@Getz-Da-Chompy "So what did you get on the check" "nat 20" "this is an ability check. I want the total" "22... So do I succeed?" No critical successes on ability checks or saving throws. You don't do critical fails, you don't do critical success. And critical fails are just as stupid for that. In combat, it makes sense. There is always a chance, no matter how armored you are, for a random dude to get a hit on you, and there is always a chance, no matter how good you are at smacking things, that you might miss once in a fight against said random dude. The same can't be said for a rogue taking his time to pick a lock. If that rogue has a +15 or something crazy, there is no reason they should be failing against random standard locks.

[@johncox7169]

The thing you forgot to mention about the Initiative rule that made it extra bad was that after initiative was rolled and everything was sorted out, you started declaring what your actions were (from slowest to fastest init) but didn't start resolving them until everyone has said what they are going to do. Then you started resolving them from fasted to slowest, and if when your turn came up your action was now impossible (say due to your target going faster than you and moving out of range of your attack) then you just got to do nothing on your turn.

[@malliceuk]

That sounds brutal. Think I can see why someone would think that is a good idea in theory. In practice it would not be as fun

[@Christian_Sandoval]

That's how me and my friends used to play 2e, like Final Fantasy 1 on NES. We now roll initiative each round, declare what we plan on doing and then we apply speed factor. We borrowed the "wait" action from greyhawk initiative to make it work. We'll try anything except for the normal single roll initiative for the entire encounter. We find 5e initiative boring and repetitive.

[@resevil2396]

I feel like that kind of system would work better in a different rpg where most fights were designed to end quickly. I remember playing a session of pathfinder and unless the dm just lowered the HP pool I took out two enemies in one attack (I think it was two orcs but I cant remember). In that kind of system, rolling for initiative for each action makes sense.

[@starbird3939]

We have a different "Killing Blow" rule. When the player reduces an enemy's HP to 0, they get to DESCRIBE the kill (we are a text dnd campaign). That's it. How equipment or other stuff is divvied (no experience, we do milestone level up) is kinda just.. between ourselves.

[@sirjimby7107]

Yeah HDYWTDT’s are awesome especially since when you say it as the dm in a really tense fight everyone starts cheering and it’s so fun to watch

[@thomasmurrell9832]

It's a ton of fun! It allows great mid-combat role-playing and I am a HUGE sucker to rp in dnd sessions. It's fun as it lets you portray how your character would be fighting and killing. Would that just be fast and crude and barbaric or would they be sadistic, letting the first hit be painful and the second be the relieving death for the target? It promotes great amounts of creativity and role-playing opportunities

[@ArmoredChocoboLPs]

That’s fair, the killing blow gets to have a badass moment. Similar to a Tomb of Annihilation session I saw where the Sorcerer’s Cone of cold turned a forge into a glacier, complete with fire newt statues.

[@Mrklondike95]

That’s not really the same that’s a “How do you want to do this?” Rule (The name stems from critical role) (Yes it was a house rule before that but that is where the phrase comes from)

[@Metalhammer1993]

Yeah that's how I do that too unless it's something entirely ridiculous. Like my campaign big boss a cleric of Talos being killed by vicious mockery. (Well with VM we have a house rule that you have to insult the monster meaning it's not just "i cast VM" it's "I cast VM. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries." And in case somebody blatantly rips off monty pyton for VM the monster gets advantage on save xD). I mean VM is a wis save boss was 18th level cleric. No way that goes through right? Yeah it went through "what do you say?" "If your god had thrown your mum after us instead of that ship (I hurled a ship after them with divine intervention) the whole city would be gone." I was like: okay you see a vein pop at Ezekiel's forhead and he lunges at you but before he can reach you, he drops. Congratulations you killed my BBEG with a yo mama joke. Ezekiel isn't the only one having an aneurysm right now. In such ridiculous circumstances I take over the kill.

[@Trynsa]

Just found this channel, and was watching through some past videos... This one hit home for me. I grew up playing the game. My mother and her husband were excellent DMs (horrible at just about everything else, but excellent DMs). I learned to love the game, and to understand the benefits and potential pitfalls of house rules. I ended up moving in with my dad, and unable to play the game for a decade. I'd really missed it. Some time after growing up, moving out, and getting married, my husband and I decided we both wanted to get back into playing. A friend offered to DM. We do a session zero, I had NEVER played 3.5e (this was back in like, 2010), and I hadn't played in well over a decade. It took a while to brush up on SOME parts, and other things were just really foreign to me, but I pulled something together that I genuinely loved and was excited to play (despite a -1 Con modifier, and feeling oddly crippled. Should have been a red flag). Our first real play session rolls around... And our first full combat scene goes down... I roll a 1. Okay, sure, that's a fumble. "Roll again." 1. Joy. "Your dagger breaks. Roll again." 1. "You fall onto the jagged remainder. Roll damage." I died. The first bout of combat, and I die. Because he INSISTED on critical fumble. And when I went down, it was apparently permanent. That session put me off of playing again for years. It was driven home that the DM was "just playing by the rules." I know this was a long comment, but hearing about critical fumble rules STILL simultaneously breaks my heart and makes my blood boil...

[@DaDitka]

One of the most fundamental rules for a DM is to make the game fun FOR THE PLAYERS. Unless you are in a 1on1 game, there are always going to be more players than gamemasters. So as a GM, I learned that to have a fun game, you need to make it fun for the players. The fun for me as a GM will always accompany that. I remember what Gygax wrote in the Player's Handbook for 1e- the rules are not like chess. They are not meant to be cut and dried. That has always stuck with me; if I don't like a rule or if I think it may hinder the game, I throw it out. Because as I wrote before, the game is first and foremost about enjoying yourself. That doesn't mean that the party will ALWAYS succeed. They might die. But if it's part of the story, or I can make it part of the story (say, the group doesn't die but they are captured), then that has potential. I don't blame you for being mad. I probably would have given up too, if I was in your position. Granting that the die rolls went terrible for you (and what timing for that to happen, eh?), if I was the DM and saw that this was your first time playing in who-knows-how-long, there's no way I would have enforced that. No way. I'm not saying this to reinforce your bias; if I disagreed with you, I would tell you. It's just not how I roll as a DM. I hope you have found a game that has a DM that is more interested in the fun of the game than the rules of the game.

[@CidGuerreiro1234]

I get genuinely sad when people report bad/traumatizing experiences in an RPG session. It can be such an amazing thing, but it can be pretty bad as well if the people involved are being dicks. And it seems to me that the DM in this case was just being a dick for shits and giggles. Critical fumbles aren't even "Rule As Written", and there's no scenario where letting a player character die like that is fun for anyone other than a DM who gets his rocks off out of watching players fail. I hope you found it in you to play again and actually had fun this time around.

[@hariodinio]

*internet hugs for you*

[@dillonrichard2541]

I play pathfinder, so this may make more sense in D&D, but how? You rolled three nat 1's in a row? Did he get you to keep rolling in the same turn? That is incredibly unlikely 0.0125%. He definitely should have stopped at dropping the dagger or something, not keep extending the detriment. Did he let you keep rolling crit hits if you succeed? Wizards in PF have 6HP, 5 with a -1 CON, how did a 1d4 damage dagger one shot you? My brain hurts, why did the GM get you to keep rolling? My group loves fumble tables (well, we use a deck of cards), they add a lot to the game. It is possible to hurt yourself, but most of them are more thematic. You sprain your arm, take a DEX penalty for a bit. You hurt your hand, and cant use it till it is bandaged up, that sort of thing. I am sorry you had such a rotten experience with the table. Please blame the DM, not the idea.

[@conundrum60690]

@@CidGuerreiro1234 that’s just a bad DM. I’d embarrass her not kill her. You not only drop your dagger but you fumble and sit on it somehow blade first. You run your max movement roll d4 west grabbing your butt and yelping and take 2 damage.

[@GogiRegion]

My favorite nat 20 happening was when a Druid tried to identify the magic being used in the area used to create a false valley to keep people out, and was nothing like any magic any of the characters had ever seen. The Druid rolled a nat 20, and the information they got was, “That’s not druidic magic.”

[@09Dragonite]

The way you described the Legend of Zelda called shot systems is precisely how the Monster Hunter game series works. I've seen someone put together a homebrew campaign for MH before, and tbh it looks absolutely fantastic.

[@alexanderferoe3750]

Best houserule: whenever someone lands a Crit they say a one liner. If it’s good enough, rap air horn goes off. Worst houserule: once per session each player was able to alter the world in any way they wished even if it didn’t make sense with the story. It turned the main quest giver from a rich traveling merchant into a gay robot foot fetishist who was constantly trying to sexually harass one of the player characters.

[@crustybomb115]

ok now what the actual hell happened in that group to *MAKE THAT* happen????

[@WowItsErin]

Firstly: That sounds like a group/DM problem not a rule problem. Secondly: ... Was he a robot with a foot fetish, or a man with a robot-foot fetish?

