NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Weiley31" data-source="post: 8423428" data-attributes="member: 7017196">So while DMing a session last night, there was a situation where the Ranger pc attempted to intimidated a Knight npc. So an Intimidation roll vs a Wisdom check, IIRC. The Knight npc has Advantage due to being Brave and rolled a Nat 20 on the roll to oppose the Ranger. The Ranger, though, was two points ABOVE the Nat 20 result after his roll+CHA modifier. I ruled that because it was a Nat 20, and an astounding success on the Knight's part, he wasn't intimidated by the Ranger. My buddy, who played the Ranger, took it in good stride and understood that a Nat 20 is the apex number when rolling, did mention "Even though I was two points above said 20?"Fast Forward to today while I'm at home, I'm now wondering if I made a mistake on my part. I'm trying to become a better DM and I supposed that I am gonna be making mistakes. (On the plus side, my buddy's Ranger was able to score the Killing Blow on a Warg boss, after it had reduced him from 40 HP down to 20 hp after missing him for most of the battle, by rolling a Nat 20 and killing it. (So Dice Karma came around and gave me the comeuppance I would say. Plus the Warg boss, despite having Pack Advantage before getting  Disadvantage later thnx to fire.)But now I'm still wondering if I made the wrong judgement call, as a DM, earlier with the Intimidation vs the Opposed Wisdom check. Now I did have it where the Knight wasn't intimidated by the ranger pc, but gave him a slight nod of "respect/appreciation" by recognizing the ranger's skills. Which wouldn't have happened at all if the rolls turned out different and if the ranger rolled SUPER low.</blockquote>

Verification