Automatic success for every class

[Frostmarrow]

Traditionally spellcasters have had plenty of opportunities to "make it so". Without rolling dice spellcasters have been able to dictate outcomes of events by just casting spells. This gives the player a sense of control.

I've read somewhere that spellcasters might have to start rolling dice to cast spells. That'd be pretty sad. Instead I'd like to see all classes getting abilities that are sure fire. The things you can do automatically shouldn't be too powerful but I can get behind a fighter being able to automatically knock 1HD humanoids out with 100% chance of success.

By introducing the notion of automatic success for all classes for a few abilities a lot of design space becomes available which can be of use when trying to define classes such as paladin and ranger. Maybe the ranger can interpret tracks without having to make a search check, for instance, or be able to hit any small object - out of combat - with unerring accuracy.

Help me out with a few extra examples if you agree with me that the confidence that comes from reliable control will add to the RPG experience. (If satisfactory executed).

 

[BobTheNob]

Propose the same thing 5 years ago I would have told you your crazy. Ask me today, and I completely agree. Rolling a dice and probability of success is a good way of quantifying capability, but increasingly I have found that qualifying capability is more conducive to ease and flow of play.

Ultimately though the bigger question is one of playstyle. The above statement is absolutely relative to my growing preference of shifting RP (non-combat) play to a more narrative style, but not everyone is the same on this. I think this question is highly linked to the sort of game people are wanting to play. Alot would argue that there should always be a chance of failure, cause thats the way it is in the real world : I dont agree with this as a design guideline, but I wouldnt go so far as saying they are wrong or dictating how others should play.

 

[Elf Witch]

While I am, not a huge fan of automatic successes especially if they involve opposed roles or involve interacting with NPCs. Magic missile is really the only combat spell that is an automatic success that I can think of off the top of my head. Most require a save or a to hit.

But I do think it can be nice to give other classes something.

Off the top of my head I came up with these.

Rangers should get automatic track for following easy tracks.

Fighters should be able to tell how badly someone is wounded.

Rouge should be able to appraise things.


Barbarians can not get lost in wildness can avoid natural hazards.

Druid should always be able to handle animal

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

They've already started along this path. Rogues don't have to roll on any trained skill with a DC less than 13+skill mod, and anyone with the Reaper feat doesn't need to roll to hit or damage against anything with less than 3hp. Racial immunities mean that elves don't need to roll saves against sleep/charm nor dwarves against poison. I agree this is a good trend, and Mearls has actually specifically said they want to go this way. (His example was that if a wizard can be invisible with no chance of failure, a rogue should be able to stealth in many circumstances with no chance of failure.)

Some other possibilities:
-Rangers could "take a 10" (or 20?) on attack rolls by giving up ability bonus to damage.
-An "uncanny fortitude" feat (or class ability, maybe for barbarians?) could give an automatic success on one saving throw per day.
-Bards could automagically succeed on some social and/or knowledge checks.

 

[Harlock]

I actually agree with this. This is precisely one of the reasons I cite for a vast, exhaustive list of skills being unnecessary. Far too often people rely too heavily on them.

Player - I want to climb a tree near the road to get a better view of what's coming down the other way.

DM - Roll a climb check.

Player - Dude, I've been able to climb a tree since I was 3 years old and I'm a 30 year-old asthmatic data analyst with psoriasis on the palms of my hand! I could climb that tree in your front yard right now! Are you saying my 2 level ranger who spent his life in the woods tracking game to provide meals for his widowed mother can't climb a tree on a calm Spring day in Gygaxia?

DM - There's rules for that. Just roll the die!

Player - (rolling) Seriously? A one? I rolled a one!

DM - (rolling a die) You got part way up but feel 10 feet and took 2 points of damage.

Player - (turning red and reaching for his inhaler) Are you (granny filtered) kidding me?

DM - Dude, it's just two points! Calm down.

Player - Oh, it's just two (granny filtered) points! Big (granny filtered) deal! A drunk common gnome suffering from the plague could have climbed that tree in a sunny (granny filtered) day without a (granny filtered) problem.