[@dapperghastmeowregard]

That actually sounds like a rad as hell rule (In fact, it's like 30% of the game mechanics in Ten Candles), you just need a group that's mature enough to use it properly.

[@WowItsErin]

@@dapperghastmeowregard Hard agree!!! Again, this is a group problem.

[@captainnickname293]

Hey it's the anime fire emblem thing for the first rule

[@dapperghastmeowregard]

"That title seems a little harsh, some house ruled can get a little silly, but-" "Killing blow XP" Me, who favors milestone levelling: Oof. As for nat 20s, I've been thinking of giving a "You wasted a crit" point of inspiration for a 20 on a roll they shouldn't have made. Obviously this assumes players don't bag of flour it and just start constantly rolling dice.

[@futuza]

What's milestone leveling in this context?

[@ethancordray8006]

Same. That was my moment of, "Oh, some people actually play that way. Oh, wow."

[@ethancordray8006]

@@futuza not to speak for the OP, but milestone leveling is when you don't track XP. instead, characters level up when they complete important narrative milestones in the campaign story. Finish a quest, complete a dungeon, defeat a major monster, etc. It helps ensure that leveling up feels narratively significant, and it eliminates the bookkeeping burden of tracking XP. I use it whenever I can.

[@futuza]

@@ethancordray8006 Yeah that's what I thought it was too, so I dunno why he's saying milestone leveling is at all related to killing blow xp or why that should be an "oof" for him favoring it. Like what?

[@dapperghastmeowregard]

@@futuza Killing Blow XP is especially dumb to me because it uses the double whammy of a terrible idea on top of implying that they use XP based levelling.

[@SunBrohan]

11:29 Player: I want to run up this 30-ft wall and grab a ledge. DM: I guess you can try...... Player: (rolls) Natural 20! DM: You attempt to run up the wall only to find you get 10 ft up and you slip and fall. Miraculously you ricochet off a nearby tree landing gracefully and out of tree drops a small pouch someone tucked away up there. Player: (Yonk!) ......... I'm not going to complain about this.

[@hariodinio]

30ft up a wall to grab a ledge? *Laughs in monk*

[@SunBrohan]

@@hariodinio Monk: I want to run up this wall...... While dashing. DM: Suuuuuure roll for Dexterity! Monk: (rolls natural 20) DM: Wow..... Good thing you have "slow fall"for what's about to happen next!

[@Heliumoxid43]

Well I would let him get up partially for a nat 20. Something like: Okay, you somehow got grip on the elsewhere flat wall and hanging with your hand 15-20 feet (Depending on total value) above the ground. You can hold this for a number of minutes equal to your strength modifier at a minimum of 30sec. What do you want to do now?

[@hariodinio]

@@SunBrohan but at level nine monk gets to run up walls without a skill check

[@tinkerer3399]

Funny thing is I knew a guy in BC who would routinely run up a ~25 foot wall. It looked perfectly flat but there were imperfections in the wall that he would take advantage of. You wouldn't be able to climb the wall but you could run up it. Impressive enough he made a pretty fair living busking with that trick (among other tricks). But the ground at the bottom was super soft and he knew how to fall if need be.

[@t84nightfall]

My called shot system is a replacement for critical hits. So you can forego your extra damage to make a called shot instead to somehow hinder the enemy, but it doesnt result in anything game breaking like an instant kill. Like you both suggested, it’s usually some form of knocking the weapon out of their hand or something similar

[@marquiseh5128]

Critical to break a leg or cripple a wing to crush their movement

[@danyschalifour2118]

its good im taking note

[@luketaylor9721]

Personally not a fan of this. I feel it undermines class abilities that mechanically apply these benefits, such as disarming strike, or silence, blindness, restrained type spells or attacks. If I had picked a battle master subclass for example, I would feel cheated as a player by the DM allowing a ranger or barbarian to call disarming or tripping attacks, for something that would normally require significant resource expenditure.

[@snuffysam]

⁠@@luketaylor9721Yeah, I think that is always the risk with these sorts of rulings. Similarly, if getting a nat 20 on a persuasion check is basically a mind control spell with no downsides, or a nat 20 on athletics is basically a flight spell, kinda sucks for the players that take those spells.

[@bouncerblake]

Aren't (most) effects such as this muddled down to making targets roll with disadvantage? I'm not up to date on the rules, but since there are classes that can cripple or trip or sunder or blind, the idea that it's out of your wheelhouse because it already exists seems to be the necessary way to lean. I get that it's not the greatest answer to someone when they get those rare rolls, but the abilities are right there to choose from, and don't usually require a lot of investment to access if you really want it, AND won't require a critical roll to achieve. That being said, the opposite could be true. And if the table wants those critical rolls to mean they can use something exclusive, then it might make players lean against choosing the class options because "anyone can do it, if you're lucky." So all seem viable to an extent. A little communication can go a long way here.

[@AlecMader]

The way I put it, "Nat 1's and Nat 20's do not alter the fabric of reality."

[@julius9943]

a little chaos ain't never hurt no one

[@Plankensen]

Mine was the Opposite, max dice wins. I hate math

[@snate56]

"Fabric of reality"? Seriously? You are playing a FANTASY role playing game! Now, I agree a lot of people go way overboard, but I wouldn't mind a bit of variety.

[@AlecMader]

@Alex Orjuela Divine Intervention is not a religion check. It's a d100 under your level roll.

[@JoeL-yq1iv]

"fabric of reality" within the context of the game world your characters exist in is absolutely a thing. If it weren't, a Wish spell could be cast by anyone at any time.

[@ProjectDT88]

My DM has a fun way of dealing with the "impossible natural 20" thing. In his version you still make the check, but it is now more of a save. You get that 20 for trying to persuade the king to give up his crown, he finds it amusing and decides not to have you executed.

[@RGMtz99]

My DM does this too. For example, when trying to intimidate someone who could instantly kill my lvl 1 character, when I rolled a nat 20, instead of killing me the NPC decided I had guts for trying and let me live

[@michaelangelomaimone3181]

The GURPS handbook actually provides some handy guidelines for intimidation specifically. Namely, there are those who fold and get scared, but there are also those who appreciate the guts displayed a “my kind of scum” sort of reaction

[@notanevilrobot]

Player: ima lift this stick *rolls 20* DM: you lift the stick and it lifts you to heaven to become a all powerful deity that can blow up universes

[@AN-ou6qu]

Why would this be rolled for tho

[@williamdavis671]

@@AN-ou6qu maybe their strength is low and it's a really big stick

[@wavetech_]

@@AN-ou6qu cause it's a joke

[@notoriousectotherm]

Please tell me this actually happened

[@ericmurotake5180]

Actually had something similar happen, except the end result had the stick pulse with energy and turn out to be a semi-mythical weapon (in this case, a stave that could mildly shapechange into other forms of blunt wooden damage (quarterstaff, short stave, heavy maul, and, courtesy of a gigantification spell that an NPC used on the party, a giant club the size of a castle tower))

[@gpearce11]

I totally get the idea behind Grayhawk Initiative, as no extended combat encounter would ever result in everyone attacking in a set order repeatedly, and it makes sense that faster weapons/attacks should get earlier initiative slower weapons/attacks. In practice, however, anything that enforces realism at the expense of game play is never worth it, and considering that initiative is designed to streamline combat, adding something that slows down combat is just a terrible idea.

[@MadManMatrix]

One of my old groups swore by gray hawk initiative while I hated the extra complications. We would spend 4 hours in a simple combat that should have been over in an hour or so at most because constantly having to recalculate initiative, players not planning their turn because they had no clue when they would go or what would happen and couldn’t even make educated guesses what other players would do because they had no clue when they would go simply awful not sure why they swore by it.

[@LordChaosHavik]

Killing blow experience - Laughs in Milestones

[@eri_sister_of_aerial]

I actually was in a Pathfinder session last year and I decided to be an Elvish Kensai-Bladebound Magus at level 1 while everybody was level 5. The DM had decided that XP is given by participation in combat and my character threw his knife at an enemy and missed and a week after I asked about the XP I earned and he said that he didn't give a good amount of XP (granted I had to leave an hour after we started) to someone who only throws a dagger and misses. If I remeber correctly, on the campaign Discord server I actually called him out on it because it makes it seem like when you enter in level 1 you just feel absolutely useless compared to much stronger level 5 characters. I called him out by explaining that my GM in our Starfinder campaign has played Dungeons & Dragons/RPGs for more than 15 years and has DMed for like 10. And I said that he gives XP based around the actual flippin' rules where you average it and when you start fresh after your character dies you enter at the same level as the other PCs are. I was pissed at the way of the DM's rules. NEVER DO PARTICIPATION KILLS, IT JUST MAKES YOUR PLAYERS AND CHARACTERS FEEL ABSOLUTELY USELESS. One example is an Investigator, the class is made for Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma skill checks not combat.

[@addamazeing]

@@eri_sister_of_aerial Why not make a level 5 character so you can come in at the same level as everyone else?

