Saving throws-always fail on 1?

[0-hr]

Doesn't it bug anyone that on a 20 you add 10 to the roll (for a 30 total) but on a 1 you subtract 11 (for a -10 total)?

Don't seem fair to me.

 

[James McMurray]

Ah, we use different tumble rules (opposed by reflex save) so that isn't an issue.

 

[Hypersmurf]

It is not in any of the 3.0 rulebooks or errata.

Unless you count Deities and Demigods, from memory...

-Hyp.

 

[Thanee]

Unless you count Deities and Demigods, from memory...

Now, that's about the last place I would look for such a rule...

Bye
Thanee

 

[shilsen]

Now, that's about the last place I would look for such a rule...

Bye
Thanee

Think about it. Who's going to be more embarassed about missing one in twenty attacks than a god? See, it makes sense

 

[Legildur]

We use the following variant from the ELH:
.....

We have found it add spice to the game, because an automatic skill check is no longer automatic (e.g. Tumble or Casting Defensively). Saves do not automatically fail on a 1, if your bonuses are good enough.

At lower levels, it doesn't make much of a difference, but at higher levels it makes things more interesting. Even a high-level character can screw up, but at least with this, it's not a flat 5% of the time.

Andargor

Yeah, the flat 5% chance for a fail or succes always bugged my groups. Knowing that you'll fail 1/20 saving throws regardless of how god-like your character is seems odd. We instigated a house rule not dissimilar from the ELH optional rule Andargor quoted and everyone seems to like it.

Mind you, we also house ruled Concentration and Tumble as Dodge bonuses to AC rather than negate AOOs, and that also works well. That way there is always incentive to keep putting ranks into those skills. Mind you, didn't help my monk on Thursday night when trying to close with the gargantuan spider with 15ft reach......

 

[Will]

It's odd, but I think it suits high fantasy/cinematic games... there's always a chance to succeed, there's always a chance to fail, even if it isn't sensible.

 

[Al'Kelhar]

Yeah, the flat 5% chance for a fail or succes always bugged my groups. Knowing that you'll fail 1/20 saving throws regardless of how god-like your character is seems odd...

They're in pitched battle for their lives. They are not gods. They're gonna f*** up at least 5% of the time.

Off-topic: This reminds me of an article I read this weekend about the popularity of SUVs (what we Downunda call "4WDs") in the USA. See, SUV occupants die in accidents at much the same rate as people in cheap compact cars, but at considerably higher rates than people in ordinary family sedans. The size of the SUVs give their occupants the illusion of safety, whereas their handling characteristics and construction methods (they're classed as "trucks" and hence don't need to meet car safety standards) mean they're more likely to be involved in otherwise avoidable accidents, and injuries are considerably more serious in those accidents than they would be in a family car. Why do peopl buy SUVs? Because they "feel" safe. Why do they "feel" safe? Because our reptilian brain exagerrates the risk of uncontrollable events over controllable events (c.f. risk of being killed by a terrorist to being killed at work). Big truck = lots of distance between me and the "uncontrollable event" of a child running onto the road in front of us. Trouble is, accidents are rarely the "uncontrollable" events our reptilian brain thinks they are. I'd rather be in a car that can either stop before hitting the child or manoeuvre around it, than be in a big truck that can do neither.

Why is this even vaguely relevant to the discussion of the natural 1? Well, I see the natural 1 as the truly uncontrolled event. A character can do everything in his power to control events, through abilities, skills, feats, equipment etc. etc. But there is always that wrong decision in the heat of the moment, the loose flagstone on the floor, the thunder of a nearby explosion which distracts for just an instant... Behold, the natural 1.

Cheers, Al'Kelhar

 

[Legildur]

.....But there is always that wrong decision in the heat of the moment, the loose flagstone on the floor, the thunder of a nearby explosion which distracts for just an instant... Behold, the natural 1.

Which has absolutely no reflection on the level of skill of the character involved.

A counter example is that a 20th level fighter attempting to strike a prone, asleep, kobold with his axe will miss 5% of the time..... probably exactly the same probability as a 1st level fighter.

And similarly, a geriatric village peasant would strike AC 50 5% of the time..... the same as say a 10th level fighter.... This is where it breaks down.

Anyway, you get what I'm saying. Sure, there should always be a chance for failure or success for any action, as Will pointed out, but the blanket natural 1/20 rules don't anywhere near reflect what the true probabilities should be.

And yeah, there will always be differences around actual versus perceived risk and the incidence of injury (as in who bears the result) for a risk event occuring.

 

[Scion]

They're in pitched battle for their lives. They are not gods. They're gonna f*** up at least 5% of the time.

Which is why I prefer no autofails,and instead either the +10/-10 or the open ended rules. If you are so incredibly good at something that no one can match your skill most of the time then this system makes much more sense.

There is still a chance of failure, but extra skill still matters. I think that they deserve to fail less than 5% of the time if they invest enough in it Sure there is still a lower limit, but that is ok.