To make critical failures (Nat 1s) more impactful without being overly punishing, we use Weapon Hit Points.
The Mechanics
The Trigger: Every time you roll a Nat 1 on an attack roll, your weapon takes 1 point of damage.
Weapon Durability:
Standard Weapons: 3 Hit Points.
+1 Weapons: 4 Hit Points.
Rare/Legendary Items: Up to 10 Hit Points.
The Broken State: If a weapon reaches 0 Hit Points, it becomes broken. A broken weapon is unusable for attacks until it is repaired by a skilled smith or a player with the right tools.
Maintenance and Repairs
Daily Maintenance: Points of damage can be removed during a short or long rest at no cost, representing the adventurer sharpening blades or tightening grips.
Field Repairs (Broken Items): If a weapon is fully broken, a player can attempt to fix it during a long rest if they have Smith’s Tools.
Standard Repair DC: 12 Strength or Dexterity (Smith's Tools) check.
How about NOT punishing martials. This just sounds like a way to make bouts of bad luck even less fun. Imagine LOSING your only good melee weapon in the middle of a dungeon just because the dice were mad at you.
On a natural 1, I prefer the option of dropping your weapon or falling prone (e.g., from twisting your ankle). Yes, this will disproportionately affect martial classes, but martial characters should have more than 1 weapon. Weapons are resources. If you're deep in a dungeon and happen lose a weapon from dropping it (and, e.g., goblin minions scramble off with it), that is just bad resource management.
TBH to be consistent across classes, a similar rule about natural 1s can be applied to casters who cast a spell with a ranged spell attack, e.g., there would be some mishap (as there is in other systems, eg Shadowdark). And if a caster is using a magical item like a wand, rod or staff to cast a spell that requires a ranged spell attack, like the martial character, the caster could drop the magic item.
The big question would be...... how do you handle Crits on Spell casters? If you roll a 1 on an attack, does the spell become unavailable? Does their focus break?
The problem with how 5e handles things is that "and"ing a Nat 1 is just insult to injury. Good complication systems tend to work better when "yes, but" is an option.
We have done it so far with the spell slot is spent but the spell doesn't do anything as spell slots are resources. We have toyed with the idea of multiple failures before a short or long rest would cause an effect liking needing to do a ritual to reenforce the spell but it hasn't come up yet.
We have done it so far with the spell slot is spent but the spell doesn't do anything as spell slots are resources. We have toyed with the idea of multiple failures before a short or long rest would cause an effect liking needing to do a ritual to reenforce the spell but it hasn't come up yet.
That sounds painful. Why would you ever cast Scorching Ray if there's a 14% chance that you waste your turn AND slot on it. And what about saving throw spells? Do they have a 5% chance of being wasted?
That's just the standard rules as I understand them a Nat1 is a miss but the spell slot is still spent so really adding damage to the weapon is our way of adding some tension to the martial classes.
Not my own creation, but it’s what I use. Very useful and funny, and it works for both Nat 20s and Nat 1s. Critical Hit/Fumble is on the last page, so scroll down till you see it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Shoutout to the 2 Crew! - the cast of Not Another D&D Podcast
Roomba Knight, Architect of the Cataclysm, Foxy Lunar Archpriest. He/Him.
Ravenclaw, bookworm, Lego fanatic, mythology nerd, rock climber, pedantic about spelling.
That sounds awful. Great way to make no one want to play a fighter or monk. Do you want to fall Prone and drop your weapon outside of movement range? Or lose your next turn?
In general, mechanics which add additional punishments for natural 1's should be used very, very cautiously, since they tend towards creating a more frustrating experience for the players for no benefit.
It doesn't matter if they apply equally to both players and DM-controlled creatures, because the DM can make infinitely more creatures and is not invested in whether they live or die. A player character will be rolling a lot and therefore getting a lot of critical failures.
In this case, it's especially punishing for players of martial characters, because combat tends to last only three rounds. No enemy is going to even use up all their weapon's hit points, so they won't be affected by this mechanic at all. This is going to lead to very frustrated martial players, or NO martial players at the table, which will leave the cast of squishy casters poorly protected. I recommend tossing this concept into the trash bin.
That's just the standard rules as I understand them a Nat1 is a miss but the spell slot is still spent so really adding damage to the weapon is our way of adding some tension to the martial classes.
It's not standard rules because Scorching Ray is 3 attack rolls, which increases the chance of rolling a Natural 1. Does one Natural 1 cancel out all three attacks and negate the damage? What happens if one roll is a 1 and another is a 20?
When you roll a Nat 1 on an attack or an enemy rolls a nat 20 on a saving throw against you, then you have slipped leaving yourself vulnerable, all attacks against you are at advantage until the start of your next turn.