[@eri_sister_of_aerial]

@@addamazeing The DM said I COULD NOT. LEVEL 1 only

[@addamazeing]

@@eri_sister_of_aerial Yikes, that's rough

[@eri_sister_of_aerial]

@@addamazeing He is my friend, but I seriously question how he DMs like this.

[@allanfloyd8103]

Had a DM one time who told us that if we wanted to have called shots, we could, but the enemies would be using them, too... We decided we didn't need that feature right away!

[@ericb3157]

reminds me of a story where some players were ins a dungeon with LOTS of small enemies (kobolds, i think), and one player realized they could use a "hold action" rule, allowing them to get free attacks a the beginning of battles. BUT the enemies started doing that too...

[@Team_BaM]

12:40 "Shoot them in the hand to disable the weapon they're holding" Me: Maybe give them disadvantage... "Shoot them in the knee to..." Me: Force them to stop adventuring and become a guard? No way too op.

[@TheMento98]

Or you know reduce their speed by half? If someone's shot in the knee they're probably not going anywhere far, nor anywhere fast, for a while.

[@ammogoettsch]

Not sure these guys in the video understand 5e as much as they think they do? Shooting someone between the eyes is what happens (narratively) if you do a decent amount of damage and this damage reduces the enemy to 0. Attacks before that were wearing down the enemy’s defenses or otherwise not resulting in a lethal effect (as determined by the hit point system.). Also, called shots are already integrated into the hit point system via Sharpshooter and GWM for damage, or Combat Maneuvers for imparting status effects by martial skill. Adding these to other classes via house rules is just goofy 2e or 3.5e (PF) nostalgia :) that makes it pointless to build your character around the 5e ways of doing them. Edit: reading my comment, it seems unclear what my point was :).... so: I am trying to say they should have done a better job explaining how these things that people are trying to add are actually already in the system.

[@Attaxalotl]

shoot them in the face to give disadvantage to persuasion rolls.

[@Team_BaM]

@@Attaxalotl Ridiculous! That should give Charisma bonuses if anything. Shoot your friends in the face to give them cool edgy scars.

[@jonathankydd1816]

@@Team_BaM honestly that depends on the placement of the scars, also edgy scars lean more towards intimidation and would probably detract from persuasion.

[@macondavis1336]

At my table, I’m implement called shot rules, however any attempts to outright one shot the enemy are never allowed and calling shots only allows minor debuffs to the target, such as -5ft of movement if a leg is injured or becoming blinded for a round if shot in the eye. The enemies can’t call shots on players though. So far, this rule has been a great addition.

[@esmepipkin6087]

The first rule is a rule my brother used the first time he was a DM. He didn't bring it up until we finished our first battle. I had dealt most of the damage and still got 0 experience, it was really not a good way to do it.

[@lagg1e]

It's a fun idea, but only if all characters work on the same axis of battle. 2 fighters competing for kills is a bit different than a barbarian and a cleric competing for killing blows.

[@oz_jones]

Ouch.

[@blitheringape5321]

it also just flat out makes no sense, I can't fathom how you can come up with an idea that bad

[@jamestaylor9887]

@@blitheringape5321 the idea is bad for a conventional campaign, but i do feel there could be some good ways to implement this. The one example i can think of is starters making this rule known at the start of the campaign or session (if applicable) and then have the campaign or session be a competitive one. So if its a campaign its not meant to last but a few sessions. If its session based maybe they are doing a hunting expedition put on by a rich individual noble or otherwise and each competitor fights on their own. I would however still provide quest experience for completing a session like this, but each person would also get kill xp for the kills they got.

[@ariannadravis3934]

@@jamestaylor9887 I actually really like this yeah

[@MarkoArillius]

I usually go with a Crit Success meaning a guaranteed success on a skill roll... with the clause that I decide what a success means. In the case of a Bard going up to a King and declaring that they should abdicate their thrown, rolling a natural 20 to persuade them, there are a number of perfectly acceptable, CRITICAL, success options. The two I can think of off the top of my head are... 1.) The King laughs at this humorous joke and the Bard finds that he has made fast friends with the monarch. 2.) The King is angered by this but before anything can happen, his steward reminds the King that these are the champions and they are a bit... unorthodox. The king lets the stupid joke slide but as the Steward is leading them away, he slips a note to the Bard with an address and a meeting place... For a revolutionary group! Ultimately, the roll failed to do what the bard intended. But success was still had in the endeavor. In the end, though, I also like to let players fail forward too, and I'm not afraid to tell them if something is truly impossible if their idea is too narrow in field for me to work off of. This house rule is a 'rule of cool' sort of rule... and with such rules, the DM is the ultimate decider.

[@lostsoul7191]

I love this and will probably use it at some point.

[@Que937]

I’ve always hated the idea of “critical confirms” where you have to roll twice for a crit.

[@velkonemriam1935]

My brother had a DM who does this and I've always found it stupid. To me, it's just a DM who doesn't like crits. I absolutely hate the "critical confirms" and will never allow it in my games.

[@horacemyrthit16]

Yes, but rolling to confirm critical success means that you would roll to avoid critical failure as well. Also, rolling a natural 20 doesn't mean automatic success. If you have a +1 to attack rolls and you roll a natural 20, but the monster had an AC of 25, then you don't crit because you can't even hit.

[@FLGCaboose]

@@horacemyrthit16 My DM we use a Critical Hit Table, and you Roll to confirm if a unique effect happens but the Crit damage goes through either way. I've preferred it because it can make a Crit feel a bit more special, but never devalues the normal criticals for damage either.

[@Adept_Austin]

@@horacemyrthit16 "If the d20 roll for an attack is a 20, the attack hits regardless of any modifiers or the target's AC." -PHB pg. 194

[@velkonemriam1935]

@@horacemyrthit16 I guess that would depend on that table then. As a DM, I don't even have the players roll if I know for a fact that the action is impossible for them to succeed. I'm not a "Crit accomplishes anything, no matter how ridiculous" DM haha

[@voldlifilm]

My take on critical fumbles is to punish the player socially rather than mechanically. Describe how their paladin bravely swings at the monster then almost stumbles over their own cape. One of the monsters laugh mockingly at them. Maybe the paladin can restore some honor by slaying the mocking foe, or maybe the other characters in the party will tease them about it later. Could be they themselves begin to doubt their ability after a series of unlucky roles. I roleplayed a character who after getting almost killed several times on a journey to retrieve a treasure began wonder if this life was really cut out for him. He still hasn't quite made up his mind about retiring or not. I don't like mechanical punishment, because it can lead to so many snowballs and end up with that player getting blamed for so much trouble that was really the fault of their die. However, by making it something social that your character gets to experience, it becomes a venue for roleplaying and character development. If the player roleplays the reaction to the miss with gusto and style, give them inspiration as they wish to redeem their fumble, or have them add some negative trait such as loss of confidence. There is so much fun to be had with a character who fumbles, just don't do it mechanically. Unless you want to, and YOU ALL think that stuff is fun.

[@Glodwran468]

Our group experimented a little bit with a "crushing blow" houserule, so that very high attack rolls felt more rewarding. A crushing blow is triggered for hitting 10 above the target's AC, and a double crush for 20 above it. At first, we were saying that it would double the number of dice rolled, but that lasted about 2 sessions before we discovered how absolutely broken that one. Then we started saying that it just added 1 dice to your roll, but it still seemed very powerful at times. Now, we have determined that on a crushing blow, you roll your damage as normal, and once all the dice have been rolled, you are able to choose a single die out of the entire lot to flip to max damage. It seems to be working out well, and helps to give really good attack rolls the extra punch they feel like they deserve, without being overly powerful. But there was definitely a little experimenting to find that sweet spot.

[@cthulhufhtagn2483]

How often were you rolling 10 or 20 above AC? Personally, I'd be OK just with saying that all crushing blow attacks do max damage, instead of rolling dice, but maybe I'm not rolling high enough.

[@sk8rdman]

@@cthulhufhtagn2483 He may be talking about a game from 3.5 or Pathfinders. In those games it was possible to get extremely high attack bonuses by 5e standards, like a +30 to hit for a high level martial character.

[@cthulhufhtagn2483]

@@sk8rdman Mmkay, that makes more sense. I've just barely gotten into systems that aren't 5e, so I didn't realize how that worked.

[@jimn4315]

@@cthulhufhtagn2483 a single war domain cleric can already add +20 to your attack roll, so its not that hard to get those even in 5e

[@cthulhufhtagn2483]

@@jimn4315 Really??? What level?

[@jordanpickthall0619]

One of my favorite homebrewed rules is the DM rolling death saves for downed PC’s behind the screen. This adds so much tension to the game when a teammate goes down and my PC’s are actually compelled to aid their fallen ally rather than saying’ “Oh, he’s got two passes. I’ll just attack this monster real quick.”

