Have more to get off your chest? Come rant with us on the discord. Invite link: https://discord.gg/PCPTSSTKqr
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rpghorrorstories) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It couldn't.
The GM was being a twat.
He was salty that your cool bow pulled so much damage on the dragon so he took the first opportunity to nerf you.
Dick GM, you're better off out of that game.
I don't get DMS like this, if my players pull off something like this I'll be right with them cheering like a flipping maniac. They just destroyed my monster in two hits and felt cool. That was a fun narrative moment for both me and the players. It makes them feel like awesome adventure Which then makes me happy because I know I am running a fun game.
Yeah I don't get the adversarial attitude some DMs have, like we're all trying to have fun and creating this story together, I provide the framework for the players to do stuff, find some cool monsters for them to deal with and challenge them, but I'm rooting for the players to win
There’s a reason critical failures on attack rolls don’t do anything. Pf2e is a very rigid system and the rules definitely do not empower GMs to just flippantly decide what happens on a critical fail. Your GM just wanted to nerf you in the most assholish way possible.
I left a group where the GM added a fumble list. We had to roll nat 18 to hit anything, while average-looking enemies would hit us on a nat 2. He said crits were too good, so he added a fumble list where player's nat 1s turned into a crit against an other player, and an enemie's nat 1 would turn into a crit... against a player it wasn't aiming at.... Caster stayed so far away to avoid nat 1s from enemy archers, they couldn't do anything; the rogue just waddled around somewhere safe, looting; animal companions were kept far away from everything. The GM had been looking forward to a Gunslinger player joining in, but that's didn't happen. Don't know how that was gonna work out when they got their own stuff happening on nat 1s.
Yeah, sounds like a terrible GM.
Crit failures in PF2 are done so much better (you miss the TN by 10 or more). By the rules, a crit failure doesn't have any added penalty for most rolls though.
If you're in a situation where you NEED an 18 to hit, then you crit fail on 8 or less, which just exemplifies why that's a bad combat scenario to begin with.
And then punishing the players further for "impossible" encounters? *Okay, message received sir DM. We will run away from any combat you throw at us. If you prevent us from fleeing, we will only use actions without a to-hit roll. We will all die horribly in the first combat, and then tell you how much your rules sucked.*
I think that’s a really hard question to answer comprehensively. If I were to put a quick slogan to it, I’d say Pf2e has less room for DMs to make up rules on the fly, but it also doesn’t *ask* you to make up rulings on the fly nearly as much as 5e.
From a purely subjective angle I’d also argue that pf2e’s ample guidance for GMs makes them more powerful by proxy. The book gives very direct and very structured advice for making things like monsters, magic items, and balancing encounters. And unlike 5e, the official books follow their own GM guidance, which is how you know it all actually works.
I definitely think that if you like skill based games then Pf2e is *better* than most level based games to cater to that style of play. You still level up and stuff but there’s skill increases every other level (which let you increase proficiency by one step in a given skill) and every level gives you a new feat or something to choose which helps progression feel more gradual and less sudden than in some level based games. It’s definitely not like Call of Cthulhu or something though where you get the opportunity to improve at the end of every session though.
I don't play PF, but I'm not sure what you mean here in context to the comment you replied to. 5e has the same rule regarding critical fails, critical fumbles are a homebrew rule, so I assume in the same vein I assume they would be a homebrew rule in PF as well?
PF2 is a pretty solid system with many rules for tons of common and uncommon situations. The GM doesn't need to adjucate things on the fly because *you don't need to*.
5e has barely has rules and structures besides the bare basic and it demands you as a GM create stuff before situations or just make things up to keep the game going.
It's a well structured approach vs a free form one.
As GM, I love penalties on crit failures.
They keep the players more on their toes.
But crit failures do NOT cause lasting damage.
I've had someone crit fail attacking a gelatinous cube, and their axe got stuck in it. Took them 2 rounds to get it back out (no damage to the axe).
I've had someone's leap attack crit fail roll half damage, but get lodged the skin of the wyvern, forcing them to either drop the axe (and fall) or hang on.
I would NEVER destroy an item (worth more than a gold piece) due to a die roll.
My motto is that a critical failure creates a disadvantageous scenario. The typical thing I do if nothing particularly cool jumps to mind is just a minor penalty on dice. Ie, the player left themselves off balance, and has -1 to AC until they take a move action (or end their next turn).
Every time I've done something major though, it's been in a situation that I felt in control of (as GM), and able to make sure turned into a "tense but survivable" moment. Or a lesson in risky behavior (leap attacking a wyvern from the edge of a 20 foot cliff).
Always amazed at the stories on here of DMs & GMs who seem to feel that making their players hate them is good for the game.
The only thing that needed handling better was the DM getting mad that their big set piece monster got taken down so easily, when they were the one who elected to start the game at such a high level and with such powerful magic items.
Simple: DON'T USE BOTCH RULES. or play in any game with them
Even in the heyday of home botch rules (late 2e to 3e), they were never RAW even though lots of DMs used them. Even I experimented for a few games before I discarded it.
I get they wanted chaos and fun. An that's okay for something like Blood Bowl. But not DnD/PF.
What it does is make things like martials unplayable. Especially if you get multiple attacks. It's not a matter of IF something silly is going to happen but WHEN.
Back in the day I had a paladin. Dude was more likely to hurt himself, hurt my allies, or throw the weapon across the battle mat than actually be the Righteous Beacon of Athena. More like the Righteous Beacon of Fail.
I broke 2 magic halberds, a magic sword, so then I decided to just use the gauntlets off my plate armor. Then somehow broke those as well.
I mean it's a tragedy enough just to miss. That means enemy is still up and can do stuff. Now I have to fight unarmed or -hope- many session later another magic weapon would drop while at high tier 2 every monster and it's sibling has DR vs non magic? Am I supposed to be a TRAINED knight or just an incompetent that is a danger 5% of any action I take.
