Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Asmor" data-source="post: 4208401" data-attributes="member: 1154">Something which was suggested in another place I posted this was a 10/20 rule, where you can only use the bank on rolls where you can't take 10 or 20. That preserves the spirit a bit since you can only take 20 when there's no consequence of failure, and the bank demands a consequence for failure.Another important consideration is group checks... If everyone's rolling spot, even if you rolled the highest it's probably not going to be that bad if you bank your roll.I think the simplest fix is to prescribe which rolls are allowed to use the bank. For example, you may only use the bank on initiative, attack rolls (including confirming crits), saving throws, and caster level checks.Another idea I had is that you allow people only to bank a number higher than their currently banked number. For example, if you've got a 15 in the bank, you can switch that 15 for a 17 you just rolled. If you bank out a high number in favor of a low number, your bank is reset to 1, so in the example above when Johnny banked out his 20 to ensure a critical threat, instead of putting his rolled 17 in the bank he now has a 1 in the bank again. This allows people to keep raising their bank, but ensures that when they "use it" they've gotta take another failure before they can start again.Alternatively, and perhaps simpler, completely ditch "switching," and don't bother with having a 1 in the bank at the beginning. Instead, you can bank any roll, but if you do you treat it as if you'd rolled a 1. Then later on you can use your banked roll as normal, but now your bank is empty. You can only have 1 roll banked at a time, and if you bank a different roll it "overwrites" any previous ones.</blockquote>

Verification