I don't get why Veeky Forums is so arsey about people celebrating at getting a natural 20...

I don't get why Veeky Forums is so arsey about people celebrating at getting a natural 20. Natural twenties have to be successes even without autocrits. If they weren't going to succeed on the highest roll on the die. Why even bother letting them roll?

>If they weren't going to succeed on the highest roll on the die. Why even bother letting them roll?
I don’t, but thanks to the modern environment of tabletop games influenced by shit like Critical Roll, players feel entitled to be allowed to roll whenever they want so they can maybe start an EPIC STORY to tell all their friends. So if you deny them the chance because there’s no possible way they could succeed, you’re labeled as a bad DM.

You make a good point, but you are making the mistake of thinking there exists an actual problem.

The internet doesn't reward people for well thought out constructive criticism. That doesn't get recognized or go viral. Self inflating 'intelligent' criticism and indignation, however, baits people into contesting the obvious falsehood and thus gets replies.

People don't make threads about boobplate because they actually give a fuck about historical accuracy or whatever. People make threads about boobplate because its garunteed replies and having prompted that gives them a fleeting sense of validation.

The same goes for natural 20s and anything else that a conspicuously consistent number of people seem to make a thread about day after day for weeks or months at a time. More than half the people who complain on Veeky Forums about specific games or scenarios haven't actually played that game in years, they are just caught in the endless cycle of memes that is Veeky Forums. Just like how you can catch people on /a/ or /m/ or /co/ talking about all of the flaws of a popular show that they clearly haven't actually watched... just because they know that doing so will get replies.

Just assume that everyone on Veeky Forums is lying about everything they say at all times for the purpose of fitting in with an imagined online culture. Thats what I do.

> lets make a baseless claim about things that don't actually happen BUT MAYBE THEY COULD so I have something to pretend to be upset at, even though even if it did happen it still wouldn't actually be important or noteworthy

wooooooooooooooooooooow

>Just assume that everyone on Veeky Forums is lying about everything they say at all times for the purpose of fitting in with an imagined online culture. Thats what I do.
I don't believe you.

And so you take your first step.

I am so proud.

>I don't believe you.
So you think he's lying?

To be fair, even if the greatest possible degree of success is still insufficient, it can be interesting or create a story worth telling.
For example
>Running GURPS-ish setting based off Dungeon Meshi after all my players lost their minds reading it
>lots of wonderful adventures
>they hung around the higher floors for a while, collecting ingredients and raising funds to better equipped themselves (they started out quite poor)
>Now they want to do some real dungeon crawling
>Long greentext short, they get fucked pretty hard by an earthen golem
>The knight and a mage get separated from the rest due to a shitty map, gets cornered
>Mage is injured, can't just slip past them
>Knight rolls to attack the golems with his broken sword, tries to reassure the mage
>"Don't worry, some clods of dirt are no match for a warrior like me!"
>Rolls 20
>Hope in his eyes
>I describe how he attacks with incredible strength and speed considering his wounds
>He imagines he can see his master guiding his blade, and each blow strikes true, the golems hands sliding off his armor as they try to catch him
>Finally though, he slips, and the golems grab him, ending his resistance, and his life
>Player almost as crushed as his character
>But the mage got away
It might be different because revives can happen in that setting, but later he actually thanked me, and we talked for a bit about how it made the moment seem more powerful. He did the best he possibly could, but it's impossible for one low-hp guy with a broken sword to do some things...but even in failure, you can succeed.
Reminds me a bit of what Dungeon World says about dealing with character's failure/bad rolls. It should always result in something to drive the party forward, rather than holding them back. You can't pick the lock, but then a guard kicks it down, that sort of thing.

I don't know, people love to roll dice, why do you think some people actually play Werewolf the Apoc as written.

You think somebody would do that? Go on the internet and tell lies?

I know, it's almost as if theirs a culture of lying or something?

I'm doing it right now in this post

>muh 5% immersion breaking
the most common criticism of these nogame faggots. as if their actual grasp of math was any less weak than their imaginations

Because 11/10 Nat 20 stories are shit.