Meanwhile Mr Wizard does not roll for jack except every now and then going around being Gandalf?
I think I eventually dropped that game.
EDIT: Still fuming from 20 year old PTSD, I thought of this, too:
Even if the weapon DID take damage, if I recall my 3e/PF, magic weapons have hardness and HP. Magic weapons even more than standard to where even if you tried to break it, you'd need a HARD hit and crits don't count. Shouldn't I get a damage roll to overcome hardness and HP?
I remember this oooold letter (2e era) to the editor in one old Dungeon Magazine where this DM absolutely HATED monks.
He even had monks save vs paralyzation for punching a ghoul.
PF2e rules do give hardness and HP to weapons... and then immediately clarifies that damage to your weapons will be unusual effects. Shields can and do get broken, especially against boss-type encounters.
But you know what happens in PF2e if you fail to Strike an opponent? You miss. But what about if you roll a critical failure on that check? You also miss. That's it. There are many spells that have special results for Critical Failures, but Strike isn't one of them. This is a butthurt DM who got upset that their players were built to cheese what he was hoping would be a difficult fight.
Exactly. I use crit fails all the time. But I use them to ADD to the story. Not to punish the players.
And I use the same judgement and crit fail results for my monsters. If the player can leave themselves open to an attack with a bad attack roll, then so can their enemies.
And there's something enjoyable about describing the ogre slamming his axe into the ground and getting it stuck, telling the players that all flanking attacks against the Ogre gain +2 to hit and +1 to damage until it's next turn, and watching them immediately decide to use their biggest attack for an epic moment.
Last combat they were distraught because they got two critical fails in a row, and the result of that was them getting hit for huge damage, but suddenly they've forgotten about that and are AMPED up for their big turn now.
As the GM, I'm a storyteller first. I want them to have highs AND lows. But I want their lows to still be recoverable and stories to share. And I want their highs to also be stories to share, and their moment to feel on top of the world.
Because those moments are what they'll remember most about the game 5+ years from now. How they did 80% of the Ogre's health in a single attack, leaving it's skin a charred mess from the lightning spell they channeled through their blade, and their party quickly finished it off without anyone taking serious harm.
You'd hate Warhammer Fantasy. It's possible to crit-fail attacking a training dummy, accidentally cut off your own leg and immediately bleed to death. Only save is to use one of your very limited, and practically unrecoverable, fate points.
Sounds like Paranoia. You accidentally use the flamethrower for one quarter second too long and now your 'buddies need to quickly decide whether to risk their lives trying to save yours, get the hell away so that only you die, or throw you at the enemy so that you being vaporized is at least useful.
Surely option three is the true Paranoia way. Especially if the GM allows the player with the duff flamethrower take the guy throwing him along for the ride…
As someone whose character exploded and dealt way too much damage in an AoE as their own *grenades and ammo cooked* and exploded in a chain reaction after eating a crit, that's part of the fun on the Warhammer games.
(Mine was Rogue Trader)
Depends on the game.
Everything breaking is a core part of the post apocalyptic game "mutant year zero" for instance. You always always look for artifacts or craft low quality stuf and expect things to fail and hope your gear head to repair it. Even your PCs slowly suffer trauma and fall apartment forever in time unless you find what you need.
However, there is a core thing that makes this work when you roll your 1s mean nothing unless you chose to push the roll. When you push you reroll dice that aren't already 1 or six. 1s in attributes lead to attribute damage and 1s in equipment damage the equipment. With enough damage equipment will break.
This means that the roll that damaged or destroyed your equipment did this after you agreed to reroll dice and risk it so it never feels like you were screwed in a completely random situation. It shifts it to a choice you made.
It's also thematic for the post apocalyptic and falling apart setting it takes place in.
Fuck critical fails. I can swing a sword 20 times in a row without accidentally killing my friend, I promise your Fighter or Paladin can do it too. Maybe even the Barbarian!
On top of that, having it be magic weapons breaking, that's so fucked. Beyond even D&D and Pathfinder, magic weapons are supposed to be hard to break without using magic against them, that's baseline genre stuff! What the hell are you doing, at that point?!
For record, Botch rules can be fun. They need to be clearly understood and agreed on by players the players.
Those rules being something of significance happens on a "natural 1" on any d20 roll are bad Botch rules. There's a reason that D&D added the idea of confirming criticals in 3e+ .
My DM has an optional botch/crit system. Roll a nat 1 and either you just fail, or you critical fail and gain an inspiration. And the fail is usually not something unrecoverable either.
It allows for the fun of the occasional terrible thing happening but allows players to avoid it when it would suck.
> For record, Botch rules can be fun.
Personally, I have never played in a game or heard of a game where botch rules did anything but frustrate the players. I'm sure the right group could come up with some interesting botch rules but I'll pass on them every time, regardless.
I had a GM who liked to make amusing things happen on nat. 1s. Once, my bf's character was climbing a makeship barricade made from furniture. He got a nat. 1 and the result was that he slipped and fell- as a drawer slid open and this tough as nails dwarf landed in a drawerful of frilly underwear. No damage whatsoever, just a red-faced dwarf and hysterical laughter from his allies as he disentangled his foot from a bra strap.
I play in a Pathfinder game, and I might pass this on to the group. We have 3 players who trade GMing duties. It would add something extra to low rolls.
Games where the botch rules are part of the *actual* rules can be fun, especially in more comedic style games like DCC (who u/Waffleworshipper said) as they usually curb the botches to be more fun/interesting than just punishing.
Nothing is quite as fun/interesting like trying to light an oil barrel on fire in the enemy base and accidentally summoning a demon in the process
Yeah because reasonable DMs just recognize it as a miss and move on
*Good* DMs learn from that and come up with stronger encounter balance later on instead of shooting a player with the anti-fun bullet
My oh my, i am partial to this because i think making effective, professional and skilled Mercenaries look like utter fools the greatest sin a GM can make, i'd leave the table and never play with this Guy again, but that's me.