[@derimperator3847]

oooooh, good one! might ask my players if they want to try this

[@MadManMatrix]

I hate that system personally. It might be helpful for min/max players or meta gamers but at a good table the players should be compelled to help regardless of when the other player went down unless they have a character reason as to why they wouldn’t (barbarian in rage didn’t see ally go down, rogue hates the paladin that went down and feels like the party would be better without them maybe feigns healing him)

[@jamestaylor9887]

my current game has this feature. personally, i don't think it matters. if someone is going to metagame it they are going to know that you have 2 rounds of actions before you have to save the person in question. The exception is if you allow natural 1s to mean two failures. That said we are a party of 8 (imo to many for this dm) and during the first session half the party didn't even use their abilities. The cleric used 1 heal spell the whole session, the barbarian never used rage, neither of the dragonborns used their breath weapons. there were many other issues regarding the bare bones nature of the scene setting and the wild discrepancies in the village/town creation, but it was painful to play in.

[@ianmartinez362]

@@jamestaylor9887 how is this ame going now I need to know

[@jamestaylor9887]

@@ianmartinez362 didn't make it past session 3. As I expected the DM bit off more than he could chew. Was too busy trying to accommodate everyone with ingraining unique character abilities then tying them into the story. The story he built was overly convoluted, a player stopped care about their character due to session 0 issues and went suicidal, he was giving bits of story to some characters, but not to others. Ultimately, I called him out cause I wasn't having fun, I don't think any other players were having fun, and no one spoke up to say otherwise. So it ended.

[@KrazyCouch2]

With the Greyhawk initiative rules, imagine casting a spell that lasts until your next turn only for your next turn to come immediately after.

[@aprinnyonbreak1290]

I mean, for every time that happens, you also get to double dip on a spell or effect meant to only work for one turn.

[@Halinspark]

Imagine deciding "Im gonna cast a spell", having to go last, and then not having a reason to cast a spell by the time it's your turn.

[@FenixNade]

@@Halinspark welcome to AD&D 2nd edition. But it was worse there. RAW if you decided to cast fireball, you picked your target spot and then rolled. Possibly everything moved out of the area of effect before your spell went off.

[@Ashebrethafe]

Actually, the Greyhawk rules say that if an effect would last until the start or end of a turn, it lasts until the start or end of the round containing that turn (with d20 rolls determining the order in which multiple effects end between the same two rounds, if it matters). So if you were the last to act in a round, you'd know that a spell that lasts "until the start of your next turn" would end immediately, and you could choose to cast a different spell instead. (All you need to decide before rolling initiative is what type of action you're going to take with each of your actions for the turn: ranged attack, move, swap gear, melee attack, spell, or something else.)

[@phillipmayger2086]

Hold up! So here's the thing about finishing blow XP. The reason I use this is often the best combat classes are pulling their weight only during those moments. However I find it a bad idea to relegate XP through only combat or through only story progression. I do give 80% XP to the killing blow, but I also give XP for actions that are meaningful and creative. Such as a wizard using mage hand to trip up a goblin, or to release a trap will get XP similar to the killing blow. A person who is playing his or her class well, creatively, and helping or supporting the other players in combat should get equally rewarded. Meanwhile the dwarf fighter that doesn't do much other than bash skulls in gets most of their exp primarily through killing enemies. You know the guy that doesn't offer much when you need to get to a town quickly, or is unable to sneak past guards quietly. XP should be delivered based on a player using their character in a way that aligns with their classes contributions. If killing a creature is the only means of distributing XP in a campaign, you should give the dm a smack upside the head.

[@SneakyNinjaDog]

In the old Rolemaster rules, killing blow was part of the written rules. In my group it resulted in people jeopardizing combat in order to disengage and switch targets so that they could finish off the monster that another player had brought down to low hp. The kind of kill-stealing seemed not as crazy as it would not since it was baked into the rules. I remember actually houseruling this away in our Rolemaster game.

[@mysticaloctopus8224]

How dare you call them “Impossible Natural 20s” instead of “Supernatural 20s”

[@racefrazier7998]

as a DM I looked my player in the eye and said "roll a nat21" He pulled out a d30. It was all in good fun.

[@Lowraith]

You get an Inspiration.

[@birdiemcchicken1471]

#1 (Last-Hit EXP) "Hey! Let's turn D&D into League of Legends!" - Said nobody, at least nobody who should be allowed to be a DM #2 (Critical Fumbles) One time, I said to a new group of players that I don't use Critical Fumbles in my campaigns, and they literally started cheering #3 (Nat 20 to pierce the heavens and kill god) Tends to be more the result of an inexperienced DM not realizing what the players should and should not be allowed to do more than a "house rule" #4 (Called Shot) It's a combat mechanic that should be carefully designed and integrating into the existing rules to make the game more diverse and balanced, not "I cut off his head to instantly win the fight." Honestly, it feeds back into #3: Not knowing what the players should and should not be allowed to do #5 (Greyhawk Initiative Order) **Confused screaming**

[@bloodtypeinfinity5143]

Fucking thank you

[@manossteele1335]

Only way I could see the called hit rule could work to me would be to allow the player to make a called shot on a critical hit, then have them role another d20 to see the severity off the actual hit. That's at least the only way I would want to play with that rule.

[@saraneff6831]

We use called shots in our game, and we're loose with rules, but usually outcome is based on damage rolls and it effects more the "acting" of combat than the numbers But then all of us are also text based roleplayers which is basically dnd without 99% of the math and rules so we all have an understanding about called shots to begin with. Had a friend disable an enemy by shooting an arrow to the scrote, then I healed him after we tied him up. Thing did like... I don't know three damage or something, but it knocked him prone.

[@capgamer26]

A called shot is "i aim to strike his head" not "I'm going to cut his head off". The former is an accurate attempt at a targeted attack against an exposed weak point. The latter is a coup d grace (killing blow) usually saved for a victim unable to defend and is only permissible if your alignment allows it. Basically you can't behead someone actively trying to defend themselves because the rules don't allow it. If this is the outcome you want them follow the rules for it. Best i can offer as gm,take it or leave it.... Player: **shrugs** "fair enough."

[@FredRedFrred]

Critical hits and fumbles add flavor by occurring, and adding to that in a small way does not screw the game at all,. Decapitations, breaking weapons, killing friends and gods...um, no and NO. Making scenes have fantasy or comic interludes, oh yes and YES.

[@RussNo1]

I tried called shots once. The players kept saying "I'll aim for his nuts", "I'll aim for his nuts", "I'll aim for his nuts". I never used called shots again.

[@XoRandomGuyoX]

Allowing unusual actions if they're dramatically relevant can work, but it should be handled with care IMO. The idea given in the video of homebrewed enemies, or I was thinking lair components, can help set the expectation of what may or may not work. E.g. if an enemy is using a large crystal ball to shoot lightning around the room players may wish to attack and break the crystal ball to stop the attacks, which would make narrative sense.

[@michaelsorensen7567]

Just make all your mobs female lol

[@XoRandomGuyoX]

That could backfire though... "I punt them in the..."

[@michaelsorensen7567]

@@XoRandomGuyoX if it's actual punting, that's merely an unarmed strike, and is unlikely to have severe secondary effects.

[@PandaXs1]

@@michaelsorensen7567 I'ma punt your nuts and see if there's no severe secondary effects lmao

[@kingnekogon]

The first paragraph of that initiative houserule made me excited, because I've been running dynamic initiative for years. Roll initiative each round, and changes to initiative changes your turn order. It's likely because I've only had on average 2 to 3 players for several years, but it hasn't slowed my games down that much. My group's loved it so far. (To be fair we play PF1e with some more dynamic 3rd party systems). Then the rest of it came... And my disappointment was immeasurable.

[@GFCOLCQuote]

When I tried to do stuff with my monk that was fluff, like kicking off their face and using that pressure to jump away to fluff my mobile 5e feat, I had to roll acrobatics. If I succeed I get no benefit. It was roll for fluff. If I fail, I'm prone. Not failed fluff but an actual fail. Worst feeling I ever had.

[@Zombikaze]

Oof, that sucks. The one time I played a monk the DM for that group decided I had to roll Con saves when I used slow fall to determine if my hands/arms/whatever got chewed up in the process. And yes, if I failed I took damage. Haven't had an opportunity to play another monk since then as I'm DMing for a different group now.

[@GFCOLCQuote]

@@Zombikaze Gross. I dont even see the logic in that. You're falling slowly. Why would things take damage, and why would it even be a damn con save? Sure, if you slow fell in a tight rocky hole I could see your body getting cut up on the way down but thats it.

[@JoeL-yq1iv]

If you're doing extra stuff "for fluff", that amounts to flavor text. It shouldn't require a roll unless you're getting something more out of it, like using the extra push off the victim to also clear two tables and land behind a bar... Something you probably couldn't have done with just the remaining move you had. I never punish my players for giving their fighting more visual fluff. I like combat to be more cinematic.

[@Yawyna124]

@@JoeL-yq1iv Especially since, you know, monk is the wuxia kung-fu artist. Please, their entire thing is that they're super-humanly agile. Let them flavor text doing some cool stuff.

