>Monk: I wake bad dude up to question him.
>DM: He's out cold, roll for medicine.
>Monk *Nat 1*
>DM:...
>DM: You remember hearing that strong smells wake people up. You take out a bottle of your strongest drink...
>DM:*rolls*
>DM: ... and hit the guy over the head with it, putting him in his negatives. He is now making death saving throws...
>DM: *rolls a nat 20*
>DM:... He wakes up and starts screaming in pain and confusion.
Post your fuck ups.
"on a nat 1, you forget your action and immediately do a different, retarded thing" isn't a mechanics fuck up, it's a storytelling and narration fuck up. (unless you consider adjudication a mechanic...)
anyway, the first game i GMed was a single session of "everyone is john". i kept wondering about my players' abysmal success rate and how long the game was taking. it took me an entire hour and half to remember the fucking "pay willpower to improve a roll" mechanic.
These are fuck ups, but not mechanical ones.
>le XD funee nat 1/nat 20 storiezzzzz
You're better than this.
That's not a mechanics fuck up. Anyways,
>running nWoD Mortals
>party comes about a Skinwalker specter
>PC priest decides to exorcise it against all odds
>does a fairly good job, but the skinwalker wins each time due to bigger dicepool
>two sessions devoted to finding ts anchor and smashing it
>check skinwalker stats as the party is breaking the anchor
>Morality 3
>meaning its 8 dice pool should have been 3
>mfw the Chapter's villain was actually way too weak and manageable for the party and shouldn't have survived their first encounter
Stop perpetuating 'nat 1/nat 20 = LOL RANDUM' bullshit.
Stop telling other people how to run their game.
No. This bullshit is plaguing the hobby and teaching new players bad habits and it needs to be stopped.
Stop shitposting
What is so extremely bad about it?
When running more serious long term games it often leads to issues.
For the casual "Just a group of friends getting together for a random game that no one cares too deeply about" the nat1 and nat20 completely changing everything is often to the betterment of the game because it adds that extra creative spark.
Assuming you don't play favorites of course.
So you're admitting it works in some games.
Quit your bitching.
>everyone on Veeky Forums is one person
It's pretty easy to come up with a natural 1 that is literally just bad luck.
One of my pcs was doing a deception check to tell these seamen that he owned a boat that wasn't his. He rolled a 1 on deception so he made a good lie but it turned out one of the seamen was a friend of his father's, recognized him, and knee enough about him to know he didn't own any boat.
It doesn't have to be "I roll for deception, saying I own this boat." *nat 1*
"you punch the boat and sink it lol"
Like most things it depends on your group.
Lol random criticals are good for groups with really whiny players because it gives you cause to say look I'm not screwing you the dice are when something bad plot related happens or they don't win an encounter.
Just make sure they can't see your dice otherwise they whine over the rolls you don't tell them about.
You can't crit fail skill rolls.
>telling people to stop giving unsolicited advice is shitposting
If a group is fine with the way a game is run it's surely not your place to tell them they should appease you?
But user! I've seen a le ebin xD story about intimidating an avalanche on a NAT TWENTY and another one where the orc ate its own fingers on a NAT ONE!
It has to be right, right?
And your are clearly the autist of prophecy, the chosen fag to do it.
> D&D game
> Roll to kill a sleeping enemy
>Nat 1
> I frown. One player laughs loud and says "hahahaha u prolly' cut your own leg off!!!"
> Dm says " ok, you hit the sleeping guy, and kill him. It wasn't pretty, but he's dead"
Nat 1 loldumbs are cancer
>Trying to gain access to a private party
>Roll Nat 20 to bluff
> Dm:"ok, he glances at your paper and waves you in"
Simple.
Our DM used a recurring NPC named Charlie. Charlie was always slightly higher level then the PCs and used as a guide to introduce the PCs to the mission/quest/setting. Chalie always died like a bitch after rolling *critical failure equivalent*.
He died by having a rope he was climbing down snap, 15 meters in the air, and falling in the middle of armed enemies.
Failed his bluff role when asked who was responsible for the mutiny aboard the ship (got hanged).
Failed his stealth roll while hiding from an angry mob.