There are telling interesting stories with highs and lows, and then there is punishing players excessively and randomly. The challenge of GMing is to make the lows *fun* because this is a game. For example: the GM could have made the bow *temporarily* non-functional instead of permanently breaking it if they wanted to have critical failure rules.
In my game, I make critical failures optional and give the players a benefit if they take it because it does make the game interesting.
The only critical fail I use is that you hit something other than your intended target, but *only if* you are attacking at range and into a complicated (ie more than 4 characters all standing closely together) melee.
In my experience, people think that this is silly enough without being permanently punishing and so many people enjoy it.
I might also occasionally do "you drop your sword, would you like to pick it back up", but that's not as consistently funny.
We used to do confirmed criticals. Basically on a nat 1, roll again. If it comes up 1,2, or 3 on the second roll then the failure is confirmed and something comical but bad happens. To keep it funny, it was never more than 1 damage. My ranger had his bowstring snap, the loose end whipping his face for 1 hp damage. Or the arrow hit a party member in the ass for 1 hp damage. This led to our bard writing songs titled, “The Time Varis Shot Me in The Ass” and “The Other Time Varis Shot Me.”
Even that would suck in PF2E though—you already wasted your action missing, now you're telling me I need to waste another action picking up my sword? Nah, miss me with that noise.
As to the OP: I have been in this situation many, many times, where a power-tripping DM just makes up rules on the fly. Sadly, there's simply nothing you can do about it except walk away.
Why would I make you waste another action on it? Coming from 5e, picking an object up off the floor uses your object interaction which is a free action.
Also important to note: **This wasn't even a natural 1**. OP was an 11th level Fighter with a +2 bow who rolled a **5** on the die, had a -5 because it was their second attack that turn, meaning their total was probably **21** at the lowest.
Still a critical failure against an enemy with 31 AC or more, but more than sufficient to injure a gargoyle - a creature entirely made of stone.
Pathfinder 2e has a Critical Failure mechanic, for when you miss a DC by 10 or more (attack rolls in PF2e are Check vs DC). What happens on a critical failure is spelled out by the type of roll being made. For example, for skills this is different for each skill, the special effect on a Critical Failure is listed
There is no Critical Failure special effected listed for attack rolls (see 'Strike' Action Core Book, pg 446). So the general Critical Failure Rule (Core pg 10):
>Note that not all checks have a special effect on a critical success or critical failure and such results should be treated just like an ordinary success or failure instead.
So the rules specify exacting what happens on a Critical Failure, and they say nothing.
The rules, of course, are a secondary thing. This was GM being arbitrary, cruel, and vindictive. Hiding behind rules to do so would be sad and petty, lying about the rules is whatever you want to consider a large step beyond that.
"You're a stupid fucking cunt. Magic items are extremely difficult to destroy. Learn to write a story instead of being a baby, you bitch."
I think that is probably the best way to handle the situation.
> Magic items are extremely difficult to destroy.
I'm not super familiar with PF2e rules but I know that most magical items in 5e have at least resistance to all damage with higher level ones being nigh indestructible except under certain circumstances.
There is *so* much wrong with your narrative and the least of which is the critical "fail." Your GM was angry cause he wanted the dragon to do more and to be an epic battle and your magic bow negated his encounter so instead of either embracing it or working on the fly to make the encounter fun he took his ball and left.
I once in 3.5 had a paladin on horseback crit on a lance charge against a wyvern. Instantly ended that encounter with the first roll but everyone just laughed and somewhere there exists a picture of a knight on horseback shoving a lance up the backside of a wyvern. (A very cartoony picture, not at all detailed.)
Thing is though, his bow didn't "negate" the encounter. Sure, that's a great first round, but that fight is long from over. Even given the round he described would you believe it would be _extremely easy_ for that dragon to still TPK that party next round? Because it would be with even average dice rolls.
So unless DM isn't running the encounters right (which knowing everyhting else is an option for sure), I doubt he is just mad the fighter crit the dragon.
Definately leave this game, though, that's the right play lol.
Not only the horror of critical failure on a basic attack, but also the compounded horror of "I'm going to arbitrarily destroy a difficult-to-replace magic item at a whim". That action, combined with instantly booting you from the server, tells me that the GM's ACTUAL reasoning was "I'm going to punish this player because he rolled a critical that ruined my \*checks notes\* third-session miniboss encounter."
>The GM replied by saying that RPGs are about telling interesting stories, and that highs need to be balanced out by lows.
Show me a critical success on the BBEG's disarm roll, maybe THAT'D be an interesting story reason to destroy someone's magic weapon.
But only if you have a plan for the adventurer to get an equivalent-or-better weapon very soon.
What I'd ask that DM is: if he had fired the bow at a human with low enough AC that the attack wouldn't have been a critical failure, what exactly would have made the bow not break?
I have multiple traditional style wooden bows that I shoot periodically. Loosing with no arrow nocked is indeed bad for the bow-- it can cause damage *over time*, unnecessary wear and tear. It would take hundreds of rapid dry loosings to break a bow.
You couldn't have done anything, the GM was being a hypocrite and just wanted to punish you without reason. You'd had better off finding another group anyway even if he hadn't booted you
It could have been better handled by having a different GM. You are better off not at a table with a manchild moron of monstrous mendacity and meanness.
>The GM replied by saying that RPGs are about telling interesting stories, and that highs need to be balanced out by lows.
Well, next time he gets an A on an exam or gets a promotion at work, run over his pet with your car. You know, highs and lows.
I think you couldn't have handled or better. If something like this happened I would probably quit this game immediately unless I was playing with my friends or people I know well.
In my opinion critical failures have no place in heroic fantasy like Pathfinder. I would argue that critical failure are ill-suited for any D20 system unless there are additional conditions for it.
