Critical Fumbles

There is one crucial element missing from the Crit Fumble debate and that is the purpose of an RPG. A Roleplaying game is not a board game. People always forget that many of the rules and mechanisms that govern RPGs descended from boardgames and still possess several of the worst traits, one of which is random generation. The purpose of a board game is exactly opposite of an RPG. In a board game players are supposed to be eliminated because they're competing. In an RPG players are supposed to work together and grow, both as players and characters (Gygax, Roleplaying Mastery). When we look at the objectives they appear diametrically opposed:
* Board Games seek to eliminate players, removing them from the game and playing session. They use random elements to hinder players individually and create an uneven playing field. Board games are designed to eliminate players early on. This increases competition and decreases game time allowing more games to be played.
* RPGs are designed to keep players returning at the table. RPGs often include rules that allow players to act out of turn, ensuring that players always have an option to keep playing. RPGs level the playing field among players granting each equal access to and representation within the game. All of these factors seek to improve cooperation rather than competition.

There are no real rivals among players in an RPG as character elimination will not end a game with a clear winner. Eliminating a character could end an entire campaign. Given the nature of a Fumble, characters dying because they roll too many dice is a board game strategy. It eliminates/stifles players in the same fashion as drawing a card and going to directly to Jail would.

When we look at early versions of RPGs we see a board game trend:
1) Rolling for stats and hitpoints which created the deadman walking.
2) Rolling for race and class.
3) Rolling for survival (Traveler and Twilight 2000 I'm looking at you).
4) Rolling for background

All of these are board game mechanisms. Rolling characters is like grabbing a character card in Descent (tm). It's a random character. In many ways it's like a pregen character. You have no control over the creation of a character you many be playing for the next year or two. How many DMs would roll to determine which modules they'd use? How many gaming groups would roll to determine which game they will purchase and play for the next 4 years? Each makes about as much sense.

Simply put, board game strategies are destructive to RPGs. They're "exciting" like landing in the Molasses Swamp in Candyland. But unlike Candyland, no child is spending time writing about the backstory behind Redpeg and why they're adventuring with Greenpeg and Bluepeg in a dangerous realm of sweets.