Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Antoine" data-source="post: 1224509" data-attributes="member: 13307">1. Skills : critical failure on a 1 or success on a 20 always seemed strange to me in a system that allows taking 10 or 20. Also, do you wan't a acrobat with a, say, +12 climb bonus to fall when climbing a "surface to steep to walk upon" , DC 0 ? I would not. So IMC, I excluded critical success/failure from skill rolls. Experts can rely on their skill. Another argument would be that when a kobold hits an aware AC 40 16th level fighter, apart from being lucky in initiative, fighting a guy without a pole arm, rolling a natural 20, and being foolhardy enough to try and attack him, he'd still would carve 2 to 4 HP out of a 100 and some total. Let's say almost nothing. If the 16th level fighter misses the kobold, he'll have 3 more chances to split the little fellow in halfs before it even moves anyway. And I don't mind giving anybody a 1/8000 chance for a no-more-than-6-seconds-longer life in this wonderful world.If you allow a Str 6 gnome 1st level bard to climb ANYTHING 10' high by rolling 20 on his d20, including a slippery metal wall in total darkness, knowing the only risk in he fails is no damage at all, it's allowing more than taking 20 on a climb check, which is not even legal. Unbalancing, and introducing recurrent achievement of impossible tasks just for the sake or rolling a die.2. For spell resistance, I would never ever allow such thing as critical success or failure. It's just a matter of confronting powers, and the d20 is enough already for randomness.Saves, on the other hand call for natural 1 or 20 : it mostly enhances the unpredictable character of magic, or of a chain of events. After all, if a 1st level Con 10 mage rolls 20 on a save when drinking a DC 30 poison, is he fighting the poison off or luckily not drinking enough ? (The same applies for the depth of a wound involving injury type poisons, an so on…). If the attack was decisive enough to affect the characters no matter what, it wouldn't allow a saving throw : for instance, when falling 100 ft. from a flying mount, you don't roll a save, you pray for some magic trick or take 20d6 damage (and then only, if still alive, presumably roll a save for massive damage). Rolling for a save is inherently admiting a saving/missing chance exists. Hence the natural 1/20 option.Just my thoughts…</blockquote>

Verification