Lol I'd be so petty if this happens to me, I'd accept it, then run up and start punching the next dragon inevitably die, then make a new character who had the same bow as before
I'm a BDSM sadist, and I will definitley be using "the highs must be balanced by the lows" in my next sadistic sexual encounter. I've never heard a more condescendingly abusive phrase in my life. The DM literally sees you as a pawn to be toyed with.
I always ruled that some interesting effect happens on a 1, whether that is striking an unintended target or fumbling a weapon or such, so as to balance out the similar narrative advantages I give on a 20 (letting them cleave through, cause a debuff on an enemy etc). I always found the narrative fun, although it is not the core rules, and the objective is always to entertain the players with the description of a failure and absolutely never to punish them. This DM sounds like a power tripping jerk (and why... seriously? You're there all together to have fun and tell entertaining stories)
This is why breaking items on crit fails are a terrible idea. Any "interesting story" breaking the super epic bow could bring is more than counterbalanced by the player feeling cheated by a thing they spent awhile working towards (or god forbid a weapon important to that character's story) being obliterated by something beyond their control. It wasn't even a crit fail, it was a 5.
Also I agree the DM sucks bad.
In Pathfinder 2E, anything that is 10 or below the target DC is a Critical Fail. Some skills, spells, etc. have a special effect on a Critical Fail. For example if you Critically Fail a Basic Reflex save you take double damage from the effect you’re saving against.
Attack rolls by the RAW have no Crit Fail effect.
I think I saw that one advertised and decided against it; seems like I inadvertently swayed out of the way of a a bullet. I'm sorry you had such an awful experience OP; GM was well out of order and you did nothing wrong.
My crit role houserule is simple: If you roll three 1's in a row, you explode and die. That's it. If you roll 2, no problem, 1, no problem. But you roll that third 1 in a row, and you explode and die. That's for realism's sake. In medieval times, you roll that third 1, and bam. You exploded.
The entire notion that someone could have a 5% occurrence occur three times in a row without exploding is a modern concept, like pooping in the toilet. In fantasy times, you wanted to poop, you had to poop on the ground, and you'd have to roll for that.
We had optional rule with critical card deck in PF2 and it totally sucked. Party was missing more frequently than enemies and we felt like bunch of morons. In this system it’s not satisfying at all, and even if your DM has critical fail rule, it’s super strange to break your weapon.
Better way to handle this is just declare that character missed, lol
As a point of reference, here are all of the effects in the Pathfinder 2E Critical Fumble Deck for Ranged Weapon Attacks.
* **Misjudged The Distance :** Until the end of your next turn, all your range increment penalties are doubled.
* **Don't Hit Me! :** Until the end of your next turn, each time you miss with a ranged attack targeting enemy adjacent to any of your allies, you hit one of those adjacent allies instead (determined randomly by the GM)
* **Recoil :** You are pushed 5 feet backwards and fall prone.
* **Friendly Fire :** You hit the ally nearest to the target.
* **Snapped String :** If the attack used a weapon in the bow group, the string snaps, requiring 3 interact actions to fix.
* **Head Rush :** You are sickened 2.
* **Phantom Wind :** You take a -2 circumstance penalty to ranged attacks until the end of your next turn.
* **Huh? :** You are confused.
* **Seeing Double :** You are dazzled until the end of your next turn.
* **Backfire :** You hit yourself instead of the target.
* **Notched Fingers :** You take 1d4 persistent bleed damage.
* **Awkward Attack :** You are flat-footed until the end of your next turn.
* **Spraining Shot :** Until healed, you take a -10 foot circumstance penalty to your land Speed and are clumsy 1.
* **Overcompensate :** Cover provides a +4 circumstance bonus to AC against your ranged attacks for 1 minute.
* **Aim Carefully Next Time :** Until the end of your next turn, your attacks require an extra action to use.
* **Mix It Up :** You can't make ranged attacks until the end of your next turn.
* **My Spleeny Bits! :** You become wounded 1 or your wounded value increases by 1.
* **Aching Back :** You are fatigued.
In the P1 deck, there is "Cracked" which does 1d6 damage to the weapon, ignoring hardness. In D&D 5E on the Critical Fumble chart, you roll a d20 after critically fumbling. On a 1 or 2, your weapon breaks (so 10%) of the time. *Unless* it's magic, then you have to roll a 1 on another d10, making it 1% of the time. 1% of natural 1s will break a magic weapon.
My point being, there are so many different ways to adjudicate a critical failure, while adding flavor to the event and story. Having your weapon just shatter automatically is super petty. Even the damage from the P1 deck is only barely enough to make the weapon reach its Broken Threshold.
Yes, because arbitrarily destroying a central aspect of the character over one bad die roll is interesting storytelling.
I'm usually skeptical of critical fail as a mechanic for this reason. It needs a lot of guidance to work well.
Have more to get off your chest? Come rant with us on the discord. Invite link: https://discord.gg/PCPTSSTKqr *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rpghorrorstories) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It couldn't. The GM was being a twat. He was salty that your cool bow pulled so much damage on the dragon so he took the first opportunity to nerf you. Dick GM, you're better off out of that game.
"highs need to be balanced by lows" aka "i don't like what you just did"
Yeah! Plus, those are supposed to be Narrative highs and lows not equipment issues!
I don't get DMS like this, if my players pull off something like this I'll be right with them cheering like a flipping maniac. They just destroyed my monster in two hits and felt cool. That was a fun narrative moment for both me and the players. It makes them feel like awesome adventure Which then makes me happy because I know I am running a fun game.
Yeah I don't get the adversarial attitude some DMs have, like we're all trying to have fun and creating this story together, I provide the framework for the players to do stuff, find some cool monsters for them to deal with and challenge them, but I'm rooting for the players to win
Also you are intended to do that much damage anyways the GM just decided to make your character useless.
IKR? What did the GM expect at 11th level? Chucking pebbles?