>I want to do impossible and dumb thing
>DM says roll for it
>NAT FUCKING 20
>I does teh impossible thing lolololol

Critical 20s don't reward a player for doing something smart or interesting, they're just random OMGWINNN events. They encourage the shittiest kind of unimaginative lulzplayers. If that is what a group wants, well, all the power to them, but I'm not sitting my fat ass down at a table of Doom Penguinz to watch a bunch of unfunny spergs try to roll Nat 20s every minute so they can do every dumb idea that pops into their head.

Can confirm.

I celebrate crits and max rolls in my games all the time.

I don't buy into the "you rolled the maximum you got, so it's SPECTACULAR and BOMBASTIC and DEFIES THE LAWS OF PHYSICS" shit. If a GM does that to me I just feel patronized, my character isn't suddenly MORE of a badass, she's always been a badass, it just means an objective has been accomplished.

Agreed. Meme fags need to die.

I have a confession, Veeky Forums. I have sinned.

In my session this past weekend, one of the players was making attacks with magically conjured tentacles. Before the attack was rolled, I made a joke about tentacle rape hentai.

The tentacle then rolled a natural 1 on its attack.

I could have just said that it missed, but I said that it groped the target awkwardly. Nobody at the table was uncomfortable, and it was good for a laugh, but it still haunts me that I did a version of the "you rolled a natural 1 so you kiss the orc and fall in love" bullshit.

You shall forever live in the guilt of your sin, unless you get over it, it's not a big deal and had no consequences.

Nat 20, if their not describing it, I'll do it. And I go out and make it brutal and cool. If this was a TV show you'd rewind and play it back and show a close up kinda shit.

No one cares faggot.

>If they weren't going to succeed on the highest roll on the die. Why even bother letting them roll?

Sometimes the proposed action is too abstract or ambiguous to tell them they cant succeed up front. For example lets say that a player rolls to "seduce the princess", you cant just tell him he cant succeed because while it might not lead to the desired result of fucking her on the spot she might soften up to the player for being charming.

Nice reddit spacing

KYS

Cunt

This.

LOL I ROLLED 20 AND I SUPLEXED THE DRAGON WITHOUT MY CLOTHES ON

>I prefer posts that are an unreadable mess.

I'm glad we came full circle on this one.

Degrees of failure. A bad move must be punished, but a critical "success" might skirt their fate.

It also makes you sound like you talk with the cadence of a smug asshole

>using d20
>not substituting a 3d6 system for superior bell curve of results
>being this much of a pleb

>tone
>Veeky Forums text

Seriously, kys

Ah, not if it's a contested roll, user.

If I have a perception of 11, and you a stealth of 10, and we both roll 20s, then it's not a success for you.

I do agree that there's reason to be excited, but you'd be surprised at how many times this can happen, especially when you widen the gap outside of this example.

It's not just that the NATURAL FUCKING TWENTY encourages idiotic risk-taking in the hope that the 5% chance of the best roll will enable something stupid that the DM should have put their foot down for. (Although that is a big part of it). It's not just the sense of player entitlement that they should be allowed to do anything, no matter how ridiculous, as long as they roll the top number. There's also the problem of degrees of success. You'll rarely see it in combat, (I rolled a twenty, that means I killed it in one hit, right?) but you will see it for all sorts of other things that aren't as finely grained and dwelt upon in the rules. You'll get all sorts of people who will think the following exchange is legitimate, and I've seen countless variations of it.


>I want to sell this slightly used wand to the merchant.
>okay, roll for bartering or whatever the system calls it
>NATURAL FUCKING TWENTY
>Okay, the base price for a wand with this spell and condition would be 8 gold pieces. You rolled well, so he offers you twelve.
>No, that's bullshit, he should give me his shop
>He's only giving you 12.
>I rolled a twenty, he should be willing to sell himself into slavery to give me a bazillion gold to pay for the wand!

etc.

>Why even bother letting them roll?
Multiple reasons:
>there are potential consequences to a character trying something even if he doesn't succeed, the roll represents him trying to do it
Example: you jump from one cliff to another. Except the other cliff is an illusion. So you still roll acrobatics to see how far you jumped, but no matter what, you're going to fall. You just might not jump far enough to notice the illusory cliff.
>the GM doesn't want the character to know that he cannot succeed
You actually can't heal the curse killing your friend but you want to try so you can. Upon rolling a 20 you realize it is hopeless and you just wasted 3 rounds of combat and now you have to watch your friend die.
>some players insist on rolling
Sure you can try to seduce the barmistress but no she doesn't want to fuck you cause you aren't even of the same species. Some players want to roll for gay shit. Okay you rolled a 20, you still failed. Retard.

