Topic: House Rules

[MidKnight]

Hey all,

I'm thinking of introducing a House rule to RMSS / RMFRP that reduces fumble and failure range based on the number of Ranks the character has in the given skill to a minimum of 01.  The reduction will be at a 10 Ranks to 1 point reduction in the fumble or failure range.

For most skills this means that fumble ranges go from 01 - 05 down to 01 - 04 at roughly 3rd to 5th level.

For weapon skills, since each weapon has different fumble ranges, it modifies the weapons fumble range, again to a minimum of 01.

My rational is that characters that highly trained in a skill or weapon would fail or fumble less frequently than someone with fewer ranks, and I think the 10 ranks per 1 point reduction is 'reasonable' and 'balanced', and gives players a reason to develop ranks past the nominal 'point of diminishing return' (where investing the DP doesn't return enough skill increase to be 'worth the point(s)'.

Thoughts?

I've been intrigued with skill 'perks' since playing Oblivion CRPG and think that RoleMaster is the perfect system to apply the 'perks' to.  This is the first of other possible options.  In the end it could end up being something more like this:

Choice of the following, not to exceed total ranks in the Skill:
5 ranks increases weapon critical result rolls by +1 (50 ranks in a weapon skill would provide a +10 to critical rolls)
10 ranks reduces Fumble / Failure range by -1 point (50 ranks in a weapon skill would reduce fumble / failure range by -5 to a minimum of 01)
15 ranks increases the Open End range by -1 point (96 - 00 becomes 95 -00 and maxes at 93 - 00 with 45 ranks in the skill)

Most characters really aren't developing skills past 25 or 30 ranks because of the 'diminishing returns' and instead branch out into other new skills (exception here is spell-casters with new spells).

Thanks all.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

I would leave the minimum at 01-02, but otherwise, sounds okay.

For other comabt stuff, I suggest looking at the combat styles in Combat Companion, they are fully usable for RMSS/FRP.

[MidKnight]

I would leave the minimum at 01-02, but otherwise, sounds okay.

For other comabt stuff, I suggest looking at the combat styles in Combat Companion, they are fully usable for RMSS/FRP.

Yeah, I'm still waffeling on the minimum.  It just doesn't seem right that someone with 'master' level training would fumble or fail once every 50 tries...even once in 100 is a bit steep...but then maybe the fumble range should be increased to 01 - 10 and walk it down by -1 per 5 ranks or something...I think the untrained should fail and fumble more often than the highly trained.

I'm currently waiting on the Combat Companion LE, and will read through it as soon as it arrives.   

[Temujin]

One of the options we use goes along the same line, it was published in Guild Companion iirc and is still in the archive there, basically you get a small advantage whenever you hit 20 ranks in a skill, and this includes weapons for the effect you mentionned above (reduced fumble).  Skill expertise, it was called, or something along those lines.

[Fornitus]

 How about this- on every "fumble" you roll your fumble then subtract the number of skill ranks the player has. If the roll was low, this could bring it back into the positive side again. That way is isnt a fumble, just a miss.

[Joshua24601]

I believe weapon styles in the MA companion allow you to lower fumble ranges...

[Viktyr Gehrig]

How about this- on every "fumble" you roll your fumble then subtract the number of skill ranks the player has. If the roll was low, this could bring it back into the positive side again. That way is isnt a fumble, just a miss.

I've been thinking of something similar in HARP-- instead of having regular fumbles, have the fumble range be open-ended negative. Roll another d% and subtract the results, and use the absolute value of your result on the Fumble Table. If you roll high on the fumble roll, that's even more negative open-ended suck.

That way, skill ranks benefit you even when you fumble... but there's still the possibility of a catastrophic screwup.

[Joshua24601]

I've been thinking of something similar in HARP-- instead of having regular fumbles, have the fumble range be open-ended negative. Roll another d% and subtract the results, and use the absolute value of your result on the Fumble Table. If you roll high on the fumble roll, that's even more negative open-ended suck.

That way, skill ranks benefit you even when you fumble... but there's still the possibility of a catastrophic screwup.

That's a neat idea, but probably a little too powerful... the average mid level PC's skill of 80-100 would require a double open-ended roll to actually fumble.

However....

Rather then messing with fumble ranges.. you offset the fumble roll itself with the number of skill RANKS and category RANKS.  The fumble roll would now become open ended, so terrible failure is still possible, but a low roll could be reduced to negative by a lot of skill... a negative meaning that the fumble didn't happen at all, and could even (if high level PC is attacking a very low DB target) still result in a hit.

Example.
Alexander the Buff attacks an Ugly Rat with his greatsword.
He rolls a 5 on his attack and fumbles.  (his OB is 115, so his total attack would be 120)
He then rolls a 25 for his fumble roll.  He has 20 ranks in Greatsword skill and 10 ranks in 2-handed, giving him a total of -30 to his fumble roll... the final total (25 - 30) is -5, meaning he doesn't fumble at all.. and can process that 120 attack normally; since his opponent is a pathetic Ugly Rat, he still may get to hit.