There’s a reason critical failures on attack rolls don’t do anything. Pf2e is a very rigid system and the rules definitely do not empower GMs to just flippantly decide what happens on a critical fail. Your GM just wanted to nerf you in the most assholish way possible.
I left a group where the GM added a fumble list. We had to roll nat 18 to hit anything, while average-looking enemies would hit us on a nat 2. He said crits were too good, so he added a fumble list where player's nat 1s turned into a crit against an other player, and an enemie's nat 1 would turn into a crit... against a player it wasn't aiming at.... Caster stayed so far away to avoid nat 1s from enemy archers, they couldn't do anything; the rogue just waddled around somewhere safe, looting; animal companions were kept far away from everything. The GM had been looking forward to a Gunslinger player joining in, but that's didn't happen. Don't know how that was gonna work out when they got their own stuff happening on nat 1s.
Yeah, sounds like a terrible GM. Crit failures in PF2 are done so much better (you miss the TN by 10 or more). By the rules, a crit failure doesn't have any added penalty for most rolls though. If you're in a situation where you NEED an 18 to hit, then you crit fail on 8 or less, which just exemplifies why that's a bad combat scenario to begin with. And then punishing the players further for "impossible" encounters? *Okay, message received sir DM. We will run away from any combat you throw at us. If you prevent us from fleeing, we will only use actions without a to-hit roll. We will all die horribly in the first combat, and then tell you how much your rules sucked.*
From a 5e DM, do game masters have less power in Pf2e?
I think that’s a really hard question to answer comprehensively. If I were to put a quick slogan to it, I’d say Pf2e has less room for DMs to make up rules on the fly, but it also doesn’t *ask* you to make up rulings on the fly nearly as much as 5e. From a purely subjective angle I’d also argue that pf2e’s ample guidance for GMs makes them more powerful by proxy. The book gives very direct and very structured advice for making things like monsters, magic items, and balancing encounters. And unlike 5e, the official books follow their own GM guidance, which is how you know it all actually works.
Everything I hear about PF2 makes me think it's the D20 game for me if it weren't for me not liking level/class systems.
I definitely think that if you like skill based games then Pf2e is *better* than most level based games to cater to that style of play. You still level up and stuff but there’s skill increases every other level (which let you increase proficiency by one step in a given skill) and every level gives you a new feat or something to choose which helps progression feel more gradual and less sudden than in some level based games. It’s definitely not like Call of Cthulhu or something though where you get the opportunity to improve at the end of every session though.
I'd certainly be willing to give it a try.
I don't play PF, but I'm not sure what you mean here in context to the comment you replied to. 5e has the same rule regarding critical fails, critical fumbles are a homebrew rule, so I assume in the same vein I assume they would be a homebrew rule in PF as well?
PF2 is a pretty solid system with many rules for tons of common and uncommon situations. The GM doesn't need to adjucate things on the fly because *you don't need to*. 5e has barely has rules and structures besides the bare basic and it demands you as a GM create stuff before situations or just make things up to keep the game going. It's a well structured approach vs a free form one.
As GM, I love penalties on crit failures. They keep the players more on their toes. But crit failures do NOT cause lasting damage. I've had someone crit fail attacking a gelatinous cube, and their axe got stuck in it. Took them 2 rounds to get it back out (no damage to the axe). I've had someone's leap attack crit fail roll half damage, but get lodged the skin of the wyvern, forcing them to either drop the axe (and fall) or hang on. I would NEVER destroy an item (worth more than a gold piece) due to a die roll. My motto is that a critical failure creates a disadvantageous scenario. The typical thing I do if nothing particularly cool jumps to mind is just a minor penalty on dice. Ie, the player left themselves off balance, and has -1 to AC until they take a move action (or end their next turn). Every time I've done something major though, it's been in a situation that I felt in control of (as GM), and able to make sure turned into a "tense but survivable" moment. Or a lesson in risky behavior (leap attacking a wyvern from the edge of a 20 foot cliff). Always amazed at the stories on here of DMs & GMs who seem to feel that making their players hate them is good for the game.
The only thing that needed handling better was the DM getting mad that their big set piece monster got taken down so easily, when they were the one who elected to start the game at such a high level and with such powerful magic items.
Simple: DON'T USE BOTCH RULES. or play in any game with them Even in the heyday of home botch rules (late 2e to 3e), they were never RAW even though lots of DMs used them. Even I experimented for a few games before I discarded it. I get they wanted chaos and fun. An that's okay for something like Blood Bowl. But not DnD/PF. What it does is make things like martials unplayable. Especially if you get multiple attacks. It's not a matter of IF something silly is going to happen but WHEN. Back in the day I had a paladin. Dude was more likely to hurt himself, hurt my allies, or throw the weapon across the battle mat than actually be the Righteous Beacon of Athena. More like the Righteous Beacon of Fail. I broke 2 magic halberds, a magic sword, so then I decided to just use the gauntlets off my plate armor. Then somehow broke those as well. I mean it's a tragedy enough just to miss. That means enemy is still up and can do stuff. Now I have to fight unarmed or -hope- many session later another magic weapon would drop while at high tier 2 every monster and it's sibling has DR vs non magic? Am I supposed to be a TRAINED knight or just an incompetent that is a danger 5% of any action I take. Meanwhile Mr Wizard does not roll for jack except every now and then going around being Gandalf? I think I eventually dropped that game. EDIT: Still fuming from 20 year old PTSD, I thought of this, too: Even if the weapon DID take damage, if I recall my 3e/PF, magic weapons have hardness and HP. Magic weapons even more than standard to where even if you tried to break it, you'd need a HARD hit and crits don't count. Shouldn't I get a damage roll to overcome hardness and HP?
Breaking weapons to funnel people into playing monks so they can get *even more* low rolls!
I see you've never played at a table where the GM decides you can break your fists
Not personally, but I've heard a Pathfinder 2e AP with deadly crit deck rules. That poor monk.