Honestly, I'd rather they didn't try and make an exhaustive list of automatic successes for the same reason: some DM somewhere would take the list as holy writ and anything not on it would be subject to a skill roll (or ability check, or save, etc.) I'd much rather see guidelines for DMs that explained in general terms that common and even moderately hard tasks are just everyday occurrences for your heroic adventuring types with average or better ability scores. If Bob the Halfling Barbarian has 3 intelligence, certainly he shouldn't be given a pass on reading a map, but Gniel the Gnome Necromancer with a 11 Int. can be expected to read maps and solve simple riddles.

ETA: It's late. I'm not certain I made any sense or explained my position worth a darn.

 

[Stormonu]

You should only need to roll dice when you want to face the possibility that there is some consequence for failure. Even the 2E PHB told us not to make rolls for NWP's where it wasn't dramatically appropriate.

Climb a tree in a calm spring day? No roll needed.

Climbing that same tree while goblins are hacking at your heels? Roll, please - even if you only fail on a 1.

And for whatever reason, I hate the immunity to sleep and poison for elves and dwarves.

 

[BobTheNob]

If you get a chance, have a look at the MythAndMagic (a 2e retroclone) take on NWP. I actually really liked it. It had automatic success by proficiency level against relative difficulty of task.

So a theif could auto-climb an easy wall, whereas an epic theif could auto-climb just about anything shy of a Legendary Wall. It actually rewards skill growth through auto-success (rather than just probability), and gives a bonus for when your skill doesnt give auto-success.

Keep in mind, the only reason for their to be a roll is because failure is meaningful. If it doesnt, then insisting on rolling is just causing the story to stall. For my part, if I had to choose between keeping the game rolling forward and ensuring that skill rolls are made, I will take keep the story rolling forward every time.

Its all where your emphasis is, are you gamist, simulationist or narativist. We will always get different answers based on where people come at it from.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I'd be really cautious with absolutes in design because there are going to be times where they do not logically make sense. You need a DM lever so that such illogical situations can be easily avoided.

I mentioned on a skill thread a while ago that one option you could go with is breaking tasks into three typical categories of difficulty:

* Basic
* Standard
* Advanced

The greater the training or capacity of the performer, the more tasks they can perform automatically. For example a "Proficient" performer can successfully perform Basic tasks without a check. A "Master" can perform Basic as well as Standard tasks without a check.

Now to avoid the absolutism I mention earlier, you allow a degree of interpretation as to what category a task falls in. To use Stormonu's example, climbing a tree is in the "Basic" task guidelines. However when chased by nasties, the DM is free to now interpret it as a Standard task and thus requiring a check for all but a Master climber.

However, while I like this for small or secondary tasks that the PCs are doing, I'm not a fan of this for primary tasks that the PCs are attempting (such as attacking a target that is actively defending itself). One's mileage is free to vary here so whichever way you go with this should be up to the group I suppose.

I've read somewhere that spellcasters might have to start rolling dice to cast spells. That'd be pretty sad.

Why do you think it sad? I think the automatic casting of spells is one of the primary reasons why the 3.x Wizard was so powerful. If the wizard had to be more careful of when and where they cast their spells, and work around that certain spells were more difficult to cast than others (thus being able to choose level of risk for requisite reward), I think you would go a long way to bringing the wizard power level more in line with their mundane colleagues. And then you can still have cantrips typically being considered a basic task (and thus automatic for a proficient wizard).

In my mind, I'd prefer to see most spellcasting an Advanced task.

Food for thought anyway.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Elf Witch]

So none of you have ever fallen out of tree that you have been climbing since you were five on a sunny bright day and broken your arm?

I like climb checks because once you start climbing there is always a chance of slipping and falling.

But common sense from the DM should always be the case. in using skill checks.

 

[delericho]

Nope, not a fan of automatic success for every class. I'd rather see automatic success removed from the Wizard - spells like fabricate should give a vast bonus to the skill check, and increase the rate of crafting, but they shouldn't just remove the skill. (And repeat for find traps, etc.)

Basically, you don't want the Wizard to have an easy spell that effectively makes another class obselete, nor do you want the Wizard to have an easy spell that allows him to outshine another character in an area that he has invested significant build options (that is, he's taken it as a skill).

However... it's entirely possible that the size of that bonus would make rolling pointless. But that shouldn't be a feature of the spell, it's a matter of advising the DM "don't roll for trivial checks" - that way it applies both to the Wizard with spider climb and to the Ranger who has been climbing forever.