Had Alexander rolled higher then 30 on his fumble roll, he would have fumbled, and rolled on the chart normally.  Remember the fumble roll is high-end open-ended so there is still the possibility of catastrophic fumblage. 


This effectively makes it so someone with 50 ranks (skill and category combined) reduces his fumble chance by 50%... it has the effect of lowering the fumble range of skilled warriors without messing with the fumble ranges on the weapon chart... which are supposed to represent difficult weapons to wield (someone untrained with a knife is still going to find it far more difficult to fumble then a trained warrior with a great sword).  It also makes it harder for well trained PC's to roll high fumbles... they usually just lose control of their weapons, rather then slashing themselves open.

[croakerdogboy]

That sounds good to a degree. But I don't think I would let the player go ahead and process his attack after failing to fumble his weapon. To me, they may avoid the negative effects of fumbling, but they still missed their attack.

[Phil]

I was thinking something similar myself, but rather than reducing fumble chance, I would allow the player to deduct their skill ranks from the Fumble Crit roll - that way, the chance of fumbling isn't reduced, but the impact of it would be. (It also gives higher level fighters more reason to keep adding those puny 0.5 skill ranks!)

[Joshua24601]

That sounds good to a degree. But I don't think I would let the player go ahead and process his attack after failing to fumble his weapon. To me, they may avoid the negative effects of fumbling, but they still missed their attack.

Just think of it like you think of weapon breakage.  Rolling a fumble just has a 'chance' of resulting in no attack or injury to self. 

--------------------------

Another thing to think about is the effects of 0 skill ranks on fumblage. 
This entire thread seems to be going under the assumption that fumble ranges are the starting point... what a beginning level warrior experiences... and as he becomes more skilled his range lowers..
What if the ranges listed on the weapon sheets are the fumble ranges of the average to high level warrior?... then what we should be talking about is increasing the ranges for low skill..

Just something to ponder.. 

(In my suggestion, a couple of posts up.. I'd go with, 0 ranks in individual weapon skill and cat = double fumble range, having ranks in the category, or skill (but not both) gives you a 50% increase in fumble range.)

[croakerdogboy]

I kind of like that idea. It makes the untrained guy with the military flail  a real danger to himself and others.

Some of the more tricky martial arts weapons would also be badly affected. The more I think about it the more I like it.

[runequester]

I really like that as well. Makes it a bit of a risk to just grab something off the floor and swing it

[Arioch]

(In my suggestion, a couple of posts up.. I'd go with, 0 ranks in individual weapon skill and cat = double fumble range, having ranks in the category, or skill (but not both) gives you a 50% increase in fumble range.)

Alternatively, you could also add the untrained penalties (-15 for no ranks in skill, turned in a +15) to all fumble rolls. This would mean that they will suffer more severe effects from fumbles than trained characters...
You could also use both options, but maybe that would be a bit nasty.

[Joshua24601]

Alternatively, you could also add the untrained penalties (-15 for no ranks in skill, turned in a +15) to all fumble rolls. This would mean that they will suffer more severe effects from fumbles than trained characters...

This works but I'm really in favor of basing all numbers on the fumble ranges listed on the weapon charts... The fumble range for a Greatsword is much higher then a knife, and untrained use of a Greatsword should be much harder then a knife.  Just tacking on a 15 increase to fumble range makes even the easy to use weapons very dangerous... and not much safer then hard weapons.. were as multiplying the listed number has a more varied result.. a knife, with a fumble of 1-3 would become 1-6, and a Greatsword with 1 - 7 becomes 1-14... knife is still pretty safe.. but the more difficult to use greatsword is really dangerous..

[Ravenheart]

I continue posting in ages old threads, but pardon me, I'm new to this forum. 

I think that the system that reduces fumble ranges, also needs a system that increases fumbles ranges somehow.
We've dropped original fatigue system and created a 5-step fatigue system, in which every level lowers the skills and increases fumble range by at least one. For example, Winded character suffers -10% to all his skills and gets +1 to all fumble ranges.

So, a fresh fighter could have minimum of 1-2 fumble range at the beginning of the fight, but as the conflict gets prolonged, he tires and starts making more and more mistakes or even fumbles.

I think that this increased fumble range could be applied to original fatigue system as well, given some kind of intervals for additional fumble steps.

[Grinnen Baeritt]

I continue posting in ages old threads, but pardon me, I'm new to this forum. 

It's never stopped me

I feel that combat rolls should be treated much like skill rolls, in that they are Open-ended at both ends. The exisiting fumble range simply being the trigger for the open-ended low roll.

If the resulting roll after the application of the offensive bonus (plus situational/positional modifiers) applied brings the result back above 0 (before the application of the defenders DB and Missile Range penalties) then the attack is a bad miss, otherwise it is a fumble as per normal. This means highly skilled combatants (or ones with significant positional advantages) are automatically less likely to fumble.

Thus characters allocating less time to thier attack, attacking in the snap phase (or making opportunity attacks) and those that are tired, injured or untrained will also fumble more often than those that are fully fit and dedicated to attacking.