Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Should you always fail on a 1 and always succeed on a 20 for every d20 roll?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 7240043" data-attributes="member: 53980"><p>I think it is.</p><p></p><p>Note that, per my previous posts, magic would not be an auto success. </p><p></p><p>Granted, you might be able to use Dimension Door to succeed automatically, but as I said before there could very well be a route by which the rogue can circumvent this courtyard automatically. However, Dimension Door can most certainly fail (if you try to teleport inside a solid object). That's before we even consider areas that are warded against magic.</p><p></p><p>I see your example as a failure of the DM. As I've said many times in this thread, you don't need to roll if success is automatic. You had an ability that automatically allowed you to jump farther than the width of the pit. Hence, no roll necessary. You're conflating "always needing to roll for skills" with "a natural 1 always fails". You can choose to use one or the other, neither, or both. Personally, I think always needing to roll is the problem rule. It leads to all kinds of nonsensical results. Failure on a natural 1 (and success on a natural 20) simply means that IF a roll is called for then there is at least SOME chance of failure/success. The outcome is uncertain. </p><p></p><p>I could see your argument about an 11th level rogue in a scenario with plenty of cover or just a few guards. However, I posited (on purpose) a scenario with minimal cover and at least a hundred guards. This would be task that a lesser character would like find to be nearly impossible or completely impossible. This character is able to attempt a nigh impossible feat with at least a 95% chance of success (could be better than that based on race/feats/gear). I see nothing wrong with allowing for a chance of failure in that circumstance. </p><p></p><p>It's not about screwing the player. I can't see how I would spring this on them. The player would be well aware that it is a heavily patrolled area with little cover. They are welcome to find another path if they don't like their odds. However, I as the DM have to make determinations about what is reasonable and what isn't. And to me, an 11th level character isn't getting through that courtyard automatically (unless they come up with a really clever plan). At 20th level, sure. At 11th, you're goid enough to attempt it, you might be good enough to only fail on a 1, but it isn't guaranteed. </p><p></p><p>In fairness though, if you were running that scenario with my rules and you felt this a trivial task for one such as him, don't even ask for a roll. Just have him succeed automatically. That's the beauty of it. A roll means a chance of failure (as well as success). No doubt about the outcome, no roll.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fanaelialae, post: 7240043, member: 53980"] I think it is. Note that, per my previous posts, magic would not be an auto success. Granted, you might be able to use Dimension Door to succeed automatically, but as I said before there could very well be a route by which the rogue can circumvent this courtyard automatically. However, Dimension Door can most certainly fail (if you try to teleport inside a solid object). That's before we even consider areas that are warded against magic. I see your example as a failure of the DM. As I've said many times in this thread, you don't need to roll if success is automatic. You had an ability that automatically allowed you to jump farther than the width of the pit. Hence, no roll necessary. You're conflating "always needing to roll for skills" with "a natural 1 always fails". You can choose to use one or the other, neither, or both. Personally, I think always needing to roll is the problem rule. It leads to all kinds of nonsensical results. Failure on a natural 1 (and success on a natural 20) simply means that IF a roll is called for then there is at least SOME chance of failure/success. The outcome is uncertain. I could see your argument about an 11th level rogue in a scenario with plenty of cover or just a few guards. However, I posited (on purpose) a scenario with minimal cover and at least a hundred guards. This would be task that a lesser character would like find to be nearly impossible or completely impossible. This character is able to attempt a nigh impossible feat with at least a 95% chance of success (could be better than that based on race/feats/gear). I see nothing wrong with allowing for a chance of failure in that circumstance. It's not about screwing the player. I can't see how I would spring this on them. The player would be well aware that it is a heavily patrolled area with little cover. They are welcome to find another path if they don't like their odds. However, I as the DM have to make determinations about what is reasonable and what isn't. And to me, an 11th level character isn't getting through that courtyard automatically (unless they come up with a really clever plan). At 20th level, sure. At 11th, you're goid enough to attempt it, you might be good enough to only fail on a 1, but it isn't guaranteed. In fairness though, if you were running that scenario with my rules and you felt this a trivial task for one such as him, don't even ask for a roll. Just have him succeed automatically. That's the beauty of it. A roll means a chance of failure (as well as success). No doubt about the outcome, no roll. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Should you always fail on a 1 and always succeed on a 20 for every d20 roll?
Top