Topic: Fumble ranges & Skill

[Kasdaye]

I have a quick question put forwards by one of my players:

He has attempted to create an incredibly acrobatic character capable of inhuman feats (I think he's been playing Prince of Persia \ Assassins creed too much!). He is now lvl 14 and his character can perform major acrobatic feats simply by not fumbling.

However as he has pointed out, this means that whatever stunt he does still has a 1/20 chance of failure as the fumble range is static at 1-5. He reasons that someone of such skill may still fumble, but should have less chance of fumbling a basic task that an amateur (In the rules someone with 200 skill has the same chance of fumbling an unmodified medium task as somebody with 100 skill).

It also means that if he wants to do either a backflip or a front roll he has equal chance of failing either (given his high skill) even though one is clearly more difficult!

What is everyones views on this? Has anyone ever put in any house rules for reducing fumble ranges as you get better at a given skill?

[masque1223]

Even the best can screw up from time to time.  There's 1 in 20 chances for a fumble, but also ridiculous success, with the 96-100 range re-rolling and adding to success.  The two cancel each other out IMO, and if it were me, I'd leave it alone.

[calmacil]

You could argue the same point with the fumble range with a weapon. I agree with masque, I wouldn't change it.

A novice swordsman wielding a broadsword has the same chance as fumbling as an expert. I'd personally put it down to being unlucky. He may be amazing at acrobatics, but he can still be unlucky.





PS.... If you decide to let him reduce his fumble range with acrobatics
There was a skill for rolemaster that you could purchase to reduce the chance of fumbling with weapons. For HARP you could say for 30 dev pnts for a talent that allows you to reduce the fumble range of one skill by 1. (also, maybe put a min fumble number you can reach)

[jurasketu]

I actually modify the fumble chance by the Difficulty Rating of a maneuver.

Routine 1%, Easy 2%, Light 3%, Medium 4%, Hard 5%, Very Hard 6%, Extremely Hard 7%, Sheer Folly 8%, Absurd 10%

But I also allow a "Recovery Roll" by the fumbler to reduce the "bad side effects" of a fumble.   

Then again, one of the reasons for Fate Points is the inopportune fumble...

[Thom @ ICE]

I'm not really sure where I got my way of handling it from because when I read your post I had to go back and re-read the rules to see that I was not doing it according to the rules as written...  With that being said, here's what I use -

If the initial maneuver roll was 01-05, I rolled again and counted that as a negative against the modified roll (96-100 on the second roll extended the negative to another roll, etc.).  Once the OE fumble impact was determined I subtracted it from the modified roll and if the result was negative I consulted the fumble chart for that amount negative.

Ex:
Joe Acrobat has an acrobatic skill bonus of +75
He is trying an extremely hard maneuver -60
The roll is 03.  Final modified roll is 18  = 3+75-60
The modified result is less than 101 so he is unsuccessful, but he still needs to resolve the fumble.

I then roll for the fumble - roll of 69
Fumble result is 18-69 = -51
Result of people can bounce 2d10+10 on the Crush table is the result.

Anotherfew examples -
Joe Acrobat and Joe Clumsy both try that same maneuver.  Joe Acrobat ended with a failed attempt and -51 fumble.

Joe Clumsy only has a +3 for acrobatics.  He rolls the same 3 and ends up with the modified result of -54.  Failed result.  Now he adds his Fumble roll and gets 69 = final fumble result -54-69 = -123
He gets a 1d100 on the Crush table and everyone laughs at him.

Joe Acrobat then tries an Easy maneuver and again rolls 3.
3+75+40 = 118
He successfully completes the maneuver.
He then rolls to resolve the fumble and rolls a 98 (OE) and then a 86 for a total of -184.
Fumble check yields 118-184 = -66  (2d10+10 on Crush)
Had he rolled a 35 on the fumble it would have been 118-35 = +83 (No Fumble Impact)

[jurasketu]

Thom-

Oh. I LIKE that.

[Thom @ ICE]

Glad to hear it - not sure where I got it from, but I have been using it for a long time and it seems to work well.  As a character gets more skilled or does easier things the chance of fumbles declines (but never disappears).

