>Roll a nat 1>DM spends a considerable amount of time deconstructing your whole character and makes you do something ridiculous and stupid
>>Do something.>>DM spends the whole session making that choice the worst thing imaginable.
>>76924870>Eventually gets to a point where you laugh>Play into it a little>Group settles back down>DM makes it up to you in XP and later triumphs getting attention
>>76924870Negative consequences should be limited in scope to the triggering action. If your dm forces you to act out of character for le wacky hijinks, that is a bad dm.
>>76925097There are situations that call for it. Like failing a resist check on a compell or similar. Rare, but they happen
>BRO something happened that had only a 5% PROBABILITY haha cant wait till reddit hears about this EPIC RANDOM THING haha
>Try to pick a lock>Roll a nat 1>As you fumble with your tools, with your ear next to the door, you slip and ram the lockpick into your eardrum with violent force
>nat 1 or 20 affecting anything except attacksFucking retarded redditor NIGGERS
>go for a fist bump>nat 1>high five
>>76924870>sneaking into a warehouse, bop guard on the head with a blackjack to knock him out>nat 20>cave his skull in killing him instantly, break the weapon, and make noise alerting everyone within 200 yards
>character is supposed to be a scary powerhouse type barbarian>use strength any chance I get>roll to break down a simple wooden door>nat 1>"you almost dislocate your shoulder, this door is beyond you">small halfling cleric tries and gets it first try>immersion broken>no longer feel like a scary brawler
>Playing a Pathfinder game>Go to open a door>Roll a nat 1>Entire table erupts in jeers and laughter>GM describes how my pc makes out with the door
>>76924870>not taking lucky feat
I always try to play of crit fails as bad luck / happenstance. Like you get a 1 on that doorpick rule so someone comes through it right as the character takes a knee to work.
>>76924870My DM does stupid stuff like that so I only ever read out my rolls following the addition of modifiers to avoid it.
>>76924870>Every time I would roll a nat 1 in combat, my DM would make me lose my sword, even when it doesn't make sense>Bought a locked gauntlet>He keeps forgetting I have it until he tries to disarm me again>Never disarmed since
>GM tells you after the campaign that fighting the boss instead of trying to reason with them triggered the 'bad end'
>>76924870I don't care what you say, the 20 with a confirmation 20 being an instant-kill and the 1 confirmation 1 instant death makes a campaign extra spicy. When your antagonist introduces themselves by thrusting his fist through your healer's chest you know business is being meant.
>>76926436>5% chance to fuck up a pick lock skillUnless you allow for a nat 20 to result in an auto success, this is a dumb rule. Just use the actual result rolled like the rules tell you to. Why can't people do this?
>>76925576I would have made it work, and also you scrambled his brain a bit so now he has a gambling addiction
>>76927473Not that anon but, I like to run natural 1's or 20's as something that changes what occurs after the outcome, rather than the outcome itself.A 1 on a lockpicking means it's noisy or takes extra time.A 1 on smashing a door means it takes an extra shove or two, and the creatures on the other side have time to prepare.Stuff like that.
>>76924870>deconstructing your characterThat seems like a bit much I just say, "You nick yourself loading the arrow for 1d4 damage" or whateverAnd I generally try to make 20s auto successes
>>76925576>>76927541I would have said he was born with a soft spot in his skull that never healed right, so he gets a full on severe concussion that puts him into a coma for hours or days instead of the usual few minutes.
>>76926000>>roll to break down a simple wooden door>>nat 1>"You hit the door so hard it swings open, bounces off the hinges and slams shut back in your face.">"Oh, and you startled a few people on the other side."
>>76927572That seems reasonable.
>>76927572I like this, but something like smashing a door, I would alter the scenario around it for something they couldn't see. Like the strength check failed because the door was barricaded with furniture behind it or something.
>>76927651>Dwarf Barbarian rolls Natural 20 to break down door>It flies off the hinges and kills the NPC townfolk behind itLiterally two sessions ago.
>>76927657In that case, you can't then have >>76926000 happen and not break suspension of disbelief. Maybe if the halfling was able to realize that there's shit blocking the other side while still failing to bust down the door.
>>76924870>Rolling a Nat 1>Doing anything more than just missing wildly or making a mistake on your skill checkDMs who do more are just sadistic and/or running a loony toons campaign.
>>76926000You just dislodged it enough for the weak halfling to push it down.
