Do natural 1's instantly mean a failed save?

[Kai Lord]

Why thanks...just another example of why reading your posts is generally a waste of my time.

I've been trying to keep this polite and let it drop, a moderator also suggested the same thing. I'd suggest you do that to.

Quote me telling you how to play your game or making cracks at your attitude or posting style. Yeah, that's what I thought. Now, if you don't mind, I was still enjoying your demand that I house rule my campaigns to have uniform consistency (when not even the official rules do that) in the same sentence you lament the notion that anyone would presume to tell someone else how to play.

When that loses its warm fuzziness, then, and only then, will I move on to your post where you state that reading my posts is a waste of time one sentence before stating you want to keep things polite. Some things just deserve to be savored.

 

[IceBear]

Well, there are several places in this thread where you placed some emphasis on words to show exactly how you felt about the person. You're snide remarks about how you wanted to play a monk or a deep woods sniper in my campaign obviously reveals that you think my campaign style is obviously flawed because you would rule the world in that campaign.

And I WAS keeping it polite until that post. You were the one that placed the innuendo in your post that my campaign was poor compared to yours.


And yes, in general, I've never really read a postive posting from you so in general none of your posts have ever contributed anything to me understanding the rules any better than before, so thus, a waste of my time

Lastly, I'm sorry if you took it as me DEMANDING that you be consistent. Never meant that. Your campaign - do what you want. I was SUGGESTING (much different thing) that you keep things consistent to avoid issues.

I've been trying to say that I DO agree with you if you wanted to get rid of autosuccess or autofailures for quite some time, just that it wasn't for me. Is that not enough for you?

IceBear

 

[Kai Lord]

Well, there are several places in this thread where you placed some emphasis on words to show exactly how you felt about the person. You're snide remarks about how you wanted to play a monk or a deep woods sniper in my campaign obviously reveals that you think my campaign style is obviously flawed because you would rule the world in that campaign.

Huh? That was a tongue-in-cheek poke at the silly notion that we would ever have to agree on how to play the game. You actually thought I wanted to bring a Deepwood Sniping Monk into your campaign?

And I WAS keeping it polite until that post. You were the one that placed the innuendo in your post that my campaign was poor compared to yours.

Okay, let's let bygones be bygones. Do you want to join my next game? I'll be running an epic adventure called "Against the Meerkats." The tagline is, "Beware epic heroes, some of them will get you!"

That was a joke.

 

[IceBear]

Sorry, I've just gotten used to people using emoticons when they're joking. Thus, if I don't see a or a after a remark I take it to be serious.

Anyway, matter dropped....

IceBear

 

[hong]

Sorry, I've just gotten used to people using emoticons when they're joking. Thus, if I don't see a or a after a remark I take it to be serious.

However, if a joke needs a to make it clear it's a joke, then it probably isn't funny in the first place.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Normal bats have no attacks, none at all. Unless I'm mistaken, they are the only creature in the MM that has no attacks.

You're mistaken

Shrieker and Toad-in-a-Box are in the same boat.

-Hyp.

 

[the Jester]

Well, to be brutally on topic, there's a situation that nobody's addressed regarding the natural one always failing.

Let's say that two high-level parties meet and get into a fight. One side's fighter is rendered magically helpless, and the other side's wizard rushes over and slits his throat with a dagger (coup de grace, iow), dealing a massive 8 hp of damage.

If the fighter is 20th level, with a good con (let's say 18) and a cloak of resistance +3 (not at all unreasonable), his fort save will be around +19... he's pretty much immune to this coup de grace. Is that right?

I haven't been using the natural 1 fails/20 succeeds on saving throws rule. But after this discussion, I think I'm going to start.

And for the record, I use the -10/30 variant for attack rolls... but I don't think I like it for saves. Don't ask me why, I still need to mull it over, and I may change my mine; I may use that rule, I may use the open-ended rule, I'm just not sure yet; but I know that fighter should have at least a chance of dying from having his throat slit like that.