[@Mr_Maiq_The_Liar]

that hurts to read. Fuck that, i dont want to a boxer I WANT TO BE SPIDERMAN!

[@Phoenix_254]

I reconcile the “hypocrisy” of the fumble and wild magic tables on two points. 1. Wild magic doesn’t prevent your spell from occurring. You just got this random deal on top. 2. The results of wild magic aren’t negative by nature, sometimes it’s comedic, sometimes beneficial, other times harmful. Whereas critical fumbles are punishments on top of failure.

[@sven3540]

Also, Wild Magic is a choice you make when you create the character.

[@eruditecaptain3117]

@@sven3540 Additionally to this point, the subclass that involves Wild Magic comes with bonuses, and eventually has some access to controlling their chaotic feature. Critical Fumbles have no upshot, only the chance to not go as poorly as it could have.

[@Endershock1678]

I both love and hate Wild Magic. It's fun as heck, but lord it hates me. Wild Magic never works for me. I once entered a wild magic zone as a Warlock (low level) and I was the only spellcaster being careful with casting. My Wizard friend only casted spells, and ended up covered in lights 4 times, turned blue 3 times, had 5 sets of wings, and got lens flares. Somehow, when I tried to cast Wrathful Smite (Hexblade) once, I got sent to the freaking Astral Plane for a few turns and lost concentration on my spell, had my body teleported away while it was injured, and got burned by a flaming mage hand.

[@Phoenix_254]

Endershock1678 sounds like you had a...wild time. Yes yes I’m ashamed and leaving now, you can put away that Eldritch Blast.

[@Endershock1678]

@@Phoenix_254 I could... but I feel like getting you as far away as possible, so I maxed out my level, put on Repulsing Blast, and then Multiclassed Sorc so I can Quicken Spell. 8 Eldritch Blasts, each one sending you backwards ten feet. Of course I can just teleport away... but this is funnier. Have a nice flight home!

[@DinksterReal]

the talk just after the "called shots" rule about different body parts having functions and health pools has made me realise the "5 gnomes in a mech" are now making an appearance in my campaign

[@MrSteveK1138]

RIFTS in DnD

[@Kurotekken]

I got the 69th like. Nice.

[@CyberDagger003]

I have a little running joke about how gnomes have a racial ability that lets 5 of them combine to make a gnome-Voltron, but it has never been used because they can't stop bickering over who gets to form the head.

[@csmead209]

It also sorta describes how Monster Hunter does a system for part breaking. Severing a Rathian's tail will keep her from using her venom; Breaking her head is just a wound you can exploit for dealing extra damage, it won't remove her head.

[@csmead209]

@@CyberDagger003 that was from Gravity Falls

[@atomkuehne]

the difference between a critical fumble table and a wild magic table is that you sign up for the wild magic. Nowhere did I select for my character to do some wildly punishing shit just for rolling poorly on an attack roll, but I did choose to cast a spell with wild magic or in a wild magic area knowing there's a random consequence that will occur

[@marquiseh5128]

In response to fumble table put wild magic die on all spells

[@SebThorson]

@@marquiseh5128 Doesn't work cause half of wild magic effects are positive. Something like Perils of the Warp from Dark Heresy, though...

[@Booksforthewin]

My group has a crit fail table with effects anywhere from you summon Tiamat* (assuming she’s the closest dragon) to stubbing a toe. The thing is, we can just take damage instead. This also only applies to weapon attacks, and it also applies to opponents. In 3 years in the campaign, there have only been 3 truly disastrous results. Twice, we sik’d the nearest monster on us and once we had to bargain with a dragon. The thing is, for something really bad to happen, you need to be in a really bad place to begin with. The nearest dragon has to be dangerous, and not, say, a drake, which happens most of the time. This means that in addition to only having a 5% chance of anything happening, there is also only really a 10% chance off that, then only about a 25% chance that it ends bad. In total, whatever happens isn’t actually horrible 99.9985% of the time.

[@yetanotherbassdude]

​@@Booksforthewin OK in theory, but it's still a non-zero chance of happening, right? Would your players actually be OK with a TPK caused by a really unlikely sequence of rolls summoning Tiamat who crushes them like bugs and then destroys the world they've been trying to save? If not, why is it an option? Bear in mind that the individual probability might be tiny, but the cumulative probability of that unlikely thing happening at least once goes up exponentially with successive rolls. I haven't crunched the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if even your 0.0015% chance per roll might well hit 10% cumulative probability of at least one occurrence over the hundreds of rolls of a whole campaign. Are you happy with there being a 10% chance of it happening once when just once would spell doom for everyone? I like the idea of critical failures being used purely for flavour, like you don't just miss but you miss really clumsily and the orc you're fighting laughs at you, but I think making critical failures result in material punishments for players will ultimately just disincentivise them from wanting to roll in the first place.

[@SebThorson]

@@Booksforthewin So you just nerf weapon-using classes for no good reason. And add a chance for a campaign to just randumbly fail. What for? Weapon classes are already underperforming compared to casters.

[@JS-zr9qs]

Natural 20: You perform your best possible effort at your task. A perfect attack may hit a weak spot, but a perfect attempt at convincing a king to give up his crown still can't undo a whole country's laws.

[@KertaDrake]

The king gives up his position with no clear line of succession. Congrats, you just caused the kingdom to descend into civil war!

[@HDloly]

The king is the country's laws many times, but whatever.

[@samwagner7837]

The king laughs at your very funny joke offering to knight you or make you a court jester

[@garykinney16]

I do “called shots” tied to crits. When someone rolls a nat 20, they can either take the auto hit and double damage, or they can call a shot and roll another attack to confirm the called shot. A hit on the confirm roll equals success. The called shots I use are Head which is double damage dice and stun for a round, Arm which is double damage dice and disadvantage on attack rolls, Leg, which is double damage dice and half speed, and Vitals which is triple damage dice. If the confirm roll misses, the original “crit” roll is still an auto hit but only for normal damage. This leads to a risk vs reward system that my players have enjoyed.

[@gabriel300010]

me likes. me steal.

[@GYSBERT49]

That's actually pretty good, might use that or a variation of that in the next game.

[@garykinney16]

Thanks guys! I play Pathfinder as well as 5e, and in Pathfinder you have to confirm all critical hits. Thats where I got this idea from, but I also wanted to leave the option to take the standard 5e crit.

[@JorisVDC]

I like the part where you can can risk for some reward. Yet I don't like that you also double the damage instead of rolling for it. The extra effect you can inflict is already enough of a bonus. Because what are you risking when you choose to make that called shot on a crit? Have you applied this also when monsters attack PC's? It's really rewarding critical hit by a lot more for a confirmed critical hit. I would game that system with a champion fighter or dip into that. Imagine a half orc barbarian with a champion fighter dip. Those critical hits will be massive, even if you use a Great Sword. At level 8, you get with Reckless attack, 19,5% chance on a crit per attack, so that's 39% per turn. And if you confirm that's 36 Damage plus STR Rage Bonus. I assume you still have to roll for critical damage.

[@garykinney16]

Joris Vander Cammen, any time I said double damage, I meant double damage dice rolled out. IE: 1D6 for shortsword becomes 2d6 with a critical. All called shots with said short sword would deal 2d6, except vitals, which would deal 3d6. Sorry for the confusion. And, yes, my monsters also have access to these critical rules. I have to consider if they would just take the normal critical damage, or if it would make sense for them to go for a called shot. I had a group of monks who were trying to apprehend the monk in the group (he is a traitor to his clan and is hunted) so when they crit on the other party members, I believe they stunned them and tried to drag the monk PC away (after knocking him unconscious). The druid in the party used wild shape and managed to free the PC monk, but it was an interesting encounter

[@brooksfaucette296]

Honestly its so annoying when dms act like whenever a player rolls a natural 1 or 20 they act like its some sort of ultra-rare one-in-a-million occurence that shatters worlds and kills gods. Its a one in twenty chance calm down.

[@palidinicchaos3047]

I once had a DM that made us travel for days everywhere and roll on his random encounter table once for each day of travel. He had a lot of ridiculous stuff on the table that either TPKed the party or gave us something super OP. His table was based on a D100 roll and every single time one of the more powerful encounters came up he would say "Wow, I can't believe that that happened, it's so unlikely." to which I replied "It's a one in one hundred chance, like every single other result on the table!"

[@OneEyeShadow]

One in ten for either of both.

[@shalekendar6759]

It may seem to be a one-in-twenty chance but somehow it never seems to happen 1 out of every 20 rolls. Must be that bell curve thing.

[@stw7120]

@@shalekendar6759 d20 doesn't have any curve. It's 3d6 and other multi-dice groups that have it. That's why 18 or 3 on 3d6 is a crits that have more right to alter reality. Natural 20 happens one in twenty times. Natural 18 - one in 216.

[@bloodfartmoon2765]

Thats a 5% chance

[@ouberfox5898]

We often do the critical failure thing and its normally like derpy stuff like triping or failure on a perception check on a spider results in the "thats a strange looking dog" derpy jokes and the occasional 1d4 bludgeoning damage from steping on a garden hoe

[@alsojames8357]

Dumbest hose rule I've ever seen: rouges shouldn't have a sneak attack because its op.

