OUESTION: Providing the GM is using an optional critical hit table and fumble rule, in what instances should the rule be enforced to the fullest measure? (Question by Frank Young.)

FIGHTER FRANK'S COMMENTS

By Frank Young

It would seem that there needs to be some logical reason why a seasoned veteran adventurer would fumble in combat, other than the unfortunate player rolling a result of 1 on a d20. I can see a fumble occurring with 1st-level characters that haven't had much experience in combat, or perhaps a female orc who is not used to fighting with (at best a kitchen knife) a spear she picked up from a dead male orc as she tries to fight in self-defense against those that have her backed into a corner. Surely such novices would only score a critical hit more by luck than by design. Thus the GM could rule that a fumble occurs on any roll of a 1 on a d20 but a critical hit would occur on a re-roll of a natural 20.

Male orcs make their living by raiding and often defend the lair. Also, adventurers that have been around and have had experience in combat should be less likely to fumble and more likely to score a critical hit. Perhaps the GM could permit a fumble to occur only if the PC (or monster) rolled a second result of 1 on a d20, but a roll of a natural 20 would do double damage on the attack without any further rolling.

This doesn't include one's dexterity. Let's assume these options are for characters with average dexterities (7 to 14). Surely a creature that has a low dexterity (below 7) is more prone to fumble than one with a high dexterity (above 14): perhaps one's defensive modifier should be considered. Thus if a PC with a DEX 16 (which grants a bonus of -2 to his defensive adjustment) rolled a 1 on a d20, his defensive modifier would could be added to the chance for a fumble which is a base 10%. Thus a roll of 8% (10 - 2 = 8) would be needed for a fumble to occur.

Even a seasoned veteran should find it difficult to score a critical hit on a creature type he or she has never before faced in combat or had a chance to study its anatomy for determination of weak points. Thus perhaps a 117,, chance per level would be acceptable in order to score a critical hit, should the rule be used.

For example: Erik the Orcslayer is a 5th-level fighter, and with his fellow adventurers he is exploring a cave complex when they all suddenly come faceto-face with a roper. This is their first encounter ever with one. Erik rolls a 20 on his attack die, but being unfamiliar with this opponent he should have only a 5% chance to score a critical hit (1% x experience level of 5 = 50/0. This sounds more logical than awarding a critical hit due to the 20 on the attack roll. n

RANGER RICK'S COMMENTS

By Dragonslayer Rick Emerich

Before getting into the question, let me preface my position by stating that I am not in favor of any critical hit or fumble rule for AD&D because it throws an unbalancing factor into the game's combat system. We would all love to describe unbelievable hits on foes, or laugh over the extraordinary fumbles and resultant embarrassment done to foes (or other players' PCs), but such is best left to the imagination of the players and DM, not enacted as combat modifications.

Assuming that a system is used, Frank's comments ring true. I'd suggest that on a roll of a 1 on a melee d20 that a PC then roll percentage dice to determine if a fumble has occurred. The base chance for a fumble would be 75%, with a -10% modifier for each level of experience the PC has, and an additional modifier of -5% for each point of the PC's DEX over 13. Thus for a 1st-level fighter with DEX 16 the fumble calculation would be: 50% (base) -10% (experience level modifier) -1517, (for DEX) = 50% chance to furnble. There would always be a base 1% chance to fumble, regardless of modifiers.

The fumble would not produce a bizarre result-no "you cut your own (or your friend's) hand off" type of thing-but rather indicates that the PC has made an unexpected blunder which leaves him unable to adequately defend himself that round (base AC only for those striking at him), dropping or entangling his weapon for that round so that he adds a 1d3+1 to his next round's initiative roll.

This system assumes a high percentage of fumbling if the initial 5% chance to fumble (a roll of 1 on a d20) is seen. However, the system reduces the chance of fumbling due to a PC's experience in his profession, and his swiftness, which is accounted for by the DEX modifier.

A fumble can have many consequences, but I would recommend limiting it to an imaginative description which in the end simply prevents the PC from attacking or doing any other action that round and a delay next round as aforementioned. Anything more than this is too unbalancing to the game system.

A chance for some sort of critical or extraordinary strike in melee is calculated similarly. The base chance for a critical hit (CH) is 10%. Fighters receive a +3% modifier for each experience level they have; thieves and clerics receive a +1% modifier; and mages get a +0.5% modifier (with the CH rounded down to the nearest whole number). If a specialized weapon is used, add +5%. In addition, for each point of combined STR and DEX over 30, a bonus of +2% is added. If the PC has never studied the creature he is fighting and/or hasn't fought it before, his knowledge about its tactics and vulnerabilities are reduced: a penalty of -25% would be used in the equation to determine a CH.

Thus for a 3rd-level fighter with STR 16 and DEX 17, using a longsword for which he is specialized, his CH chance is: 10% (base) + 9% (experience level modifier) + 6% (3 points of combined STR and DEX over 30 points) + 5% (weapon specialization) = 30% chance to make a CH. The maximum chance for a CH would be 75%.

This system produces a CH that is rarer than the comparable result for a fumble, simply because a fumble in my opinion is an accident, while a CH is a dedicated attempt by the PC to make the most of a blow he has timed and planned. As a result, experience in his profession again plays an important role, as does his brute strength and quickness, as represented by the DEX score. A specialized weapon receives a bonus as well, since it has been used predominantly by the PC.

I would not inflict double damage on a CH, but instead rule that a CH inflicts maximum damage possible for that hit. I might add a chance as well for the victim so struck by the CH to be stunned during then next round if he failed an unmodified paralyzation saving throw. Again, to do anything else would be too destructive to the game balance.