It wasn't DM fiat, we all saw the rolls. At that point we always assumed Charlie was going to fuck up and die.
>*nat 1*
lawl echs dheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
If it's 5e, then rolling a 20 on a death saving throw brings you back to 1hp and full awareness.
Critical failures like that are fucking stupid though. It's okay to just not succeed a roll sometimes, it doesn't have to spectacular.
GMing Through the Breach. Party are thugs working for the 10 thunders, guarding a Hospice the 10 thunders own, since people have been dying in their sleep, but not of their illness. Party find some Alps (little demons who drain the life from sleeping/dying people) and kill one, the other three jump out the window and start climbing down the wall outside. Party strong guy, (two augmetic arms, heavy armour) asks how far away they are. I check climbing rules, and say 15ft down. He says, I move to them and attack. I ask if he climbs out the window (GM warning). He says yes. I ask him to make an attack with a negative flip, then an Acrobatics flip (he has no ranks) to not fall. He kills the last Alp, but fails the acro flip. He realises what hes done, and accepts hes gonna get hurt. He gets knocked down from fall damage, and three street urchins go through the the guys deck three times trying to kick him. (Even when down, only the black joker allowed them to hit him). Player has learned not to jump out of 3rd floor windows, and has realised when I say, 15ft down, it does not mean it is on the floor.
Here are some reasons to avidly and reasonably dislike "Nat 1. = Failure And Bad Terrible Thing Happens"
>If the system is d20 based, this means that regardless of power, competency, training, or circumstance you always have a flat 5% chance of some random misfortune.
>The stakes of the roll may not align with the nature or degree of fuck-up; for example, almost beating someone to death when you're just trying to wake them up.
>It thematically emphasizes the dramatic role of luck rather than player agency or tactical forethought.
It's not a fucking rule that you always have to use, this is what you fucking autists don't get. You'd fucking have rules for putting one foot in front of the other if you could. This is why autists dislike/homebrew 5e, they can't stand that it's lifelike.
cdg doesn't require an attack roll. Rolling anything that doesn't present a challenge is bad DMing.
in a really silly campaign where everyone is just goofing around theyre a great source of hearty laughter.
OP here.
Yeah it's 5e, and we homebrewed critical successes and failures, as well as a revamped unstable magic system (the world is post-magpocalypse), but the latter has nothing to do with the post.
Fucking around a bit is a trademark of this DM, no one goes with him expecting railroading and super-serious gameplay.
I mean, he shits out random funky things on nat 20 investigation checks when searching different rooms. For example, a bottle of some extremely viscous and very brightly glowing liquid that we mostly use as a flashlight now. Or some extremely expensive old drink. Or a ring that reappears on a different hand if you suffered through some damage. Shit doesn't always make sense or is in any way good, but it's fun finding situations where something might be useful.
I'm gonna complete the derailing this thread is already experiencing and say that you can be funny in the expression of failing one action without changing the intention or nature OF the action. Your character could have just held the flask practically up on him, maybe pouring some up their nose on accident or something.
A result like that can be described as a moment of genuine ineptitude that many people would experience under pressure or just experiencing a lapse in judgement.
It's not objectively wrong to have some slapstick, random event pass - but it is cheap and lazy storytelling.
...why would the DM ask the player to roll if the minimum result was already a success?
>In DnD you have a 5% chance to do something completely retarded or stupidly amazing.
More of a bad luck on my part, but I have lost 3 of the 5 characters ive played in the last two years due to self inflicted critical hits. A group I started playing with after moving to college used an a home rule where you rolled on an absolutely brutal table or made an attack against yourself if you crit failed in our pathfinder games. At least after the first time it happened he stopped going "lol, you stab yourseld to death xd" and made something that almost made sense
>half-orc rouge-fighter stumbles and falls on greatsword
>human cavalier has his horse stumble and ends up trampled
>dwarf cleric just gets shitstomped by the orc he was fighting
Oh, and in a 1500 point gane of 40k, I rolled nothing higher than a 3. Admitibly it was a short game since I got tabled on turn 3, but still incredibly unlucky
>it's only 5% rather than 50%
The only way I could see this working is if it was fluffed as some god or something having cursed all adventurers. The fatality rate due to stupid stuff like falling on your weapon would mean no one would reach high levels.