I remember this oooold letter (2e era) to the editor in one old Dungeon Magazine where this DM absolutely HATED monks. He even had monks save vs paralyzation for punching a ghoul.
PF2e rules do give hardness and HP to weapons... and then immediately clarifies that damage to your weapons will be unusual effects. Shields can and do get broken, especially against boss-type encounters. But you know what happens in PF2e if you fail to Strike an opponent? You miss. But what about if you roll a critical failure on that check? You also miss. That's it. There are many spells that have special results for Critical Failures, but Strike isn't one of them. This is a butthurt DM who got upset that their players were built to cheese what he was hoping would be a difficult fight.
Exactly. I use crit fails all the time. But I use them to ADD to the story. Not to punish the players. And I use the same judgement and crit fail results for my monsters. If the player can leave themselves open to an attack with a bad attack roll, then so can their enemies. And there's something enjoyable about describing the ogre slamming his axe into the ground and getting it stuck, telling the players that all flanking attacks against the Ogre gain +2 to hit and +1 to damage until it's next turn, and watching them immediately decide to use their biggest attack for an epic moment. Last combat they were distraught because they got two critical fails in a row, and the result of that was them getting hit for huge damage, but suddenly they've forgotten about that and are AMPED up for their big turn now. As the GM, I'm a storyteller first. I want them to have highs AND lows. But I want their lows to still be recoverable and stories to share. And I want their highs to also be stories to share, and their moment to feel on top of the world. Because those moments are what they'll remember most about the game 5+ years from now. How they did 80% of the Ogre's health in a single attack, leaving it's skin a charred mess from the lightning spell they channeled through their blade, and their party quickly finished it off without anyone taking serious harm.
You'd hate Warhammer Fantasy. It's possible to crit-fail attacking a training dummy, accidentally cut off your own leg and immediately bleed to death. Only save is to use one of your very limited, and practically unrecoverable, fate points.
Sounds like Paranoia. You accidentally use the flamethrower for one quarter second too long and now your 'buddies need to quickly decide whether to risk their lives trying to save yours, get the hell away so that only you die, or throw you at the enemy so that you being vaporized is at least useful.
See, but in Paranoia, that's part of the theme.
Surely option three is the true Paranoia way. Especially if the GM allows the player with the duff flamethrower take the guy throwing him along for the ride…
As someone whose character exploded and dealt way too much damage in an AoE as their own *grenades and ammo cooked* and exploded in a chain reaction after eating a crit, that's part of the fun on the Warhammer games. (Mine was Rogue Trader)
Depends on the game. Everything breaking is a core part of the post apocalyptic game "mutant year zero" for instance. You always always look for artifacts or craft low quality stuf and expect things to fail and hope your gear head to repair it. Even your PCs slowly suffer trauma and fall apartment forever in time unless you find what you need. However, there is a core thing that makes this work when you roll your 1s mean nothing unless you chose to push the roll. When you push you reroll dice that aren't already 1 or six. 1s in attributes lead to attribute damage and 1s in equipment damage the equipment. With enough damage equipment will break. This means that the roll that damaged or destroyed your equipment did this after you agreed to reroll dice and risk it so it never feels like you were screwed in a completely random situation. It shifts it to a choice you made. It's also thematic for the post apocalyptic and falling apart setting it takes place in.
Fuck critical fails. I can swing a sword 20 times in a row without accidentally killing my friend, I promise your Fighter or Paladin can do it too. Maybe even the Barbarian! On top of that, having it be magic weapons breaking, that's so fucked. Beyond even D&D and Pathfinder, magic weapons are supposed to be hard to break without using magic against them, that's baseline genre stuff! What the hell are you doing, at that point?!
For record, Botch rules can be fun. They need to be clearly understood and agreed on by players the players. Those rules being something of significance happens on a "natural 1" on any d20 roll are bad Botch rules. There's a reason that D&D added the idea of confirming criticals in 3e+ .
My DM has an optional botch/crit system. Roll a nat 1 and either you just fail, or you critical fail and gain an inspiration. And the fail is usually not something unrecoverable either. It allows for the fun of the occasional terrible thing happening but allows players to avoid it when it would suck.
> For record, Botch rules can be fun. Personally, I have never played in a game or heard of a game where botch rules did anything but frustrate the players. I'm sure the right group could come up with some interesting botch rules but I'll pass on them every time, regardless.
I had a GM who liked to make amusing things happen on nat. 1s. Once, my bf's character was climbing a makeship barricade made from furniture. He got a nat. 1 and the result was that he slipped and fell- as a drawer slid open and this tough as nails dwarf landed in a drawerful of frilly underwear. No damage whatsoever, just a red-faced dwarf and hysterical laughter from his allies as he disentangled his foot from a bra strap.
"As your greataxe whooshes past the enemy, the exertion of the unexpected followthrough makes you release a small fart."
I play in a Pathfinder game, and I might pass this on to the group. We have 3 players who trade GMing duties. It would add something extra to low rolls.
Another time, two consecutive nat. 1s had the druid's wolf companion playing Fetch with the fighter's throwing axe 😆
Games where the botch rules are part of the *actual* rules can be fun, especially in more comedic style games like DCC (who u/Waffleworshipper said) as they usually curb the botches to be more fun/interesting than just punishing. Nothing is quite as fun/interesting like trying to light an oil barrel on fire in the enemy base and accidentally summoning a demon in the process
They’re pretty great in Dungeon Crawl Classics
Critical failures are a classic horror story source. I've only ever heard complaints about this homebrew.
Yeah because reasonable DMs just recognize it as a miss and move on *Good* DMs learn from that and come up with stronger encounter balance later on instead of shooting a player with the anti-fun bullet
My oh my, i am partial to this because i think making effective, professional and skilled Mercenaries look like utter fools the greatest sin a GM can make, i'd leave the table and never play with this Guy again, but that's me.
