Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Nebuul
For everyone in this thread, if you have disadvantage on a roll that you should *never* fail, then your chance of failure with Larian's implementation goes from 0% to 10%. Instantly. Think about that, your character should never fail at something, and instead they fail one time out of ten attempts. That is huge.

You could always change that. Reroll a nat 1 and only fail if you do it again? lowering the chance of it happening. There would be miriad ways to do this. Personally i would not remove the system. But think about what kind of disadvantage you have. What does it mean? A rogue trying to pick a lock, coughing inside poison gas, may fail more often than one that just has a little dust in his eye. I just think its a bit hard to implement different type of DA.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Montiness
um.... critical failures can occur on any roll, but I have 2 complaints with them....
Critical roles does not applied to skill checks since 3rd edition. So over 20 years already.
Critical rolls still was applied on on saves in 3/3.5 and Pathfinder 1e. But not in D&D 5e.
Paizo decided to return critical roll on everything in PF2e, but it's far more complex than just letting you succeed 5% of a time, and fail 5% of a time.
Originally Posted by Montiness
I don't have the books anymore jesus...
Don't need no book...
https://www.5esrd.com/

Last edited by Redwyrm; 27/10/21 05:52 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by UnknownEvil
While i certainly do not like failure i have nothing against failing on a nat 1 and succeeding on a nat 20.

Never forget that even pros make mistakes and even the most unskilled person can have a lucky strike. It's the feeling that, against all odds, you still have a small chance. OR the risk, that no matter how good you are, you can still make a mistake or have bad luck (faulty lockpick or somesuch)
That's why crits remained on attacks. But was removed from skill checks.
Most of a time by the rules nothing really stops you retying on the same skill checks. With with simplified "critical success" every player would just keep brutefocing every skill check, until they succeed.

Joined: Aug 2021
C
member
Offline
member
C
Joined: Aug 2021
Originally Posted by UnknownEvil
You could always change that. Reroll a nat 1 and only fail if you do it again? lowering the chance of it happening.

Originally Posted by KingTiki
they are merely mentioned under Rule 0

And there's part of the (arguably impossible) challenge of bringing a human-moderated interaction to a machine-moderated one. A level 1 thief is more likely to break their tools than a level 20 one. A level 1 fighter is more likely to drop their weapon or trip than a level 20 one. If playing with natural 1s and 20s the old AD&D way, the human in charge has lots of leeway to do it eloquently.

Unfortunately for the machine, it's stuck with either a broad-strokes attempt at this, what we have now, or some complicated set of heuristics that nobody will be happy with.

Better to not even go there in the first place.

Last edited by colinl8; 27/10/21 02:44 PM. Reason: adverb
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Niara
I feel it is, yes (this is personal opinion, unrelated to rules discussion). Hitting a super high AC is acceptable in the 'there's always a gap' kind of sense... brain-powering your way of a mental crush from an overbearingly superior force, not so much. If anything, your barbarian is a prime example of why one of your heal-capable characters might consider carrying lesser restoration with them as one of their prepared spell, going into nasty combats, or just in general - expressly, to help the characters that cannot help themselves.
There's also the opposite case, where say a level 20 archer or wizard casting firebolt can miss a shot on a prone&unconscious commoner (or elephant or some other large+ monster with low AC) 10 feet away (so attacking at normal) if they roll a natural 1.

As you said this is all personal opinion, but idk our characters are typically the heroes of the story, yeah? Being in the exact right location (there's a rock or some rubble to hide behind) to avoid a fireball, or being so stubborn/finding inner strength to resist a mental crush seem like well within the realm of possibility to me. Also, again, I dislike the lack of progression of saves in 5e, so I like anything that can help that. And finally, rolling a natural 20 and succeeding regardless is fun, and doesn't really break anything for saves (unlike skill checks).

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Well, tbh 5e doesn't even have coup de grace mechanics. Which i personally found one of biggest downsides. Remind me when we was able to sneak up on sleeping cambion. But because of lackluster of coup de grace option, we was just been able barely scratch him with single automatic crit.
And btw by rules you still need roll attack even on sleeping target. So you CAN miss completely.

But that's side notes...

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
[Linked Image from i.imgflip.com]


Optimistically Apocalyptic
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Nicou 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5