Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5817357" data-attributes="member: 22779">Swimming a bit upthread for this one, but, this, right here, is why I absolutely LOATHE the idea of &quot;Fail on a 1&quot; houseruling.If the PC has a base bonus great enough to clear the pit, he cannot fail, even if he rolls a 1.&nbsp; ((Barring outside interference of course))&nbsp; A 1 isn't a fail on a jump check.&nbsp; There is no failure on a jump check.&nbsp; Every check is a success.&nbsp; The only thing the check determines is how far you jump.&nbsp; Which, in this case would be 1+bonus feet (presuming a running start).&nbsp; So long as you have a +4 or better, you cannot actually fail this check.Which, is also true of every single skill check in 3e D&amp;D (and 4e as well).&nbsp; A 1 is not an autofailure, not because it's so low, but because the check, frequently, doesn't actually determine success or failure, but rather how well you did something.When you use any skill, you automatically succeed at using that skill.&nbsp; Your skill may not have been good enough to complete whatever task you are attempting, and that's fine.&nbsp; But, it doesn't mean that you actually failed to use that skill.It's conflation of the skill mechanics with combat mechanics that causes so much confusion.&nbsp; Rolling a 1 in combat is an actual failure.&nbsp; Your attack roll determines success or failure of that attack.&nbsp; And that works because you are going to attempt many times during the course of combat to hit the baddie.But, in skills, if you refuse to allow retries, when retries make sense of course, it's like telling the fighter that once he misses in combat, he can never make another attack against this opponent.&nbsp; His skill just isn't good enough.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5817357, member: 22779"] Swimming a bit upthread for this one, but, this, right here, is why I absolutely LOATHE the idea of "Fail on a 1" houseruling. If the PC has a base bonus great enough to clear the pit, he cannot fail, even if he rolls a 1. ((Barring outside interference of course)) A 1 isn't a fail on a jump check. There is no failure on a jump check. Every check is a success. The only thing the check determines is [u]how far you jump[/u]. Which, in this case would be 1+bonus feet (presuming a running start). So long as you have a +4 or better, you cannot actually fail this check. Which, is also true of every single skill check in 3e D&D (and 4e as well). A 1 is not an autofailure, not because it's so low, but because the check, frequently, doesn't actually determine success or failure, but rather how well you did something. When you use any skill, you automatically succeed at using that skill. Your skill may not have been good enough to complete whatever task you are attempting, and that's fine. But, it doesn't mean that you actually failed to use that skill. It's conflation of the skill mechanics with combat mechanics that causes so much confusion. Rolling a 1 in combat is an actual failure. Your attack roll determines success or failure of that attack. And that works because you are going to attempt many times during the course of combat to hit the baddie. But, in skills, if you refuse to allow retries, when retries make sense of course, it's like telling the fighter that once he misses in combat, he can never make another attack against this opponent. His skill just isn't good enough. [/QUOTE]

Verification