BookBarbarian
Expert Long Rester
I wonder if the Real-World DM just has them autosucceed.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E Reliable Talent. What the what?
- Thread starter cthulhu42
- Start date
I wonder if the Real-World DM just has them autosucceed.
Greg Benage
Legend
No, the real-world DM is a dick, otherwise he wouldn't be like, "Haha, you lost your keys!"
BookBarbarian
Expert Long Rester
Seems legit.
"Well, you didn't say you brought your keys with you when you left your house" "Roll an Int check to see if you lost your keys."
CapnZapp
Legend
What what - in the butt!
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Yeah, the real-world DM is one of those DMs who insists you describe every action in excruciating detail, if you don’t explicitly state your character does something, they don’t do it. And he makes you roll for EVERYTHING. “There’s always a chance you could get a natural 1” and all. He also runs a heavily houseruled custom campaign. Ultra low-magic, high lethality, no resurrection (some people say he had a DMPC early on in the campaign who did get resurrected once, but everyone who played with him at the time has long since ragequit, so no one can confirm or deny, and all the stories about the early game contradict each other.) He’s also real big on PvP.
G
Guest 6801328
Guest
Thread necro!
Just wanted to relate a funny story:
The other night our rogue had to make a clutch Stealth roll. Very important. (Jubilex slithering by the in the dark. You get the picture.)
He rolls...a natural 1. The whole table erupts and the DM grins evilly.
The player says calmly, "Thirty-three."
The DM's grin fades. "What?"
He has reliable talent, so that 1 became a 10.
Dex is +5, so 15.
Expertise in stealth for +8, so 23.
And I (Ranger) had cast Pass Without Trace, so 33.
Just wanted to relate a funny story:
The other night our rogue had to make a clutch Stealth roll. Very important. (Jubilex slithering by the in the dark. You get the picture.)
He rolls...a natural 1. The whole table erupts and the DM grins evilly.
The player says calmly, "Thirty-three."
The DM's grin fades. "What?"
He has reliable talent, so that 1 became a 10.
Dex is +5, so 15.
Expertise in stealth for +8, so 23.
And I (Ranger) had cast Pass Without Trace, so 33.
That's awesome and also one of my favorite things about 5e rogues.
CapnZapp
Legend
Allow me to post a contrary opinion.
Anything that you can do in your sleep, automatically, even on rolling a 1, etc cannot, by definition, be "awesome".
In this case, it's just a matter of the other players (and GM?) not knowing the rules.
In our game, we have ruled that a natural 1 is always a failure, so there is always a small risk of failure associated with rolling. (When there is no risk of failure I don't make the player roll at all). You don't have to roll, though.
As for Reliable Talent, this means the player is facing a decision: do I roll, or do I "take 10" and risk that not being awesome enough? (A 10 is often - close to always - enough to avoid failure, at least for "skill monkey" builds like the Rogue. But it is not always enough for spectacular success, and that's the crux!)
In your case, taking 10 would, however, be a spectacular success. Not surprising with all that buffing. And Jubilex is not the most attentive of Demon Lords.
But my point is: we've tweaked the rules to make the decision to roll meaningful even for Reliable Rogues. You can roll to gain a good chance of getting a spectacular result at the cost of a 5% risk of failure... or you can skip the roll and risk never getting that spectacular result.
What's more important? Succeeding at all - then don't roll. Or would failure mostly be fun or interesting, as would being a showoff, basking in glory? Then roll.
Anything that you can do in your sleep, automatically, even on rolling a 1, etc cannot, by definition, be "awesome".
In this case, it's just a matter of the other players (and GM?) not knowing the rules.
In our game, we have ruled that a natural 1 is always a failure, so there is always a small risk of failure associated with rolling. (When there is no risk of failure I don't make the player roll at all). You don't have to roll, though.
As for Reliable Talent, this means the player is facing a decision: do I roll, or do I "take 10" and risk that not being awesome enough? (A 10 is often - close to always - enough to avoid failure, at least for "skill monkey" builds like the Rogue. But it is not always enough for spectacular success, and that's the crux!)
In your case, taking 10 would, however, be a spectacular success. Not surprising with all that buffing. And Jubilex is not the most attentive of Demon Lords.
But my point is: we've tweaked the rules to make the decision to roll meaningful even for Reliable Rogues. You can roll to gain a good chance of getting a spectacular result at the cost of a 5% risk of failure... or you can skip the roll and risk never getting that spectacular result.
What's more important? Succeeding at all - then don't roll. Or would failure mostly be fun or interesting, as would being a showoff, basking in glory? Then roll.
G
Guest 6801328
Guest
You offer an opinion, and then say something is "by definition". Huh? Which is it? Is it your opinion, or is it the definition of awesome? (Hint: the definition of 'awesome' has nothing to do with the ease with which the awesomeness is demonstrated.)
And here you accuse us of not knowing the rules, and then go on to explain the alternative house rule you use. Surely there's a typo in there somewhere...?
You know you're nerfing the way reliable talent works, right?
For reliable talent, the player always rolls, anything under a 10 is a 10 anything over is the rolled number. Forcing a decision is expressly against the intent of the ability!
Similar Threads
