Topic: Spell fumble/failure

[Malim]

The base attack table and the bolt/ball tables in Spell law has an F in the lower part of the table.
Is this meant as a FUMBLE or just that the spell fails ?
A fumble on 24 modified is still pretty high tbh.
And does that mean that you also use open ended low end on those tables and maybe even on weapon tables?

[tbigness]

The F means Fumble on the spell attack table. So you will roll on the Fumble chart for Elemental Spells.

[Hurin]

I never realized the numbers were so high; on the bolt tables, you can fumble on a modified 20. That seems pretty rough.

[tbigness]

More of a failure than fumble. As most spells, elemental bolts are more spell than weapon and have a better chance of failing just like normal spells.

[Hurin]

Right, point taken: more of a failure than a fumble. Still kind of harsh though.

[pastorwelby]

As GM, if there is a spell failure or fumble, depending on how low the roll is, it can be a true fumble which can be devastating. If it's a borderline roll, within say 10 or so, it could result it a random result. Like ricocheting a bolt could either be comical or nasty; up to the GM's discretion. Just my two cents, a year later.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[arakish]

I have always used the roll of UM01-05 to mean a Spell Fumble.  Otherwise, I used the "F" to mean Spell Failure.

I never realized the numbers were so high; on the bolt tables, you can fumble on a modified 20. That seems pretty rough.

Right, point taken: more of a failure than a fumble. Still kind of harsh though.

And I NEVER liked this fact.  Thus, during one RPG session, we stopped RPGing and discussed this.  Then I proposed the idea as above.  Everyone loved it and I have been using it ever since.

As GM, if there is a spell failure or fumble, depending on how low the roll is, it can be a true fumble which can be devastating. If it's a borderline roll, within say 10 or so, it could result it a random result. Like ricocheting a bolt could either be comical or nasty; up to the GM's discretion. Just my two cents, a year later.

And that could be comical or nasty.  Once had a player "F" on his spell roll.  It ended up bringing the ceiling down on everyone.  Then they had to try and dig themselves out before the enemy...

rmfr

[Ravenheart]

It beats me that you can Fumble your Firebolt from attacking table with UM roll above 5. And it's easy: Just attack a foe 50' away who has wall shield and some additional DB then roll a low attack roll. This is in my opinion just bad aiming or too protected enemy (or both), not a fumble. Why then shooting with a bow on that same enemy cannot yield a fumble? 

[Lorgalis]

01-02 UM is always failure. For spells. There is no spell fumble table. It's called spell failure.
If you cast spells against someone with much protection, the spell is more likely to fail, not to miss, cause the elemental bolts are also more likely to hit.
The heavy protection/metal is interfering with the essence and that's why you will fail more easily. Similar to trying to cast essence bolts while wearing armor.
Find your own explanation regarding the range issue. Mine is that if you try to get your shock bolt to hit a target beyond 50' you have to do something similar to overcasting. It's possible but more risky. If you don't like it, just treat all F's except 01-02 as a miss.