"critical failure is only for combat"
>>76927679the DM doing scenario A is not the same type who would allow scenario B, so further rolls would probably not work
>>76927657Stuff like that is terrific and prevents the characters from attempting for Strength checks as you can justify why future checks fail. Also doesn't break the player's view of their character and immersion in general.DMs who are as bland as to describe every miss as "you just shoot the other way lol!!!" and bring that to every skillcheck are just poor.
>>76928922>DMs who are as bland as to describe every miss as "you just shoot the other way lol!!!"I much prefer failed attacks to be not only the fault of a clumsy attacker. It works so much better for building a sense of competent opposition and personal competence if you describe it like "glancing blow to the armor" or "enemy parried /dodged the attack". When playing classic d20 systems with AC our gm usually handles it by having a miss by 10 or more described as a flat miss by the attacker, a miss by 5-10 beeing a parry or dodge by the enemy and a miss by less than 5 beeing a hit that wasn't solid enough to overcome the armor of the target. It also gives you a hint about how tough and competent enemy is, without meta gaming the exact AC.
>>76924870>DM rolls a 1>DM spends whole session explaining how a minor action has a domino effect causing the BBEG to die
Rolls determine luck, not skill##### Scenario>Jacob, an experienced longhunter with a total of a 9 dice for survival checks, attempts to track a wounded deer. In a stroke of bad luck, his player rolls no successes.##### What not to do as a DMThe DM describes how an experienced hunter bumbles about, unable to track a wounded animal leaving a trail of blood in a situation the character should have been in his element. Jacob's player feels like his character's skill were rendered irrelevant by luck and suddenly he is playing as a bumbling imposter. ##### What to doThe player described how Jacob tracks the blood to a nearby stream. Only to lose the trail on the banks. The creature must have been washed away. A stroke of bad luck can happen to a hunter of any skill. An even more experienced tracker might have noticed broken branches across the river indicating that the deer made it across, but a lesser one would have not even tracked the deer this far. Jacob's player might curse his rotten luck, but he does not feel that his character's skills have been ignored or invalidated. ##### In summaryLet the outcome of the roll retroactively affect how difficult the challenge was. The lower the rate of successes per dice, the more unexpected challenges and unfortunate circumstances led to the failed outcome. The skill of the character should not be pulled into question by a failed roll if they used many dice. This also applies on a lower than expected amount of successes in a high dice roll.
>>76927676Nat 20 should be the best possible outcome, not the most extreme. Unless everyone thinks it's more fun that way of course.
#### A second attempt? ##### Scenario >Adam, a rake looking for redemption, is picking a lock using 8 dice. Sadly, he achieves zero successes. The DM described that he does not succeed in picking the lock. Adam's player looks up and states: "Well, then I try again." ##### Problem It is obvious that we cannot let Adam simply try the challenge again until he succeeds, or his success would be guaranteed. Nor can we let others try the same lock without penalty,. ##### Solution A: Failure Breaks things Failing the lock pick attempt simply breaks the lock in the attempt. This effectively prevents a retry and changes the scenario based on the failure, allowing the scene to move forward. But we cannot use this solution in every scenario. The player might attempt to light a fire using survival. Failure here probably would not destroy his wood or his tools. ##### Solution B: Failure costs time Adam spent 10 minutes attempting to pick the lock. Now he has to spend another 10 minutes on his second attempt while his allies desperately try to keep the night's watchmen distracted. This can be applied to many scenarios, though there may still be scenarios where time is abundant and yet continuous retrying would not reasonably result in success. ##### Solution C: Failure determines difficulty As described earlier, the failure of an experienced lockpick to open the lock may retroactively indicate that this is an exceptionally difficult lock to pick. In fact, the failure has determined that this lock is simply above the skill of Adam and trying again would result in an automatic failure. With 8 dice now locked into failures, any attempt with less skill would also fail. But any new attempt with a higher dice pool, whether Adam has brought some lockpicking tools or a more experienced locksmith, may still be attempted. But only with the dice not "locked". That is to say, a new attempt with 10 dice may only roll the additional 2 dice.
>>76925089Tsungposter is the best thingt tha hapened to teegee in a while
>>76925089This never happens in practice though.
>>76930938Solution C2: retries are not allowed until a meaningful change in circumstances. Your character has done their best with what they have available. New gear, a different skill, knowledge (and a skill roll) from an ally or research into the specific obstacle (like looking at the key from a distance).
>>76931000For sure, anon. Especially for d20 systems, since this was written for a dice pool system. Players might try to get a little tricky, though. Like attempting it without and with gear for two attempts, but that's just something everyone on the table should agree is bad manners.
