Well, sure.
But since we don't have a specific example, it becomes talking about a vague hypothetical, which doesn't seem constructive.
D&D General 1s and 20s: D&D's Narrative Mechanics
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
Well, sure.
But since we don't have a specific example, it becomes talking about a vague hypothetical, which doesn't seem constructive.
Emerikol
Legend
I was thinking only of players but sure DMs probably do some narrative work as DMs even those campaigns that don't have it for players. Not all by any means but some do.
As an example: Fate, and the Fate Point Economy.
In Fate, the player's ability to succeed is strongly influenced by their having Fate Points to spend. The primary way of the player getting Fate Points is by accepting when the GM Compels them, at which point the GM give the player a point, and adds a complication to the scene, thematic to the PC's Aspect being compelled.
Same game, another mechanic:
In Fate, character death is never delivered by strict mechanical results. When a character cannot absorb stress, and is Taken Out of the scene, the responsible party gets to choose what happens in the narrative. The GM can choose that the character dies. They can also choose that they get captured, left for dead, etc.
Flip side of that, any party in a conflict can choose to Concede, and may thereby choose the nature of their withdrawal from the scene. The villain can always get away, so long as they try before they get Taken Out.
Mannahnin
Scion of Murgen (He/Him)
It's become increasingly common as a meme over the past decade or so, at least.
Despite D&D in the past 25 years having no core fumble rules (even though critical hits are official in every WotC edition), and skill checks at no point having had either fumble or critical rules, players increasingly talk about them and tell stories about natural 1s and 20s being occasions for spectacular occurrences. Both on attacks and skill checks.
I think it's clear that a lot of people (how many is unquantifiable, but again, just from observations of geek talk on the internet, it seems increasingly common) generalize the "1s always fail and 20s are a crit" rule for attacks to skill checks.
I suspect that the streaming games which are more rules-loose reinforce this a bit, as it seems like an obvious trigger for improv. Matt Mercer's "How do you want to do this?" doesn't rise to the level of house rule, because the monster's dead anyway and he was just letting the player take the reins to narrate as color for feel-good moment of triumph, but I think folks have built on that example (as at least one influence) and carried it further.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
Which is fine as long as they also suggest or request a bigger than usual failure on a Nat 1.
payn
Glory to Marik
payn
Glory to Marik
Not the same thing. In PF2 the degrees have result associated with them in the rule book.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
"In the rule book" is what I meant by baked in.
It (perhaps over-)formalizes the sort of sliding-scale results some of us have been informally using for years if not decades.
payn
Glory to Marik
They are not narrative mechanics.
