Newbie Question 2: Natural 20 and Skill Rolls

[Lurker]

Definitely! Just last night we, or at least I, got a great laugh out of Zask the Gnome Fighter rolling a fumble on his attack, then a fumble on his DEX check to avoid a bad mishap, which caused him to fall off of the table he was fighting from, face first, onto the floor, prone, but not helpless, before TWO Skeletal Warriors,

Ah, so you do have fumbles? By rolling Natural 1? Or do you use another system?

Yes we have fumbles ... and the rest of that sad story is that I was next ... I too rolled a 1 on my attack ... three 1s in a row. Luckily, I was able to roll well on my dex check to keep it from being worse than it could have been

The up side, a very minor up side considering there was 6 or 7 of us facing 4 skeleton warriors and a death knight, is that in the rest of the combat 2 of the skeleton warriors also fumbled - though not as spectacularly as Zask did.

[Treebore]

Definitely! Just last night we, or at least I, got a great laugh out of Zask the Gnome Fighter rolling a fumble on his attack, then a fumble on his DEX check to avoid a bad mishap, which caused him to fall off of the table he was fighting from, face first, onto the floor, prone, but not helpless, before TWO Skeletal Warriors,

Ah, so you do have fumbles? By rolling Natural 1? Or do you use another system?

Yes we have fumbles ... and the rest of that sad story is that I was next ... I too rolled a 1 on my attack ... three 1s in a row. Luckily, I was able to roll well on my dex check to keep it from being worse than it could have been

The up side, a very minor up side considering there was 6 or 7 of us facing 4 skeleton warriors and a death knight, is that in the rest of the combat 2 of the skeleton warriors also fumbled - though not as spectacularly as Zask did.

I fumbled with the Dearth Knight too, when I had him get up on the table.

[Treebore]

Ah, so you do have fumbles? By rolling Natural 1? Or do you use another system?

A Nat 1 is a Fumble, and they then roll a SIEGE check for DEX, and if they fail again, I determine something detrimental. Such as falling off the table, face first, and landing Prone at the feet of a Skeletal Warrior.
Since the roll is essentially against themselves, the CL for the check is 0. So eventually, they will only fail, and fail spectacularly at that. Like now that they are level 10, they can only final the check on a Nat 1 or 2. Or for those with DEX modifiers, they can only fail with a roll of 1. Like I said, though. Since they are so high level, now when they do fail, they do so spectacularly. No minor mistakes for these guys, only BIG ones.

[Captain_K]

No one answered, in your HOUSE rules do Natural 20 cause something extra? Not counting when it takes a 20 to hit. Or ones something worse? We have great fun with 20s are double damage and 1s are fumbles... simply because they're fun to do... we could make it a 13 that hits is double damage and a 9 that misses is a fumble... but we like the 20s and 1s. Again, its fun. Goes both ways...

[Treebore]

No one answered, in your HOUSE rules do Natural 20 cause something extra? Not counting when it takes a 20 to hit. Or ones something worse? We have great fun with 20s are double damage and 1s are fumbles... simply because they're fun to do... we could make it a 13 that hits is double damage and a 9 that misses is a fumble... but we like the 20s and 1s. Again, its fun. Goes both ways...

Yes, for me, when they don't hit only on a Nat 20, they do double damage. ALL damage, dice, STR and magic.

[serleran]

True. Tarot is more... random, too, when done right. Plus using the Major Arcana can have some more significance when drawn.

I think I'll change my own recommendation.

I thought about it myself a bit, and actually, although it would limit "options" from 78 to 22, (or from 156 to 44 is you use reverses), I would probably stick with just the Majors for the rule.

Partly because the Major cards are what everyone consider spooky, so it would be cooler to turn up, say, "The Hanged Man" rather than "7 of Cups."

But also partly because I have some really great decks that have very evocative art on the Majors, but the Minors are just depicted as normal pip cards. Without the picture, I feel the idea would fall a bit flat with players. Obviously, since you were originally wanting to use poker cards, you probably disagree, though.

I do not disagree, but I also do not agree entirely. Major Arcana are known for their "big effects" but if every draw is one, they are no longer "big effects." Not every critical or fumble need be super-special. In fact, not having them so (to me) means, when they are, they are more.

[KeyIXTheHermit]

I do not disagree, but I also do not agree entirely.

I could not have replied to your reply with a better reply than your reply! I could have tried, but I would not have been successful!

Truly, this is a matter of taste. I have done "tarot readings" for characters in-game, and let the cards fall where they may (and then tried to work predictions into upcoming games), as playing a gypsy or something. In those cases, I always kept the whole deck together.

I'm thinking more as a quick list of critical effects (either positive or negative), a 44 item list is sufficient for my group and my needs, and the "aaaah!" factor would be higher if I'm using a deck that doesn't have pictures on the Minors. If I'm using a RW Clone with pictures on every card, it would matter less, though, because the non-initiated can't tell the difference between the Minors and the Majors when every card is a picture card anyway!