• psud@aussie.zoneEnglish
    61·
    24 days ago

    When you’re +12 to stealth a 1 isn’t that critical

      • psud@aussie.zoneEnglish
        104·
        23 days ago

        Yeah and free parking jackpots break monopoly by making the game run for hours

        Failed skill checks on 1 break d&d by making skilled people fail regularly just as less skilled people do. I also play in the Palladium system where skill checks are on percentile dice and also don’t fail on a minimum roll

        One of the things I don’t like about BG3 is that the rogue with godlike sneak can’t get far with greater invisibility because everything they touch gives a 1/20 chance of being heard

        When I roll a d&d skill I call out the total. A 1 might be 6 or 10. I’m not participating in rewriting the basic rules of the game

        • squaresinger@lemmy.world
          4·
          23 days ago

          If you can’t fail a skill check, there should be no roll. Same as most DMs won’t make you do a skill check for “I sit down on a chair”.

          Rolling dice implies that there’s a chance of failure.

          Failed skill checks on 1 break d&d by making skilled people fail regularly just as less skilled people do.

          Nope. 1/20 is much less regular than 5/20 or even 19/20. More skill doesn’t mean it always works, only that your chances are higher. And if you are skilled enough that it always works, then there should be no roll.

          • psud@aussie.zoneEnglish
            3·
            22 days ago

            Nope. 1/20 is much less regular than 5/20 or even 19/20.

            What do you mean here? Any roll is as likely as any other

            Do you mean 2-20 is more likely than rolling a 1? Of course it is, but an invisible rogue sneaking at +15 shouldn’t be seen by the monster who’s -4 to spot 1 in 20 events, or if 20s are also special, 1 in 10 events (one for the rogue getting a 1, one for monster getting a 20)

            • squaresinger@lemmy.world
              3·
              22 days ago

              In that case, and I keep repeating myself: don’t roll.

              Don’t roll for things that can’t fail.

            • Kichae@wanderingadventure.party
              1·
              22 days ago

              They’re talking the probability of failure, not the specific number on the die. If your skill bonus meets the DC, you have a 1/20 chance of failing, assuming a natural one equates to an auto-fail. If your bonus doesn’t meet the DC, you have a higher chance of failing.

          • psud@aussie.zoneEnglish
            2·
            22 days ago

            Isn’t that okay for easy stuff? Skilled characters also see harder challenges, disarming a dc20 trap for example

            Why should they fail to tie a simple knot on a +5, dc5 use rope check 1 in 20 times?

            • squaresinger@lemmy.world
              1·
              22 days ago

              Isn’t that right foot easy stuff?

              Sorry, don’t know if I understand what you mean with that.

              Why should they fail to tie a simple knot on a +5, dc5 use rope check 1 in 20 times?

              Why should they roll for something as simple as tieing a simple knot? I don’t make my players roll whether they manage to tie their shoes either.

              • psud@aussie.zoneEnglish
                1·
                22 days ago

                A simple knot like the bowline you’d tie around a sturdy tree before descending by rope into a hole

                That’s exactly the sort of thing a DM would set as DC10

                • squaresinger@lemmy.world
                  2·
                  22 days ago

                  If your skill level would guarantee a win if you ignore the concept of a natural 1 auto-failing, then there should be no roll.

        • “Expensive Parking”

          Instead of just being a boring space that does nothing, and contrast to it being like winning a lotto, now landing on the space requires payment to the bank of $250.

        • That’s a better way to put it. It’s fun to have critical failures as much as critical successes. Especially when it’s something that the character making the check on should easily handle.

          “While normally, this lock would pose no challenge for you, in your confidence you did not notice the pebble on the floor, which causes you to trip and break your lock picking tools when you fall on top of them.”

          • untorquer@lemmy.world
            5·
            24 days ago

            Yessss!!!

            In your haste to investigate the desk you fling open the desk’s drawer to find it empty except a small stain of blood. Upon further inspection you notice a dagger shaped letter opener protruding from your thigh. The blood stain is related. You take one piercing damage.

          • squaresinger@lemmy.world
            3·
            23 days ago

            If the action is something that can never fail, there shouldn’t be a skill check.

            You don’t roll dice on sitting down at a table, so if you are a perfect lock picker who always succeeds at picking locks, no dice should be thrown.

            The Lockpicking Lawyer doesn’t play with dice either.

      • Carrot@lemmy.today
        31·
        24 days ago

        Yeah, Nat 1 is miraculous failure, Nat 20 is miraculous success in all games I’ve played

        • psud@aussie.zoneEnglish
          2·
          22 days ago

          That’s the only way I’m willing to house rule this. If 1 fails regardless, 20 succeeds regardless

          But I prefer to call things easy or impossible

      • psud@aussie.zoneEnglish
        1·
        22 days ago

        If the sneaking person rolls a 13 +12, yeah it would be DC25 to see them. If they rolled a 1 the DC would be 13

        • Kichae@wanderingadventure.party
          2·
          22 days ago

          You know how it’s “RPGMemes” and not “D&D 5e Memes”? You’re making assumptions about where the joke is rooted.