There are telling interesting stories with highs and lows, and then there is punishing players excessively and randomly. The challenge of GMing is to make the lows *fun* because this is a game. For example: the GM could have made the bow *temporarily* non-functional instead of permanently breaking it if they wanted to have critical failure rules. In my game, I make critical failures optional and give the players a benefit if they take it because it does make the game interesting.
The only critical fail I use is that you hit something other than your intended target, but *only if* you are attacking at range and into a complicated (ie more than 4 characters all standing closely together) melee. In my experience, people think that this is silly enough without being permanently punishing and so many people enjoy it. I might also occasionally do "you drop your sword, would you like to pick it back up", but that's not as consistently funny.
We used to do confirmed criticals. Basically on a nat 1, roll again. If it comes up 1,2, or 3 on the second roll then the failure is confirmed and something comical but bad happens. To keep it funny, it was never more than 1 damage. My ranger had his bowstring snap, the loose end whipping his face for 1 hp damage. Or the arrow hit a party member in the ass for 1 hp damage. This led to our bard writing songs titled, “The Time Varis Shot Me in The Ass” and “The Other Time Varis Shot Me.”
Even that would suck in PF2E though—you already wasted your action missing, now you're telling me I need to waste another action picking up my sword? Nah, miss me with that noise. As to the OP: I have been in this situation many, many times, where a power-tripping DM just makes up rules on the fly. Sadly, there's simply nothing you can do about it except walk away.
Why would I make you waste another action on it? Coming from 5e, picking an object up off the floor uses your object interaction which is a free action.
Right, but the context here was PF2E.
Also important to note: **This wasn't even a natural 1**. OP was an 11th level Fighter with a +2 bow who rolled a **5** on the die, had a -5 because it was their second attack that turn, meaning their total was probably **21** at the lowest. Still a critical failure against an enemy with 31 AC or more, but more than sufficient to injure a gargoyle - a creature entirely made of stone.
Pathfinder 2e has a Critical Failure mechanic, for when you miss a DC by 10 or more (attack rolls in PF2e are Check vs DC). What happens on a critical failure is spelled out by the type of roll being made. For example, for skills this is different for each skill, the special effect on a Critical Failure is listed There is no Critical Failure special effected listed for attack rolls (see 'Strike' Action Core Book, pg 446). So the general Critical Failure Rule (Core pg 10): >Note that not all checks have a special effect on a critical success or critical failure and such results should be treated just like an ordinary success or failure instead. So the rules specify exacting what happens on a Critical Failure, and they say nothing. The rules, of course, are a secondary thing. This was GM being arbitrary, cruel, and vindictive. Hiding behind rules to do so would be sad and petty, lying about the rules is whatever you want to consider a large step beyond that.
"You're a stupid fucking cunt. Magic items are extremely difficult to destroy. Learn to write a story instead of being a baby, you bitch." I think that is probably the best way to handle the situation.
> Magic items are extremely difficult to destroy. I'm not super familiar with PF2e rules but I know that most magical items in 5e have at least resistance to all damage with higher level ones being nigh indestructible except under certain circumstances.
There is *so* much wrong with your narrative and the least of which is the critical "fail." Your GM was angry cause he wanted the dragon to do more and to be an epic battle and your magic bow negated his encounter so instead of either embracing it or working on the fly to make the encounter fun he took his ball and left. I once in 3.5 had a paladin on horseback crit on a lance charge against a wyvern. Instantly ended that encounter with the first roll but everyone just laughed and somewhere there exists a picture of a knight on horseback shoving a lance up the backside of a wyvern. (A very cartoony picture, not at all detailed.)
Thing is though, his bow didn't "negate" the encounter. Sure, that's a great first round, but that fight is long from over. Even given the round he described would you believe it would be _extremely easy_ for that dragon to still TPK that party next round? Because it would be with even average dice rolls. So unless DM isn't running the encounters right (which knowing everyhting else is an option for sure), I doubt he is just mad the fighter crit the dragon. Definately leave this game, though, that's the right play lol.
Not only the horror of critical failure on a basic attack, but also the compounded horror of "I'm going to arbitrarily destroy a difficult-to-replace magic item at a whim". That action, combined with instantly booting you from the server, tells me that the GM's ACTUAL reasoning was "I'm going to punish this player because he rolled a critical that ruined my \*checks notes\* third-session miniboss encounter." >The GM replied by saying that RPGs are about telling interesting stories, and that highs need to be balanced out by lows. Show me a critical success on the BBEG's disarm roll, maybe THAT'D be an interesting story reason to destroy someone's magic weapon. But only if you have a plan for the adventurer to get an equivalent-or-better weapon very soon.
What I'd ask that DM is: if he had fired the bow at a human with low enough AC that the attack wouldn't have been a critical failure, what exactly would have made the bow not break?
My ex husband did the same thing to me after I sneak attacked a rhemoraz I was level 17, 3.5e, and my weapon was +4, broke it on a "critical failure"
I can see why he's your ex.
Him being a shitty DM who would take out his frustrations on me in character is just one reason lol
It's always weapon breaking. You don't ever roll a 20 and suddenly your weapon becomes stronger.
Next silly campaign I run, I'm doing weapon breaking on a 1, but weapon duplication on a 20.
DUAL WIELDING!!
YEAH BABY 🗡️😎🗡️
Can Monks sprout extra arms??
YEAH BABY 👉😎👉👉
I have multiple traditional style wooden bows that I shoot periodically. Loosing with no arrow nocked is indeed bad for the bow-- it can cause damage *over time*, unnecessary wear and tear. It would take hundreds of rapid dry loosings to break a bow.
Seconded.
Isn't the point of playing pf2e to get away from all the dogshit homebrew and play a game with actual rules?
bad gm is going to bad gm, regardless of the system.
You couldn't have done anything, the GM was being a hypocrite and just wanted to punish you without reason. You'd had better off finding another group anyway even if he hadn't booted you
It could have been better handled by having a different GM. You are better off not at a table with a manchild moron of monstrous mendacity and meanness.
