Should we merge the [critical-failure] tag with the [fumbles] tag?

Question

The current tag descriptions:

• critical-failure (20 questions):

  For questions about critical failures (sometimes called "critical fumbles"), a mechanic in various RPGs in which results of actions which not only fail to meet their goal, but also hamper the doer of the action or their allies. Some examples of such mechanics include rolling natural 1s on some d20-based systems, or rolling a Despair in the Star Wars FFG system.

• fumbles (10 questions):

  For questions about "fumbles" (which some systems call "botches"), a term sometimes used to refer to especially bad dice rolls or results that result in an outcome worse than a normal failure.

Here's an example, with two questions:

• Is a fumble on a natural 1 an official rule?
• Is there an official variant rule where a natural 1 ends a full attack action?

Both questions ask about the same outcome (rolling nat. 1 on an attack roll) in the same game system. One is tagged with critical-failure; the other one has the fumbles tag.

Do these tags mean the same? Should they be merged into a single tag?

If they should be merged, which tag should remain as the primary one? And should the other tag be left as a synonym of the primary tag?

Answer 1

Either they should be merged, or their descriptions should be changed to be clearly distinct.

From critical-failure:

a mechanic in various RPGs in which results of actions which not only fail to meet their goal, but also hamper the doer of the action or their allies.

From fumbles:

a term sometimes used to refer to especially bad dice rolls or results that result in an outcome worse than a normal failure.

These are very obviously saying the exact same thing. Both describe failure with consequences worse than a normal failure. We should merge them, or the community needs to work together to reach consensus on how they are distinct and edit one (or both) so that their descriptions are clearly distinct.

Answer 2

No, we should not merge them

Here is why: connotation of the terms.

A critical failure encompasses a wide variety of things going horribly wrong during an RPG. A fumble has a more limited application, in that it implies a certain lack of manual dexterity or ability to hang on to your lazer gun, you magic wand, your {implement or weapon of choice}, and so on.

The consequences of that fumble will vary with game system, but it may not be a critical failure in the narrative sense.

The critical failure's criticality is what makes it a different category of "Oh, no, what just happened?" Examples include ...

1. I tried to hack the code and I didn't just fail, I set off an anomalous (bad) chain of events.
2. I tried to steer the battlewagon in the way of an oncoming assault of enemies and I didn't just miss my mark for location and time, I drove it over a cliff.
3. I tried to thread the needle with an arrow and not only didn't emulate William Tell, I ended up hitting the innocent bystander right between the eyes.

Path forward: don't merge, differentiate better

Let's write better definitions / descriptions for the two terms within the tags to clarify. For example, I think we can leave fumbles alone, and revise critical-failure to this, or something like it:

A mechanic in various RPGs in which results of actions not only fail to meet their goal, but also inflict on the character and / or their allies, and even innocent bystanders, significant negative outcomes - either mechanically, narratively or both.