[@bladesandswords6136]

What is a hose rule?

[@AntipaladinKent1]

You're right; that is dumb.

[@TheTanuki90]

Had a dm essentially do that. “It’s not a sneak attack, he can see you. Besides, you aren’t flanking, so you don’t have advantage. “No, but Barbarian Bill is right beside me, and he is engaged with the Orc. So, RAW gives me sneak attack.” “No. The orc sees you. You are not sneaking. So no sneak attack.”

[@snatchadams69]

No a house rule like that is a hose rule..

[@mitchryan85]

I do think they're way too easy to get in 5e, but to cut them out altogether cuts out the core mechanic of the rogue

[@Loehengrin]

Player: "I wanna run up the 30' of wall and grab the ledge" DM: "Well... You can try" Player (rolls):"NAT. 20!" DM:"Good job. Now do that again for the next 10'"

[@satsunada]

Playing L5R. Idiot player decides to pick up Ambition (don't ask, it was a high power game up to that point) during a mass battle. He has it for about 2 seconds before our own clan daimyo charges to the front lines with us, the head of the Crane Clan at the time. The player immediately has to make a Willpower check vs a target number of 45 to not attack his own commander, ignoring all results on the D10 below 9. This guy cheated constantly (and we got xp each time) so he miraculously, with 4d10, made the roll. He's happy and swings at the nearest minion, not understanding how Ambition works. The blade phases right through him with each hit, doing absolutely no damage to the farmer with a polearm poking the PC. Next round comes up and he tries to drop Ambition and use his normal sword, the DM looks at him and says "Before we get that far, the daimyo is still in line of sight, make a TN 45 Willpower check please". The DM just walked over and stood over his shoulder as he rolled, making sure he couldn't cheat. He failed miserably and that character was absolutely slaughtered by the house guard of the daimyo as he charged recklessly in, unable to ignore Ambition's temptations.

[@kevinerose]

every 10 inches? Now that is a badass DM

[@Loehengrin]

@@kevinerose stick to decimal. It involves less thinking 😈

[@kevinerose]

@@Loehengrin oh i c it is covered by quotes lol. that would be funny though.

[@apepmedia3059]

Now this depends on the class, a thief? sure why not? The expectation is that the Thief knows how to climb walls. A fighter in full plate, well not so much, but sure if you want to allow it the fighter's "run" it takes 5-10minutes, the Crit still counts, the circumstances on how its done is the challenge.

[@tylercain9697]

As a DM, there is one houserule for my table that may players and I love that’s related to one of your examples here. Whenever someone rolls a spell attack and rolls a 1, the spell fails and they must roll on the wild magic table. This has been very hit or miss to be honest. One time, someone healed to full instead of hitting their target, which they appreciated. Another time, it summoned a unicorn who wanted to attack an evil-aligned party member. When they tried to fight off the unicorn, someone else rolled a 1 and summoned another unicorn. Nothing that extreme has happened since, but it’s still been fun despite the mishaps.

[@nairocamilo]

Hey, I like that.... Doesn't really makes sense to just copy+paste it into the setting I'm currently running, but I think it could come into play in an alternate dimension/plane, or maybe a magic laboratory filled to the brim with pure, unstable arcana juice!

[@mal2ksc]

I could see this happening in certain parts of a campaign -- for example, I had it such that all sorcerers in the Feywild who used meta-magic while casting a spell had to make a CHA save or roll on the Wild Magic table. This is because of the "high background magic level" inherent to being in the Feywild. The DC depended on how many Sorcery Points they spent. One battle, the party sorcerer decided to use Empowered Spell to push damage from an AoE spell from non-lethal to likely lethal. He did, but ended up also Polymorphing himself into a sheep. The druid blew a Dispel Magic on him to get him back in the fight, rather than "killing" the sheep to force him to transform back. This also allowed me to explain how one NPC was banned from the Feywild, as he had inadvertently set off a massive magical blight that affected almost 10% of a continent. The players later found out that he was the victim of a set-up, in the sense that another spellcaster had set up a Contingency, but used the fact that Wild Magic surges _just happen_ in the Feywild as a cover. It wasn't until the damage had been paid for by an amused and very rich local hero that the sorcerer was allowed to return, and it was then that the trap was proven. Until then, even the (impractically good) Druidic legal system had come to the conclusion that it was probably an accident, but he still had to pay for it. It was his inability to pay for the damage that led to his banning, not the damage itself.

[@EugeeFGII]

That's literally what Tide of Chaos does for a Wild Sorcerer. You use ToC to gain Advantage, and on the next non-cantrip spell they can roll a d20 to regain their ToC. On a 1 they roll on the wild surge.

[@JorisVDC]

And do you have to roll a d20 for spells that require a save? I feel that's just one sided. Characters that only use crowd control spells don't face the danger of triggering wild magic. I don't think I would like to play in such a random world, unless this was part of the setting. Magic is fickle and this was announced in session 0.

[@mal2ksc]

Any time I apply the risk of Wild Magic Surges, I let the players know the risk exists before they cast any spells, _or_ I make sure that the first time it happens, it's just funny and not a problem. The one exception would be if they were a Wild Magic Sorcerer (which I've never had anyone play) exiting a place where their surges were suppressed, not knowing such surges were back on the table. But in that case, they signed on for that life. Also, for surge-prone locations, I invented Bracers of Mana Focus to prevent such surges -- although this eats an attunement slot. I let drow have Bracers of Eilistraee that negate daylight sensitivity but require attunement also, so you will see drow on the surface even during the day. You also know they're potentially under-equipped for a fight, although only once you get to a level where you actually have to worry about what to attune. Whatever your weakness, I'll provide a way to shore it up -- at the cost of one of your precious item attunements.

[@LightPink]

Gloomhaven has a cool system where each spell/attack has a different initiative but the game is based around that mechanic

[@Ricefrisbeetreats]

My fumble table is an opt-in rule. On a 1, the player can choose to roll on the fumble table for a point of inspiration. There is a small chance you might just have a standard miss, but something dramatic could happen. The goal is to allow players to decide when something happens and not have it just be when you make the 12th attack during the battle. This is still in play test. I want to add to the drama without just punishing my fighters. If a player never uses it, no sweat. No inspiration for it either.

[@DungeonDudes]

I like where you are going with this idea.

[@dardaraxthebasementmonster3423]

I love this idea. I enjoy Critical Fumble charts myself, though I always pair it with a Critical success chart, as a sort of balance (when they roll a critical hit on an attack roll, something minor and cool happens to benefit the attacker, like they disarm the target or do it with a fancy flourish to help inspire their allies). But I was wondering how I could make critical fumbles cool and interesting for 5e, as I'm new to the system. I really love this idea you came up with. Opt in would really help avoid animosity and also help benefit them as well, thanks to inspiration. I hope the play test goes well! I'm going to work on my own chart (I only ever do minor things on my chart, just to help make each critical fail/hit interesting).

[@eainjones9509]

I like this idea a lot

[@chrismanuel9768]

"fumble for inspiration"

[@argent4444]

Wild Magic is not only sometimes helpful and interesting, it's also a choice. Critical Fumble rules aren't really something that a player has much say in, but they CHOOSE to spec into Wild Magic when building their character. That choice is an important difference I would say.

[@arcaneemain8309]

1. mirror image can cast spells 2. mirror images can cast mirror image

[@FarothFuin]

Your character IS a mirror image...

[@fantomp1773]

El Faroth Fuin I mean, I once played an one hp character so I was preeeety much a mirror image

[@larsthorsen4660]

Or, they can pretend to?

[@anthonynorman7545]

Afterimage go!

[@TheRABIDdude]

Now imagine fighting such a spell-caster in a hall of mirrors.

[@DeadRedRider]

Had a Critical Fumble group. The result was that you hit another PC. Didn't matter how close or far away the PC was they got the full brunt of the damage. The number of times our fighter knocked our mage to zero was like 2 dozen. I was the cleric. So rather than being a meat shield and buff master, my PC ended up spending most of his spells healing the party from fumble damage. Because I'd cast more spells then usual keeping PC's from dying, the next encounter it'd snowball. I couldn't buff the party, 'cause I was out of spells. Now the PC's get hit even more. So the last half of the encounter, the DM's mobs aren't landing hits at all, or min damage. And convenintly there's 12 healing potions in a chest in the very room we got out ass handed to us.

[@resultantdoor6630]

Rule 2: Player: "Give me your kingdom please." Rolls nat 20 King: *laughs* "That was a pretty good joke so I won't kill you today. Guards throw it in the dungeon until tomorrow and we'll see if it continues to amuse me." ~Rip silly player.

[@fenzelian]

Player: "I run 30 feet up the wall, grab the top, and vault over" Rolls nat 20 DM: "You run 5 feet up the wall, jump, and do a totally sweet double backflip, landing on your feet where you started."