Still sounds like BS, and only serves to take time out of the game.

>Still sounds like BS
Okay. Why?
>and only serves to take time out of the game.
You have to fill up 4 to 6 hours somehow, faggot. Also that's not an argument. If the characters are following a wrong thread in a mystery, do you OOC correct them because "it's taking time out of the game". Well I'm sure your DMing is so fascinating it needs every single second to be taken up. And I'm sure you're such a great DM that you artificially remove any sort of challenge you don't like from the players' way because "it's taking time out of the game".... even though all the events I described, are part of playing the game.

Yeah, it's fuckin obnoxious. Usually a nat20 is a success but these idiots seem to think that they can do not just Charm Person but Dominate Person 5% of the time just by talking to people. And they don't even roleplay it, they just throw a skill check at the problem. This is part of why I believe in throwing out most skills and going with an OSR approach, but that's a discussion for another time. What it comes down to, is that the normoniggers who are flooding the D&D hobby come in several brands. One is the brand that saw the game on Critical Roll and sees how the natural 20s go on that, and they want something exciting to happen every time. Then there are the retards who saw Veeky Forums greentexts on Tumblr of mostly-made-up stories where some fag gets three nat20s in a row to convince an orc to let him buttfuck him, and then get this idea that the entire point of the game is to be hilarious. So they make dumb-ass characters with dumb-ass traits like "lol I worship the god of weed" then shit all over the game with their obnoxious behavior, destroying any chance of an engaging narrative. Then there are the video game players who treat TTRPGs like they are no different than CRPGs, right down to fucking with the NPCs and treating them like computer programs instead of people. Then getting asshurt when they can't fast-travel to the next area to escape the angry guards.

The solution? Carefully vet anyone before you let them into your group.

It's BS because it doesn't add anything and is a pure waste of time, as in a roll to see if you see a thing before you die, which adds nothing. Hell it's just a more stupid form of the illusionary choice.
4 hours isn't that long, hell 8 hours is usually the max my shit reaches, and I often still got shit to go. So your just coming out and saying it, you need to push filler, I mean fuck you. If their following a Red haring, it goes somewhere, even if it's not helpful, this isn't that. (or at-least not as you had said)
I don't need to correct them; not everything needs to be finished or "won" there's other shit to do. I'm not removing challenge, you litterally just said your giving fake ones to pad out your shit, I'll just say they fail and move on. After all you did just railroad with fake challenge, at least you can be straight with them.

Where in my post did I say I railroaded anything? Oh you think anything that's not made blatant obvious is a "false choice"? Get used to it faggot, that's how a white man plays RPGs, alright? I don't fucking put everything right in their face to decide and then roll 2d6+stat and they get whatever they want on a 10+, this isn't fucking Dungeon World or Apocalypse World or FATE or any of that.
>if their following a red herring it goes somewhere
Yeah and it's the same thing here.
I provided 2 or 3 rare examples of when you might want a player to roll a check even if they can't succeed, for the equivalent of "rolling dice behind the screen to increase tension" little GM trick and you started sperging out about how I'd be such a bad GM because if I was good I'd have increased tension naturally or some shit. Get your head out of your ass, you probably suck fucking shit at Gamemastering, like 90% of the GMs I've met. I've been running games for 10 years, trust me I know my shit, and my players love it. Stop getting asshurt because 30 seconds of your time is wasted, it's not that precious. You wanna get paid for your time, go to your fucking job. Oh wait you probably don't even have one.

>Using 3d6
>Not using d100 system for some basic degree of granularity and relying on probability to do the hard work of making your players feel accomplished for you.
>Not using 300d6/100 for superior bellcurve.
>Not realising OP was talking about critical results rather than the dice used because you're an edgelord.

KYS, fagstick.

KYS.

There is nothing wrong with the GM setting a 5% chance of success for a difficult action.

There is everything wrong with this being interpreted as "any action has a minimum 5% chance of success".

GMs often could do well to say more often "under these circumstances, you cannot succeed at this" or even say "even a high roll wouldn't be a total success."

usingappropriate spacing

betweenwords

i
s

forred

d
i t

Pretty much this. 5% chance of success is much higher than the probability of success for many of the stupid actions attempted.