>trying to decipher a series of glyphs from a language I don't understand
>roll intelligence
>nat 1
>I forget how to think and fall to the floor ina vegetative state
Maybe something like that. But in real life plenty of people die in incredibly dumb and clumsy ways too, so it isnt incredibly unbelievable a few clutzy adventures do.
Again, I just have shitty luck a lot of the time
No. You at literally playing wrong.
>What is so extremely bad about it?
>what is wrong with feeding your players the idea they do anything they want as long as they roll a natural 20.
I'm not saying stupid, fatal mistakes don't happen. I'm saying they don't happen 1 in 20 times you try to do something moderately dangerous. Construction work is a dangerous profession, but even if they had to make a check only once a day, you don't see one out of twenty construction workers plummeting to their deaths every day.
>I roll to shove my own head up my ass!
>nat 20
>letmedoitwhywontyouletmedoititsaysicansuccesstheimpossibleifirollnat20waaaaaaaahyou'reThatGM
I have lost my patience for stupid shit attempts even if someone rolls a nat20.
>they can't stand that it's lifelike.
>lifelike
>years of training only makes you 10 percent more likely to succeed at something than someone who has never done it before
Lmao. 5e is not lifelike you fucking faggot. It's not even realistic within the expectations of a heroic fantasy world. It "fixes" D&D math by making players barely improve then calling anyone who doesn't like it a 3avoo power gamer. 5e faggot seriously need to fuck off and kill themselves. Or switch to 4e which is better
Good to see someone else in this thread is sane.
In this circumstance, why would the GM even allow the roll? If it's impossible, a nat 20 won't help.
If you roll to open a lock and you have no skill in the art, sure, I will let a nat 20 slide, this is a possible thing to do. But if you are rolling a dice to see if you can jump across the Mississippi or to survive jumping off the Space Needle, expect to land feet-first, and then have those leg bones spike up through your shoulders.
I had an autist in a game once who would roll a dice even if I hadn't told them what the skill check would be. This fucker also would cheat his rolls afterwards.
He actually cried when I finally lost it and told him to 'stop cheating' and 'wait your goddamn turn'. He wouldn't stop calling other members of the game to complain about me after they were visibly relieved to have him out of the game.
>trying to decipher a series of glyphs from a language I don't understand
>roll intelligence
>nat 20
>I become a human supercomputer and can calculate with pinpoint accuracy everything that will happen in the next six trillion years
>Or switch to 4e which is better
lmao
Can we not? Like, seriously, can we not?
People have different tastes, just swallow that now before it actually affects your ability to hold a job.
>Me and my two party members are on a boat testing out a new spell to catch more fish
>Nat 1 on my first roll of my first ever game of d&d
>Spell goes out of control and boat blows up
>Never trusted to use magic on boats ever again, make my character have a fear of boats he can only overcome with alcohol.
I just posted because 4e is laughably bad.
Isnt it realistic that there's a small chance of somehow failing, despite how good you are at something? Otherwise, is it not possible for someone who his not at all proficient at something to somehow succeed through sheer luck?
Additionally, most of the none-autistic people in this thread understand that its just a thing to add flavor and not something to change the outcome of crucial matters.
For mine it would have been more like 1 in over 2000 since I rolled a 1, then a 19 or 20, then confirmed the crit
I still agree that a d20 doesnt give enough of a variance for these incredibly rare fuck ups
be glad you aren't playing anything shat out by these idiots
>10% chance to fail any task you perform
>60% chance after that to horribly fuck it all up on the fumble table
it's not even like D&D where le ebin nat 1s are just a shitty houserule, in cyberpunk it's 1d10 and if you roll a 1 you fail.
>meanwhile crits are just 'roll another d10'
>If you roll to open a lock and you have no skill in the art, sure, I will let a nat 20 slide,
So I'll just keep trying until I roll a natural 20. There are no consequences for failure are there?
break the pick in the lock, making it unopenable?
>and we homebrewed critical successes and failures
I knew a GM who would screw over players when they rolled natural 20's.
>*Nat 1*
Yes it is a mechanics fuck up, you fucked up the mechanics where nat 1/20 only applies to attack and saves.