>>76931030Christ, I've never had a player pull that on me but I'd fucking crucify them if they did. Good call, anon.
>>76924870This reminds me of an early trend in my gaming career. Player's would usually retire/kill off character's that lost their first combat, had consistently bad roles in the first session, or who made a notably bad decision. It was so disadvantageous to be the typecast as ineffectual that it was almost always better to just play a new character.The other effect of this is that most character's didn't get a backstory, defined personality, and often not even a last name for two or three sessions.
>>76926000Shit like this is why I'm considering adopting the genesys dice system for skill checks in 5e.
>>76930938This is really interesting. I've def done B on a few occasions, but I've never considered A and C. C seems most interesting to me, having a moving DC for a given lock.
>>76925576I hate it when dm's do this. A nat 20 should be they go down silently without making a single noise. It should represent the perfect execution of your intent.
>>76924870Stop playing with shit GMs
>goofing off during travel time>get in literal pissing contest>nat 1>DM tells me my character might have a UTI:(
>>76935568Ok I usually don't like this sort of thing buy this one is really funny
>>76927365>you and the villain have each killed hundreds already
>>76936632>You & I are not so different!
>>76935568I'm sorry to hear that, Anon :(
>>76924870>Spend multiple rounds setting up complex tactic>DM says, "no, I don't like that so it doesn't work">Character is retroactively retarded, having spent multiple rounds setting up nothing for no reason
>>76936687This may be true for the average DnD party, though.
>>76924870>toss some oil at a monster>Nat One>DM describes me purposefully rubbing it all over me Fucking nigger, I left the table.
>>76936873I'm sure there been plenty of campaigns where the "big bad" is actually a force for good and the main party are just a bunch of shits who keep making the world worse with their decisions. I can imagine it being pretty kino if handled well
>>76924870That's sort of cruel. When my players get natural ones I have them roll again to see how badly they failed. If that roll is not so bad there isn't any serious consequence to their failure, it's just treated as no different than if they missed the check or attack roll or whatever as normal. if the second roll is still bad I might say they drop their weapon, or broke the toll they were using, or accidentally hit the wrong target, or something like that. Because my group loves Rogues so much, I sometimes like to say that when they fail Stealth or Hide rolls, somebody farted and that gave away their position. because a little bit of humor helps that sort of thing.
>>76924870There is nothing wrong with an environmentally-contextual extra penalty, even experienced fighters stumble often in the middle of conflict. I do agree with refraining from narratively painting them as particularly buffoonish though, unless the action is stupid enough to warrant such in the first place.
>>76930938What about limited resources? In this case, Adam has limited lock picks. He can try again but he only has 3 more and they may be hard to replace. Works for the fire in the woods: you can keep trying but you’ll run out of matches eventually and you don’t know how long they may need to last you.
>>76937283It's a possibility but in that case you're playing a resource management game. Enough lockpicks guarantee success, so the resources spent have to be rare and few or you might as well roll for how many you spend on a guaranteed success.
>tfw all my characters end up exceedingly incompetent because I have shit-tier luck IRL and I fucking hate itI just want to play somebody who knows what the fuck they're doing, I'm tired of the fucking DM constantly making my guy a joke because I roll like 5 1's in a fucking row. God I hate it I either roll 5 1's or 5 20's with little to no in-between it's the worst.Also >other player rolls a 1 in combat>DM makes his attack hit one of the other party members (usually me because he usually rolls for it) AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
>>76926000You tried to push it open. The halfling saw which way it swung and simply pulled it open, you thick twat.
>>76927473>Just use the actual result rolled like the rules tell you to. Why can't people do this?They don't read the rules
>>76927572Why do you like to fuck over players beyond what the rules say?
>>76927651>>76928922>>76930886>>76938553So much fucking player butthurt. You've never fumbled something you're good at? Do you watch sports on TV and scream anytime someone misses a catch>HOW COULD YOU DO THIS YOU ARE PROFESSIONAL STATTED FOR THIS MY IMMERSION IN REALITY IS BREAKINGfucking mongoloids
>>76924870>Roll a nat 1>"Ok, that failed">game carries on like normal
>>76925500>Go for a hive five with your bro>nat 1>You slowly grab his hand and interlock your fingers with his.
>>76924870>Goliath Barbarian rolls nat 1>Instantly beans paladin in the head with her hand axe and knocks him the fuck outWhat I hate is when DMs have nat 1's instantly hit your teammates. There should definitely be a Dex saving throw there to dodge a wild swing/stray arrow.