Worst case scenario is that low level guy who tries a sheer folly maneuver with few or no ranks in the skill.  End result is nearly 5% chance of a fumble - and then a pretty good chance of it being a big mistake (as it should be).  And of course with the high end OE always a possibility there is that chance that the maneuver may work... especially if you add a fate point into the mix.

[uberyoung]

Interesting idea (we used to do similar in 'Non-RM' years ago) - but probably too much maths for my (or my players) liking!

We use the 'Skilled Fumbles' optional rule.
Fumble chance still 01 --> 05.
If you fumble, roll 1d100 and SUBTRACT the number of ranks you have in the skill you're using (and apply any other modifiers).
You'll fumble just as often, but the result (on average) will be less severe...
I also use more graduated fumble tables, as I found the 25 increments a bit too coarse & results too repetitive...

There is already a Talent (somewhere) that allows you to reduce the fumble range of a weapon...

[RandalThor]

Thom, that is pretty-much how I have been handling RM fumbles for a very long time now (like 20 years or so). It works for us.

[Thom @ ICE]

Sounds great... Always like hearing that my ideas are not completely off of the wall (though I know sometimes they are) 

[Kasdaye]

Thanks all for the replies. I like these ideas . I'm sure my player will as well. The whole discussion came after Mr Super-Acrobat managed to fall off 3 flat roofs in a short space of time (into the hungry arms of zombie hordes waiting below... thus eventually costing him all his fate points to not get severely nibbled on!).

While this is possible I do like the idea of there being a way that a truly skilled person can try to avoid this turn of events!

I'll trial Thom's suggestion and see how it works. Thanks a lot for that

@uberyoung: I also find the 4 levels of fumble a bit restrictive. What are these graduates fumble tables you speak of? did you design them yourself? If so would you be able to post a copy?... pretty pretty please with sugar on top .

[jasonbrisbane]

HI,

IN one of the books there were bonuses you get from having high ranks in skills.
(martial law - basic, advanced, something, legendary = 1-20, 20-40, 41,60, 61-80 etc, IIRC)
One of our players extended that (Pat) and created an XLS for all skills for extended skills.

Why dont you extend/modify this to allow a minus 1 to fumble rolls?
Id make it a minimum of 1-2 is ALWAYs a fumble, even with this method...

Just my 2cp...

[uberyoung]

Kasdaye - The 'extended fumble tables' (shall we call them) are an 'almalgamation of fumbles' from many systems (HARP, RM, 'Not-RM' and others...).

Not sure about the legalities of posting stuff with 'Not-RM' content.

If someone from ICE says it's OK, I'll post them...

[Thom @ ICE]

Please send them to me at Thom@ironcrown.com
I'll review and try to get back to you ASAP.

[uberyoung]

Thom - I've e-mailed the first installment to you for your perusal...

[Thom @ ICE]

Received and under review...

[Uriel]

I actually like the different fumbles for different Difficulty, as mentioned above.
Likewise, the other suggestions.

Or (And I JUST thought this up), you could reduce the Fumble of a particular skill by 1 per or 20 Ranks of skill.

Said Prince of Persia acrobat,at Lvl 14,has a Maxed out 42 Ranks? His Fumbles would be reduced by 2.

-Uriel

[GrumpyOldFart]

Thom's method is the same one I use, and have been using since.... sheesh, probably the mid 80s when I started applying it to RM. It seemed the obvious way to achieve a "fumble chance never goes away, but skill does apply" mechanic.

[jurasketu]

I have another idea that I'm going to try. One of the problems with the subtraction trick is that certain rolls are not truly pass/fail so determining "success" may be ambiguous (probably fixable with caveats of course).

Anyway, the rule applies the skilled fumbles like this...

If the initial roll is in the fumble range, then the player makes a second open-ended roll. If the second roll is less than or equal to their skill RANKS in the skill - then it is NOT a fumble and just modify the roll "as is".

This way spells, actions and weapons that have higher fumble ranges will still fumble more often but the player with 50 ranks will only *really* fumble less often than the player with 10 ranks.

[Thom @ ICE]

My issues with that are that a person with lots of rank, but not much base aptitude (stat bonus) has a lesser chance of fumbling than one with fewer ranks and much greater aptitude - and, it's another # to look for during the process. 

What it really comes down to is going with what you like best.  So, if it works for you... go for it.