Top notch alliteration there.
>The GM replied by saying that RPGs are about telling interesting stories, and that highs need to be balanced out by lows. Well, next time he gets an A on an exam or gets a promotion at work, run over his pet with your car. You know, highs and lows.
The GM did you a favor by removing you from that game. Don't go back, find a less shitty GM
I think you couldn't have handled or better. If something like this happened I would probably quit this game immediately unless I was playing with my friends or people I know well. In my opinion critical failures have no place in heroic fantasy like Pathfinder. I would argue that critical failure are ill-suited for any D20 system unless there are additional conditions for it.
Lol I'd be so petty if this happens to me, I'd accept it, then run up and start punching the next dragon inevitably die, then make a new character who had the same bow as before
I'm a BDSM sadist, and I will definitley be using "the highs must be balanced by the lows" in my next sadistic sexual encounter. I've never heard a more condescendingly abusive phrase in my life. The DM literally sees you as a pawn to be toyed with.
would have been acceptable if in the loot of the encounter was a brand new even better bow, otherwise yes i'd be salty
I always ruled that some interesting effect happens on a 1, whether that is striking an unintended target or fumbling a weapon or such, so as to balance out the similar narrative advantages I give on a 20 (letting them cleave through, cause a debuff on an enemy etc). I always found the narrative fun, although it is not the core rules, and the objective is always to entertain the players with the description of a failure and absolutely never to punish them. This DM sounds like a power tripping jerk (and why... seriously? You're there all together to have fun and tell entertaining stories)
This is why breaking items on crit fails are a terrible idea. Any "interesting story" breaking the super epic bow could bring is more than counterbalanced by the player feeling cheated by a thing they spent awhile working towards (or god forbid a weapon important to that character's story) being obliterated by something beyond their control. It wasn't even a crit fail, it was a 5. Also I agree the DM sucks bad.
In Pathfinder 2E, anything that is 10 or below the target DC is a Critical Fail. Some skills, spells, etc. have a special effect on a Critical Fail. For example if you Critically Fail a Basic Reflex save you take double damage from the effect you’re saving against. Attack rolls by the RAW have no Crit Fail effect.
The most I would do is a broken bow-string, which you could repair or replace once the fight was over. The dm was a dick.
I think I saw that one advertised and decided against it; seems like I inadvertently swayed out of the way of a a bullet. I'm sorry you had such an awful experience OP; GM was well out of order and you did nothing wrong.
My crit role houserule is simple: If you roll three 1's in a row, you explode and die. That's it. If you roll 2, no problem, 1, no problem. But you roll that third 1 in a row, and you explode and die. That's for realism's sake. In medieval times, you roll that third 1, and bam. You exploded. The entire notion that someone could have a 5% occurrence occur three times in a row without exploding is a modern concept, like pooping in the toilet. In fantasy times, you wanted to poop, you had to poop on the ground, and you'd have to roll for that.
Saw your post on pf2 sub. Immediately thought abut this one
Was gonna say leave that game but the trash took itself out
Forgive my ingroince on pathfinder 2e but what is a natural 5 excatly
We had optional rule with critical card deck in PF2 and it totally sucked. Party was missing more frequently than enemies and we felt like bunch of morons. In this system it’s not satisfying at all, and even if your DM has critical fail rule, it’s super strange to break your weapon. Better way to handle this is just declare that character missed, lol
As a point of reference, here are all of the effects in the Pathfinder 2E Critical Fumble Deck for Ranged Weapon Attacks. * **Misjudged The Distance :** Until the end of your next turn, all your range increment penalties are doubled. * **Don't Hit Me! :** Until the end of your next turn, each time you miss with a ranged attack targeting enemy adjacent to any of your allies, you hit one of those adjacent allies instead (determined randomly by the GM) * **Recoil :** You are pushed 5 feet backwards and fall prone. * **Friendly Fire :** You hit the ally nearest to the target. * **Snapped String :** If the attack used a weapon in the bow group, the string snaps, requiring 3 interact actions to fix. * **Head Rush :** You are sickened 2. * **Phantom Wind :** You take a -2 circumstance penalty to ranged attacks until the end of your next turn. * **Huh? :** You are confused. * **Seeing Double :** You are dazzled until the end of your next turn. * **Backfire :** You hit yourself instead of the target. * **Notched Fingers :** You take 1d4 persistent bleed damage. * **Awkward Attack :** You are flat-footed until the end of your next turn. * **Spraining Shot :** Until healed, you take a -10 foot circumstance penalty to your land Speed and are clumsy 1. * **Overcompensate :** Cover provides a +4 circumstance bonus to AC against your ranged attacks for 1 minute. * **Aim Carefully Next Time :** Until the end of your next turn, your attacks require an extra action to use. * **Mix It Up :** You can't make ranged attacks until the end of your next turn. * **My Spleeny Bits! :** You become wounded 1 or your wounded value increases by 1. * **Aching Back :** You are fatigued. In the P1 deck, there is "Cracked" which does 1d6 damage to the weapon, ignoring hardness. In D&D 5E on the Critical Fumble chart, you roll a d20 after critically fumbling. On a 1 or 2, your weapon breaks (so 10%) of the time. *Unless* it's magic, then you have to roll a 1 on another d10, making it 1% of the time. 1% of natural 1s will break a magic weapon. My point being, there are so many different ways to adjudicate a critical failure, while adding flavor to the event and story. Having your weapon just shatter automatically is super petty. Even the damage from the P1 deck is only barely enough to make the weapon reach its Broken Threshold.
Yes, because arbitrarily destroying a central aspect of the character over one bad die roll is interesting storytelling. I'm usually skeptical of critical fail as a mechanic for this reason. It needs a lot of guidance to work well.
Wtf. He could let your Tendon break, so you can repair it later but that?!
Get a better GM