Why this is fair:
-> it punishes both melee & spellcasters equally, while martials make more attack rolls, most casters will have multiple enemies making saving throws, so it should balance out.
-> It also has the greatest punishment for builds that take the most time at the table : the more d20s you roll or that you force the DM to roll the more likely for a crit fail. So it incentivizes players to make characters that are fast to run at the table.
-> It has a hard limit to the amount of punishment per turn, since advantage doesn't stack a player who rolls two nat 1s in a row isn't also excessively punished by stacking penalty to for those nat 1s.
-> The amount of punishment is equal across characters - characters have roughly equal AC, so advantage on enemy attacks is equally penalizing for all characters, in contrast falling prone is much worse for movement-based characters and characters in melee with enemies than those at range. It also doesn't matter if the character uses armour or weapons or not, the amount of punishment is equal to all.
True. However, I have played a wizard who rolled 2 Nat 1s in a row. First he tripped, then he tripped again and his wand got flung 30 ft. away. They won the battle, but it was very funny. Also, the Nat 20 table more than makes up for it (on 100, it’s an instant-kill).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Shoutout to the 2 Crew! - the cast of Not Another D&D Podcast
Roomba Knight, Architect of the Cataclysm, Foxy Lunar Archpriest. He/Him.
Ravenclaw, bookworm, Lego fanatic, mythology nerd, rock climber, pedantic about spelling.
True. However, I have played a wizard who rolled 2 Nat 1s in a row. First he tripped, then he tripped again and his wand got flung 30 ft. away. They won the battle, but it was very funny. Also, the Nat 20 table more than makes up for it (on 100, it’s an instant-kill).
That sounds incredibly frustrating in the moment. Also, humans have a negativity bias, so the Nat 20 table does not make up for it, especially since winning heroically is the norm, so your complete failure stands out more than your greater success.
I would never play at a table that used those tables.
Each one is it's own attack you get a nat1 its miss and the 20 dose its crit damage. I am sorry if i am miss understanding or stating something but its always been my experience that if you make a spell attack and roll a nat1 the spell slot is still spent you just missed. Thus wasting a resource for the caster (the slot/components)
When I've DM'd, I've treated nat 1s like a major whiff on an attack. If it's a martial attack and they're beside an ally, they might accidentally hit that ally for a small amount of damage (I usually use either a d4 or a d6). If it's a spell attack, they might accidentally hit an ally near the target if one if there; or they might set the room on fire.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
To make critical failures (Nat 1s) more impactful without being overly punishing, we use Weapon Hit Points.
The Mechanics
The Trigger: Every time you roll a Nat 1 on an attack roll, your weapon takes 1 point of damage.
Weapon Durability:
Standard Weapons: 3 Hit Points.
+1 Weapons: 4 Hit Points.
Rare/Legendary Items: Up to 10 Hit Points.
The Broken State: If a weapon reaches 0 Hit Points, it becomes broken. A broken weapon is unusable for attacks until it is repaired by a skilled smith or a player with the right tools.
Maintenance and Repairs
Daily Maintenance: Points of damage can be removed during a short or long rest at no cost, representing the adventurer sharpening blades or tightening grips.
Field Repairs (Broken Items): If a weapon is fully broken, a player can attempt to fix it during a long rest if they have Smith’s Tools.
Standard Repair DC: 12 Strength or Dexterity (Smith's Tools) check.
Magical/Rare Repair DC: 18+ Intelligence (Arcana) or Strength (Smith's Tools) check.
Professional Repair: Taking a broken weapon to a professional smith costs gold (10–25% of the weapon's value) but guarantees a fix.
How about NOT punishing martials. This just sounds like a way to make bouts of bad luck even less fun. Imagine LOSING your only good melee weapon in the middle of a dungeon just because the dice were mad at you.
On a natural 1, I prefer the option of dropping your weapon or falling prone (e.g., from twisting your ankle). Yes, this will disproportionately affect martial classes, but martial characters should have more than 1 weapon. Weapons are resources. If you're deep in a dungeon and happen lose a weapon from dropping it (and, e.g., goblin minions scramble off with it), that is just bad resource management.
TBH to be consistent across classes, a similar rule about natural 1s can be applied to casters who cast a spell with a ranged spell attack, e.g., there would be some mishap (as there is in other systems, eg Shadowdark). And if a caster is using a magical item like a wand, rod or staff to cast a spell that requires a ranged spell attack, like the martial character, the caster could drop the magic item.
Started playing AD&D in the late 70s, took a 40 year hiatus, re-started with 3.5 and 5e in 2023
The big question would be...... how do you handle Crits on Spell casters? If you roll a 1 on an attack, does the spell become unavailable? Does their focus break?