[@zaclittlejohn2701]

@@fenzelian unless lvl9+ monk in 5e. They get wall & liquid running as part of their movement at lvl 9 and I would restrict the possibility to just monks.

[@aralornwolf3140]

@@zaclittlejohn2701 , They can run up 20 feet of walls if they are fast enough (running start) and are able to use a corner so they can run up the wall by pushing themselves up it from one side to the other... lots of work and... most likely break their bones, lol.

[@zaclittlejohn2701]

@@aralornwolf3140 "at 9th level you gain the ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids on your turn without falling during the move" phb 78 on unarmored movement. With unarmored movement also increasing movement speed based on monk level a 9th level wood elf monk can walk up a 45 foot wall on their turn without failing.

[@zaclittlejohn2701]

@@aralornwolf3140 what part of that says you can't run up the wall? It is a specific skill only given to one class. Would you let a rouge rage without barbarian levels? Would you let a cleric cast Eldritch blast without warlock magic initiate? Wall walking gaurantee is something only monks get, and I see no reason to take that away bc "muh realism" in a world where magic wall walking is already available (spider climb boots)

[@Кайо-н4в]

well for that give the kingdom to that guy problem... That's how i would solve it as a DM The king pauses and ponders. A full minute passes when he finally leans back at his throne. His servants stare at him with worried eyes. "...Well.... My true passion was never to rule these lands." Some of the servants look away at disbelief Another minute passes when he opens his mouth again to say ''But i cannot give my fathers legacy to any stranger that comes around asking so here is my offer: I will prepare Seven challenges to see if you and your group/levy are fit to govern. You will recive a letter summoning you to an audience in two weeks." The king claps his hands twice. "This meeting is finished''

[@elnekosauce]

While that sounds nice, that's just strange and not at all very logical. The only real life example I can think of was the Pope who decreed that he should be able to quit, and then quit.

[@noelhann5262]

Jay Reese I love that story

[@krizash]

I can't believe that first house rule is even a thing for anyone. What a terrible decision.

[@lordzaboem]

Maybe that isn't a house rule exactly but a bad interpretation of older more vaguely worded rules. If an older game rule reads, "You get these many experience points for killing a thing" then a GM could almost reasonably conclude that assisting in the kill does not gain XP.

[@sk8rdman]

@@lordzaboem In earlier editions the amount of gold coins you got from the adventure WAS your xp. Once you earn a certain amount of gold, you could level up. I guess it was up to the party to decide how they split the spoils. I didn't play in those days, so I could be off, but that's what I recall hearing from people who did.

[@krizash]

@@sk8rdman That's right. Man it's been a long time but I remember that.

[@DakkaBert]

feels like a straw man tbh

[@DocFunkenstein]

It's because they pulled it out of their ass so they could have something to bitch about.

[@BabyDoll-ym1zm]

We call shots at our table but we cannot one shot decapitate anything

[@mittri1990]

I remember when I played one of my very first games where they had a rule of the person that lands the killing blow on an enemy gets dibs on the loot. Even that felt unfair since I was still a new player. On top of that, the DM got angry at me for not being creative and not speaking up. I started doing that but then I got instantly got yelled at for doing bad things according to the DM and the party. I stopped playing and hanging out with them afterwards.

[@BlueTressym]

I hope you found better people to game with.

[@TheMento98]

I was yelled at during our last session. It taught me to just go with your gut instead of listening to the loudest person in the room. We are playing Out of the Abyss and are doing our business in Gracklstugh. In the session before we got orders from Themberchaud the Dragon to listen to his little followers but to report to him directly and he will reward us handsomely, and then behind close doors his followers told us that it's time for him to kick the bucket but we need to get their lost dragon egg and in return they will pay us 2% of the dragon's hoard once old Thember-chode is gone. Immediately I see an opportunity but mind you I keep it to myself. Fast forward back to the last session we clear the Whorlstone Tunnels get the dragon egg and I carry that bad boy in my warforged chest (think Alphonse from FMA) while popping a grow mushroom every hour. We deliver it to the flame keeper guys and everythings cool, Chodey isn't the wiser and we are expecting a handsome 2% in the near future. But now we have to go give Chodey our report. This is where I set my plan into motion. Without approval from the rest of the party or the DM I flat out tell him that the flame keepers want to replace him with a new dragon egg. Immediately my party freaks out of character begging me to stop, granted I don't blame them for doing so since I didn't say anything but this plan was mostly fool proof so it didn't matter. After calming everyone down I continue and this is where the genius hits, I explain to Chodey that while we did look for said egg I lied and said we didn't find anything and just like the rest of the Duergar the flame keepers are just fucking nuts so there's nothing to worry about. So naturally I have to roll deception while our DM rolls insight. Now mind you I play a warforged Barbarian. I'm not exactly charisma focused. But my DM is probably Wil Wheaton's son born out of wedlock or some shit because he was rolling garbage all night, I'm talking nat 1's consistently. So despite me rolling a fucking nat 3 his nat 1 was counted as an automatic failure. (yeah that's how we play, if you don't like it good for you but that's how we play at that table so tough shit i you would not count it as an automatic failure) And because despite it being a lie we did technically fulfill his wishes he gave us a nice bit of loot right then and there. So moral of this long story, don't be afraid to make risky plays. And don't give up on a risky play just because someone yells "no" at you. And before anyone says "YoU sHoUlDn'T rIsK tHe PaRtY lIkE tHaT!" put a sock in it. Our dm afterwards explained after the session that even if the insight check hadn't failed we wouldn't have been the one facing the dragon's heat instead the dragon would have smashed the egg and ruled over Gracklstugh which considering Out of the Abyss is all about getting OUT of the Underdark none of that would have affected us. So no matter what it would have been a win win.

[@Entropy67]

@@TheMento98 That's a lot of not vary well arranged words. You do you, but it doesn't seem like you are really role playing in your campaign and i'm pretty sure that the gm said whatever he/she said afterwards just to make you happy (probably because of the internal party strife you caused). I don't recommend doing things like what you did often, the DM isn't always gonna throw you a bone nor are they obligated to.

[@TheMento98]

@@Entropy67 Firstly, you don't get to judge how I put words together when you spell 'very' with a fucking 'a' bud. Secondly you don't get to make assumptions of the GM I've known for 5+ years based off of a single KZbin comment you goon. You'd don't get to tell me they're throwing me a bone when A. you don't know them and B. you have only gotten an abridged version of over 10 hours of gameplay spread across two sessions. If I took recommendations from people like you who rather play it save then the game would lack any fun.

[@logancross3950]

HARHEE maybe you shouldn’t have commented if you can’t stand someone’s input

[@bobwaka1]

The best way to avoid that nat 20 problem rule is simple. Player: "I'm going to try and convince the king to give up his kingdom." DM: He says "no" No dice rolls.

[@justinbotkin]

If you inform your players that your world exists with logic and went them, I think its perfectly acceptable to let them roll. Why stifle player agency?

[@agafaba]

@@justinbotkin You let them roll first, but the king is still going to say no unless you have a +40 to that roll on top.

[@CDVDD010]

or give disadvantage so they could literally only do it if they roll two nat20's

[@jeremieberneche1742]

@@CDVDD010 that would still mean that out of 1000 kingdoms, about 2.5 kings would be stupid enough to just go "meh, fine". Still doesn't feel realistic.

[@11D4V1D]

It would be easier to set up the expectation that a natural 20 gives the best possible outcome in that opportunity. Just saying no discourages creativity and experimentation. This could end up instead with the King being impressed by your speech and you gain favour with the King, or he goes haha very well done, usually I'd kill someone with that suggestion but I'll let you live. It could lead to a cool quest, or if the Players are far enough the King could grant them some land and the Party gets a possible home base in an interesting way. There's always a better option than just saying no. No is boring.

[@majorcrispy7203]

"They aren't really rules, more like guidelines" -Barbosa

[@Radlum]

I lost an ear with a critical fumble during an attack, and it's not like there was a table, it was just a random decision by the DM.

[@BistoYeti]

If any game has a critical fumble table, I'm straight up playing a halfling.

[@EllipsisMark]

once had DM use a "fumble deck". Thing was he would always forget to get the deck and take like a 5 minutes to find it. During one of his deck hunts I said I didn't even this fumble system stuff and he over hear me. Later he said I was being disrespectful, and i just straight up told him I thought his idea sucked and everyone got mad at me. No regrets. Man also put us in 5 foot wide hallway fight twice. Was literally happy when he kicked me out.

[@analogger3058]

@@EllipsisMark He kicked you out for speaking your mind? Sounds like that group sucks, unless you were rude

[@EllipsisMark]

@@analogger3058 I... was... a little rude. But in my defense I was frustrated.

[@analogger3058]

@@EllipsisMark 😂😂I get it

[@RashidMBey]

*DM announces critical fumble table* Me: I've been looking to play my lucky Halfling divination wizard.

