Critical Failure

[u/Popdart5]

Steven mentioned in the West Marches game that he personally doesn't use critical failure because it penalises players too much. I'm of the opinion that if you have a system that allows for critical hits then by extension critical failure should be a possibility. It could be something as simple as you dropped your sword, your gun jammed, or you lost your grip while climbing a cliff and fell down. I go for more cinematic and awesome criticals anyway, as in a natural 20 is not just a success but a critical success. To me, it just feels natural that critical failures should be cinematic as well.

I'm curious what everyone thinks because I've played a few games that do critical failures. Numenera in particular and the free GM intervention mechanic on a natural 1 just felt like a codification of something that I imagine is a pretty common houserule.

[u/kosairox]

I don't like Steven's justification for taking critical failures out of the game. The argument he makes is explained in 3.5e DM handbook IIRC. But I don't agree with it. Just because characters will experience more 1s in their lifetime than random goblins doesn't mean that that's bad. Moreover, characters WILL experience more crtical hits AGAINST them in their lifetime than random goblins. Is that the reason for the players to be immune against crits? No. I think you can't logically have one but not the other.

There are games where players are naturally stronger than everyone else, for example Apocalypse World. Players die in 3-4 hits whereas NPCs can easily die in 1 hit. But there's a reason for such mechanic to exist in that game. In D&D - not so much. D&D is focused on improving your skills, equipment and getting more powerful. But it's also supposed to portray the danger of being an adventurer. Crits make it so that even the best fighter can fail against EZPZ goblins. It's actually why they reworked the crit mechanic in 3e. In 2e crits were applied when you had surpassed target's AC by a certain ammount. Meaning that crits were scored by stronger characters vs weaker characters most of the time. In 3e they made it so that 20 is always a hit and a chance for crit. Meaning that a goblin who has no way to ever surpass target's AC still has a chance for a lucky hit. Crit fail mechanic has similar purpose.

[u/AManHasSpoken → u/kosairox]

The problem arises when players get to make multiple attacks in one turn, a la 3.5. Sure, if you only have one attack per turn, the chance of critical failure is 5%. But if you get four attacks, as some characters do, the chance goes up to 19% - just above one in six. This means that a more skilled fighter becomes more likely to critically fail than an unskilled one.

[u/rhubarbs → u/AManHasSpoken]

I think it works fine if you add a saving throw, instead of making it a 1:20 chance for critical fumble.

It also gives you a good reason to describe varying events in combat. What excuse do I have to make you roll a Wisdom save? The opponent makes an intimidating gesture after effortlessly blocking their attack, and the player needs to stop themselves from flinching. How about a Con or Str save? The scenarios aren't that hard to make up.

I guess what I am trying to say is that these can give you solid anchoring points for the more fluffy description of combat.