Originally Posted by Dexai
Originally Posted by GM4Him
I think all this boils down to a misunderstanding of what a roll means in a roleplaying game.

Roll is strictly about whether you succeed in something or not.

That's not true at all. Rolls might just as well be about how well you succeed (or how badly you fail), or how long a task you can't fail takes to succeed (or how long it takes you yo realise there's no chance of succeeding).

For example. You're breaking down a door to a burning inn. If you roll well, you get it open with no time lost. If you roll poorly, you still bash it down, but it takes several tried and now the fire inside is much greater.

I know this is irrelevant in the context of BG3 because they don't do rolls that way, but in terms of what rolls mean in DnD it applies.

Sorry Dexai, but I have to disagree. A person who rolls Critical Miss doesn't miss worse than a person who rolls a 19 and needs a 20. The entire point of a Critical Miss is that even if someone would get an automatic hit, there is still a chance that they miss. It is not to indicate that you epically missed. That's not how 5e works. I've played games where if you roll a Critical Miss your gun jams or you run out of ammo or you epically miss, but that is not 5e.

If you roll a one and fail to bash down the door, you can try again next turn. That is what determines how long it takes to bust the door down. Your rolling a one doesn't indicate that it takes you longer to bust the door down. It just means that you failed at that particular attempt. It also doesn't mean that you will succeed eventually but it takes you several turns to do it. It simply means that you failed in that six second round. You can try again on the next six second round. Hopefully the fire doesn't get to you before you are able to succeed on your turn in busting the door down.