[@Hellsparkt]

house rule: consuming a potion of healing counts as a bonus action, administering one still counts as a action

[@war2theren227]

That's our house rule two. Makes potions so much better to use

[@Attaxalotl]

nice.

[@sodorflubbs5000]

Bronin in our group you’re allowed to heal yourself as an action. However, we’re all sensible with it and only do it if we’re really low down on health. Even if I’m not a healer and use potions of healing I will still use them on others first. And also decide on which potion to use using the most appropriate one that I have for the state of their hit points.

[@elijahculper5522]

Great house rule for groups without a dedicated healer. But it can step on the cleric’s toes if there isn’t much of an action economy cost for self healing.

[@sodorflubbs5000]

Elijah Culper given the fact that the cleric’s usually me, I’ve never thought to be upset by it. I suppose it really depends on how your cleric reacts to such things

[@JusToLazy]

What makes fumble tables great is that since they are all home brew, you can set it up as fairly (or unfairly) as the group is comfortable with. You have a 5% chance every roll of the dice to crit fail, and can easily go down to 0.05% for tpk or one member to need a scroll of revivify if your group even chooses to have those options.

[@dancourtney4]

These two always look uncomfortable about how close they're sitting to each other

[@thetruth45678]

Yes. They should move closer.

[@g80gzt]

there's literally called shots already - It's called the Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter feats! -5 to hit, +10 to damage!

[@DungeonDudes]

I wouldn't not really consider this a called shot, since it doesn't involved targeting a specific limb or body part, which is usually what called shot systems are trying to model.

[@BoundingBeast]

That's how I treat both of those feats in combat. If I'm making a Sharpshooter or GWM attack I describe the specific body part I'm targeting to do the extra damage. ("I shoot him in the heart with my longbow." "I take a baseball swing at his head with my halberd.")

[@BlindDevilNeko]

@@BoundingBeast no that is a called shot while using the feat itself.

[@Zombiewithabowtie]

Vorpal weapons.

[@IamGruntonHGH]

@@DungeonDudes Nah, that's literally what the feats are. Lol.

[@archer9338]

I really like how logical the Greyhawk Initiative Roll is. Buttt, it would be much better suited to a video game, where the mathematical formula could be calculated in a millisecond and would not bog down combat.

[@trolleymouse]

Wouldn't take too much tweaking to get running more smoothly, if the DM is already using technology to their advantage. 1) Excel spreadsheet open on their computer, all the combatants listed in column 1 2) Everyone starts by rolling 1d20 minus initiative modifier 3) Enter the resultant numbers next to the respective names in column 2 4) Order by lowest-highest based on column 2 value, and start from the top 5) After each combatant's turn, have them roll the relevant di(c)e for their action(s) 6) Enter the resultant numbers next to the respective names in column 3 7) Order by lowest-highest based on column 3 value, and start from the top 8) After each combatant's turn, have them roll the relevant di(c)e for their action(s) 9) Repeat from step 3

[@legionofyuri]

Kinda weird but it was the default back in AD&D 2e. It made sense back then with weapon speed and how fast combat was. Not with 5e.

[@snate56]

I does sound cool but I would only use it with a bunch of really sharp veteran players that would have their dice pool already set up by the time they needed to roll it.

[@coffeecoder8162]

It would be pretty easy to whip together a small piece of software where you could just ask a player what they were doing for that turn input it and have it auto roll the initiative

[@armageddonbound]

Other than the time it takes this is a great rule

[@DERyuga]

I treat called shots like how monster hunter treats breaking monster parts- they have to do an x amount of damage to a certain part (or get a crit), and the best it results in is a minor debuff (especially if it's a boss) AND a rare reward at the end.

[@wompusslompus5424]

I love monster hunter! I like how it works when you've damaged a part (or heck, even all of them) you can tell the monster is now weaker, but they're still going. They don't just give up the ghost right then and there. You've temporarily given it a minor debuff, but it's still alive and kicking. I have a PC that wants to implement a monster part harvesting system in the game since he's playing a chef so I'm still looking for good homebrew material to help with that part.

[@guyman9655]

As a DM. I generally add a unique effect when my players roll both a 1 and a 20, but I never use a set table. As an example one of my players was using a flame enchanted bow, they fired and rolled a Nat 1 to attack the enemy the party was hunting, at the time the party was in a small farming village. I had the player hit a hay storage area which caught on fire. After the encounter was over I had them hand over a random amount of money, it wasn't a huge amount to them but they felt it, an example of a Nat 20 was from the same player. I had the party in a cavern that connected to the underdark and they met a tiny myconid (I forget the name) and they rolled a Nat 20 to communicate to the myconid. He joined the party as an npc and the party named him groot.

[@hadihash1195]

Once again. This punishes high level character that are supposed to be supernaturally amazing at what they do. If an archer fighter could at any point during their 8 attacks just accidentally set fire to something, that does portray them as a fumbling moron instead of the hawkeye that the player believes their level 20 character to be.

[@guyman9655]

@@hadihash1195 I suppose so. But anybody can fuck up, even Hawkeye or Legolas. Just because you're the best doesn't mean you're going to succeed and not fuck up. I don't care if my players are level 20 nobodies perfect, not even Hawkeye or legolas. There's tons of ways to rationalize a supernaturally good hero fucking up, hubris, over confidence, and underestimating the enemy all can be the downfall of a hero. I do make all my intentions clear in a session 0 and let my players know I don't take my games the most serious out of any dm so if they don't like it then so be it.

[@hadihash1195]

@@guyman9655 yeah for sure. But said hawkeye with their 8 attacks is fucking up more often than the level 1 archer which is the part that doesn't make sense. Sure every now and then anyone can fuck up, but it's just simple math that the more dice you roll the more chance you have to get a 1.

[@guyman9655]

@@hadihash1195 also you have a chance for more damage and crits. Plus nobodies telling a player they have to take 8 attacks on their turn. There's risk and there's reward, it's up to the player to determine if they want to take that risk for a 1

[@bowmanc.7439]

@@hadihash1195 well if you take 6 seconds to aim, you are less likely to fuck up than taking 6/8 second to aim regardless of how good you are.

[@ragingfurno7096]

Alright, watching that "critical fumble table" one, literally made me look at how I handle nat 1's in my game, which even though I don't actually use that table, I still usually make nat 1's be "failures" no matter what, so now I'm changing that. Thank you!

[@leopoldjenkins]

I'm starting out as a DM and I like to punish a 1 by making a humorous RP event, just as their pants splitting. It still has an effect but it's not game changing

[@lexkek5625]

My DM does that too. It's funny yet embarrassing but it's not cruel or over punishing. =)

[@michaelwalsh6276]

My dm also does this. For example, my character, an artificer sage, rolled a 1 on an investigation check to figure out what a small cracked fly statue was. He pulled down his welding goggles to investigate it.

[@yin81]

Wouldn’t this rule still result in more experienced PCs humiliating themselves more often then noobs?

[@onyxtay7246]

@@yin81 Still better than usual. Maybe "confirming" critical fumbles like how pathfinder does critical hits would be a good idea. Just roll again, if they fail the second check (or a lower number) then they fumble. This allows more skilled PCs to recover from fumbles, which may actually show their skill.

[@xyxxyyxx]

@@onyxtay7246 i played in a different system that did that, (though combat works a lot different than dnd and i can't really remember exactly how) and it was fine

[@Rcoutme]

15:00 Called shots used to be a THING in D&D. It was not a good thing, but was only available to elite archers anyways. Also, called shots to heads did not work against helmets.

[@klratz]

Theres a very simple phrase to stop a nat 20 roll from derailing your campaign: Player: *roll nat 20* DM: You Fail

[@izathae]

Or just don’t let players roll for things they can’t succeed on

[@justinbotkin]

@@izathae but success in many situations exists on a spectrum. You may fail at the task but bolster other positive effects. Maybe your nat 20 fails to persuade but the king likes your confidence, or thinks you're telling a joke. A creative GM can do more than just pass/fail on a roll.

[@OhNoTheFace]

So a lazy DM

[@Torvik40]

"instant death and other forms of decapitation" I think you mean decapitation and other forms of instant death. :P

[@nathankurtz8045]

Forms of decapitation: 1. Instant death 2. Slow, painful death as your disembodied head is paralyzed with shock. 3. Don't even notice until you realize you're watching yourself fight in 3rd person.

[@adamtaylor8471]

"Instant death and other forms of decapitation" I think you mea.... "You heard me"

[@Xenibalt]

they really mean stabbing eyes for blindness cant say it because demonetization

[@GogiRegion]

My favorite house rule for natural 20s and 1s with skill checks is that a nat 20 is a 25 and a nat 1 is a -5, so they have a special effect, but aren’t broken.

[@yeeterdeleter4101]

I allow for my players to target specific body parts, but I assume that if you strike for either the body or head it does normal damage. If you make an attack without a targeting system , I just assume you strike for the head or body, so in my targeting system if you go for the head or body it just does normal damage. Striking for legs or wings will do less damage but reduce speed, and arms might temporarily reduce an enemies strength or dexterity