>>76945166>You slowly grab his hand and interlock your fingers with his.>Try to say, "No homo.">nat 1>You gaze into his eyes as his cheeks redden.
>>76924870>be level 20 warrior>literal God>have traversed multiple realities >5% chance of slipping on a banana any time I do anything at all.Haha DnD5e is a fun game haha d20 is so good and fun
>>76925221>haha BRO I’m creating le EPIC REDDIT STRAWMAN, my boys (we call each other fa/tg/uys) are going to love this lol put me in the screencap
>>76945332Not to defend your DM, but do the enemies get a dex save to dodge any attack coming at them?
>>76925046You may be joking, anon, but i genuinely had GM like that. Good thing i'm not playing with that cunt anymore.
>encounter kobolds>Roll for perception to see what's going on>8 with no bonus>You see some small humanoid creatures scurrying through a crashed cart>Ask if I know what they are >Roll for History>Nat 1>Even though the minis are already there, "You have no idea what that is">Use divine sense and slaughter them anyway
>>76925576That's what a Messy Critical is in Vampire The Masquerade 5e does but in Games like D&D that should have let you execute your action flawlessly
>>76946589Sort of but the player does it, it's called an attack roll.
>>76938420Maybe it's time to accept that defeating static, unguarded, non magical locks is a trivial task for anyone with the tools and even rudimentary knowledge of how to use them. Most locks, even those in high security areas, are part of a matrix of security elements (from guards to glyphs to security cameras) and by themselves will succumb to even brute force raking techniques in minutes. It's time for ttrpgs to stop fetishizing the lockpick test and for writers to actually write their locations with some thought and detail. There are plenty of """tests""" you could roll to fill time, or you can stop worrying about someone who is literally designed to defeat locks doing so trivially, or a fire starting kit actually starting a fire. Every system has trivial actions, and any good system has something like taking a 20. Worry less about making dumb shit dramatic and instead worry about representing the players' specializations, decisions, and approach as parts of a system of complexities that will deliver them to the challenges and confrontations that actually have meaning, stakes, or are maybe fucking entertaining.Sorry halfling, you failed to perform a mechanical skill and, as Schrodinger's tumblers dictate, the lock is now impossibly hard. Fucking hell.
>>76949163>seething this hard over the choice of example> 3 detailed solution suggestions with flaws vs vague glittering statement
>>76942333Michael Jordan has never slipped on a banana peel and shit himself.
>>76947225This. Based. Saved.
>Be a slayer of hundreds of horrible monsters, while covered in powerful artifacts.>Always have a 1 in 20 chance to fuck up and slice your own balls off.
>>76949327> 20th level fighter is able to make 4 attacks> chance to drop his weapon or other """hilarious""" results rises to to 1 in 5 per turn as the fighter gets better at fighting.
>>7694936422.6% is the actual chance
>>76942333Two of the posts you're replying to could be seen as player butthurt, two can't in any way. One's just very reasonable advice for how to handle critical failures as a GM. Also I don't fumble things I'm good at 5% of the time, especially not with comedic or catastrophic consequences.
>>76949416compared to d6 dice pool system with critical failures on all 1s.> 1 dice has 16.66% of a critical failure> 10 dice has 0.965% chance of a critical failure> 15 dice has 0.087% chance of critical failureDice pool wins again
>>76949486Dice pools are pretty great, yeah.
>>76948472I mean you could of just never seen one before, or heard of them but weren't able to put two and two together at that time. This one is the most reasonable
>>76925576That's fucking bullshit and I'm a dm
>>76926406Roll to open door. Was it at least locked jew friend
>>76924870It's a critical fail for a reason
>>76950133The first part is actually in line with certain rulesets regarding excessive damage. 5e, as an example, results in an instant death if the damage exceeds reducing you to 0 by your hit point maximum.Its a rules that is best used only when appropriate, but it doesn't, to my knowledge, have any caveats regarding non lethal attacks or circumstances.
>>76935568As nat 1 descriptions go, that's a pretty good one.Hopefully you can find a cleric to help you with that
>>76927398>Time for an awesome combat encounter> Except you healbitch. reroll.
>>76949281https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_BucknerBill Buckner hit .289 over his career, was a NL Batting Champion and All Star, and he's most remembered for fumbling a ground ball rolling through his legsA nat 1 shouldn't make banana peels appear out of nowhere but "the trained professional stumbles at a crucial juncture" is something that happens all the time
>>76965891I mean sure it does happen even to professionals but 5% whenever you do anything to fumble at that tier is just ridiculous. Maybe it'd be better with a confirmation roll, that'd bring it down to... what a 0.25% chance to fail epicly?