The problem with how 5e handles things is that "and"ing a Nat 1 is just insult to injury. Good complication systems tend to work better when "yes, but" is an option.
We have done it so far with the spell slot is spent but the spell doesn't do anything as spell slots are resources. We have toyed with the idea of multiple failures before a short or long rest would cause an effect liking needing to do a ritual to reenforce the spell but it hasn't come up yet.
That sounds painful. Why would you ever cast Scorching Ray if there's a 14% chance that you waste your turn AND slot on it. And what about saving throw spells? Do they have a 5% chance of being wasted?
That's just the standard rules as I understand them a Nat1 is a miss but the spell slot is still spent so really adding damage to the weapon is our way of adding some tension to the martial classes.
https://gamenightblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/rules-four-page.pdf
Not my own creation, but it’s what I use. Very useful and funny, and it works for both Nat 20s and Nat 1s. Critical Hit/Fumble is on the last page, so scroll down till you see it.
Shoutout to the 2 Crew! - the cast of Not Another D&D Podcast
Roomba Knight, Architect of the Cataclysm, Foxy Lunar Archpriest. He/Him.
Ravenclaw, bookworm, Lego fanatic, mythology nerd, rock climber, pedantic about spelling.
I love K-pop Demon Hunters and the theatre.
That sounds awful. Great way to make no one want to play a fighter or monk. Do you want to fall Prone and drop your weapon outside of movement range? Or lose your next turn?
In general, mechanics which add additional punishments for natural 1's should be used very, very cautiously, since they tend towards creating a more frustrating experience for the players for no benefit.
It doesn't matter if they apply equally to both players and DM-controlled creatures, because the DM can make infinitely more creatures and is not invested in whether they live or die. A player character will be rolling a lot and therefore getting a lot of critical failures.
In this case, it's especially punishing for players of martial characters, because combat tends to last only three rounds. No enemy is going to even use up all their weapon's hit points, so they won't be affected by this mechanic at all. This is going to lead to very frustrated martial players, or NO martial players at the table, which will leave the cast of squishy casters poorly protected. I recommend tossing this concept into the trash bin.
It's not standard rules because Scorching Ray is 3 attack rolls, which increases the chance of rolling a Natural 1. Does one Natural 1 cancel out all three attacks and negate the damage? What happens if one roll is a 1 and another is a 20?
If you want fair rules for Critical Failures:
Why this is fair:
-> it punishes both melee & spellcasters equally, while martials make more attack rolls, most casters will have multiple enemies making saving throws, so it should balance out.
-> It also has the greatest punishment for builds that take the most time at the table : the more d20s you roll or that you force the DM to roll the more likely for a crit fail. So it incentivizes players to make characters that are fast to run at the table.
-> It has a hard limit to the amount of punishment per turn, since advantage doesn't stack a player who rolls two nat 1s in a row isn't also excessively punished by stacking penalty to for those nat 1s.
-> The amount of punishment is equal across characters - characters have roughly equal AC, so advantage on enemy attacks is equally penalizing for all characters, in contrast falling prone is much worse for movement-based characters and characters in melee with enemies than those at range. It also doesn't matter if the character uses armour or weapons or not, the amount of punishment is equal to all.
True. However, I have played a wizard who rolled 2 Nat 1s in a row. First he tripped, then he tripped again and his wand got flung 30 ft. away. They won the battle, but it was very funny. Also, the Nat 20 table more than makes up for it (on 100, it’s an instant-kill).
Shoutout to the 2 Crew! - the cast of Not Another D&D Podcast
Roomba Knight, Architect of the Cataclysm, Foxy Lunar Archpriest. He/Him.
Ravenclaw, bookworm, Lego fanatic, mythology nerd, rock climber, pedantic about spelling.
I love K-pop Demon Hunters and the theatre.
That sounds incredibly frustrating in the moment. Also, humans have a negativity bias, so the Nat 20 table does not make up for it, especially since winning heroically is the norm, so your complete failure stands out more than your greater success.
I would never play at a table that used those tables.
OH i like that that's clever and fun also
Each one is it's own attack you get a nat1 its miss and the 20 dose its crit damage. I am sorry if i am miss understanding or stating something but its always been my experience that if you make a spell attack and roll a nat1 the spell slot is still spent you just missed. Thus wasting a resource for the caster (the slot/components)
When I've DM'd, I've treated nat 1s like a major whiff on an attack. If it's a martial attack and they're beside an ally, they might accidentally hit that ally for a small amount of damage (I usually use either a d4 or a d6). If it's a spell attack, they might accidentally hit an ally near the target if one if there; or they might set the room on fire.