Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 6676086" data-attributes="member: 6775031">Sure, but that includes most rules in most editions of D&D, and most games that are based on D&D. I can't speak for anything earlier than 2E, but even that version suggested using a binary-outcome ability check for resolving actions not otherwise covered in the rules. The only games which don't really offer such clear results tend to be the ones which describe themselves as "rules-lite" or "story-telling" games, and the lack of such clarity is considered to be a major criticism against them.There's no problem, then - no edition of D&D includes critical success or critical failure for anything other than attack rolls, and it's not too terribly difficult for those to be removed. Complications only make things more complicated.As with anything else in game design, it essentially comes down to a trade-off in priorities. Since a game is defined as a series of meaningful decisions, one of the priorities must be the clarity of the rules - without which, no decision can be meaningful. But if you want to tell a good story, then it really helps for you to have more freedom in interpreting results. These priorities should be weighed carefully.</blockquote>