>>76930983step 1: get out of hell
>>76936792The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry.
>>76965891>A nat 1 shouldn't make banana peels appear out of nowhere but "the trained professional stumbles at a crucial juncture" is something that happens all the timeYou're only proving the opposite. If it happened all the time, no-one would be remembered because it happened to them once.
>play d100 game>you have a woefully tiny selection of trained skills and any skill you aren't trained in you might as well be a fucking retard in requiring justifying rolling 4-5 times to maybe get through itI thought I'd enjoy CoC too
>>76925489>I try to persuade the enemy they're lighter then air>NATTY TWENNY>THEY FUCKING FLOAT INTO SPACE AND DIE! I WIN MOMMY!
>>76946589Thats different though. I shouldnt have to reroll a brand new character just because the Wizard accidentally rolled the funni number and instantly shoved his finger of death up my ass with no possibility of avoiding it or reducing the damage, and I think the same standard should apply to enemies.Something like this:>Paladin crit fails>overshoots the attack and sends a sword hurdling towards me>roll dex save vs Paladin's strength mod + 8 + prof>fail the dex save and get knocked into DSTIs way more fair than this:>Paladin roll funny number>hehe lol ok sorcerer ur fucking dead get fucked lol ik its the first dungeon and you spent 100 bucks on that awesome character art and all but u know how it b the funni number means u die lol!
>>76968359If you're a sorcerer in your first dungeon funni number would probably kill you from the damage alone anyways
>>76949484Yeah, I used to have a job cutting up vegetable. I would do them crazy fast and juggle the knives occasionally for some fun. I did this for seven years and only cut my fingers a couple times. If each time I cut up a vegetable it was a DnD action, I would be rolling hundreds of times per day, never rolling a one. Almost always rolling 15+.
>build my character to be extremely good at one particular thing.>Roll nat 1>DM now decides I am a bumbling retard at the thing my character is a master at.
>>76926000Why am I making the 18 strength barb roll to smash the door at all?
>>76968141You're keeper isnt running the game right if this is the case.
>>76925089>>76930983Tsungposters shouldn't deny the existence of bad experiences. They should just present a glass half full perspective and some non-condescending advice on how to build a more friendly atmosphere in the group.'The dm doesn't always see the scene the same way you do, but I hope most of the times you do have fun together building an adventure. It's no good to stay around if you're not having fun. I too have played with dm's that make a failure seem particularly humiliating. If I think it goes a bit too far I usually play into a bit to highlight the comical nature it's getting. Perhaps take some initiative describing your own character's slip ups if the dm doesn't mind.'
I had a DM that unironically deconstructed all our characters after we'd succeeded...Also rival society that was a communist utopia. I know that sounds like bait but I swear that that retarded shit really happened. I don't hang out with that guy anymore. Last I heard he was talking about eugenics and disabled people... basically he was crazy.
>>76969303Anons in this thread are right, the d20 roll is to determine chance. A character with a high history skill bonus rolls a 1 and fails a DC. That character isn't suddenly illiterate, uncultured or less knowledgeable in general, but through the circumstances of their untold life just never happened to have learned much on this specific topic. The character with a negative modifier rolls a 20 and succeeds. They aren't suddenly a savant, it's just that they happened upon the relevant information. Maybe they grabbed a random book in a shop when bored and read it until they fell asleep, maybe their uncle once regaled them about the tale, or maybe they remember details of an obscure nursery rhyme that just happened to spell out the information.
>>76925467>>76971348Why wouldn't you?RIP AND TEAR
>>76927315Your sword breaks at the hilt.
>>76965891Did Bill Buckner lose the grip on his bat and sent it flying to hit the catcher in the face once in every 20 pitches?
>>76942333Hey, some of us like to coach from the couch.
Have you people tried playing with 3d6 instead of 1d20?
>>76936792>>DM says, "no, I don't like that so it doesn't work"Thats where you fucked upDont Tell GM your plans
>>76965891is that a 5% chance across all of human history retard? prove it mathematically or your argument has no goddamn weight.
>>76936687>>You & I are not so different!I will literally not use a coaster if a DM ever pulls this shit on me.
>>76971580Unless its a situation where failure to break down the door is interesting, he just breaks down the door. Why wouldnt I just let him do it?
>>76971815it would just change to >Roll a nat 3
>>76976743At least the chance of that happening is 2.15% vs 5%.