It is if fun for a DM to have creative explanations for when things go wrong or right. That is natural 1 or 20. To that end I would like to assemble a table of Critical Fails on Proficiencies.
For example, you roll a natural 1 on a stealth check. Your character is sneaking along and an has uncontrollable flatulence that alerts creatures in 20 feet to your presence.
I would like the groups help, and I will share the results.
For the first one.
Acrobatics Dexterity.
Your Dexterity (Acrobatics) check covers your attempt to stay on your feet in a tricky situation, such as when you're trying to run across a sheet of ice, balance on a tightrope, or stay upright on a rocking ship's deck. The DM might also call for a Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to see if you can perform acrobatic stunts, including dives, rolls, somersaults, and flips.
The big toe on your left foot snags on something and trip. Roll another Acrobatics check to catch yourself.
Generally, it's better to not make players feel like idiots. Instead of saying, "you accidentally let one rip, alerting the guards", say something like "the guards are clearly paying extra close attention tonight. One of them turns around, bringing you straight into the light of his torch".
Make players feel cool (not stupid), and their foes feel intimidating (also not stupid)
In our early days, my Rogue player failed a pickpocket. I let her do it with seemingly no consequences. She picked an item and slipped it into her pouch without even looking, deciding to check it out later.
That night, she checked her loot to find a moldy leftover biscuit balled up in a napkin.
Another one I'm saving for a bad stealth check. "You're quiet, and successfully creep down the hall, completely unaware that your cloak has snagged a glass mug on the table next to you. Your party watches in horror as the mug begins to slide towards the edge. Quickly, what do you guys do?"
Generally, it's better to not make players feel like idiots. Instead of saying, "you accidentally let one rip, alerting the guards", say something like "the guards are clearly paying extra close attention tonight. One of them turns around, bringing you straight into the light of his torch".
Make players feel cool (not stupid), and their foes feel intimidating (also not stupid)
You need to re roll to grasp the idea of fun and people laughing with you
In our early days, my Rogue player rolled a 5 to pickpocket. I let her do it with seemingly no consequences. She picked an item and slipped it into her pouch without even looking, deciding to check it out later.
That night, she checked her loot to find a moldy leftover biscuit balled up in a napkin.
Another one I'm saving for a bad stealth check. "You're quiet, and successfully creep down the hall, completely unaware that your cloak has snagged a glass mug on the table next to you. Your party watches in horror as the mug begins to slide towards the edge. Quickly, what do you guys do?"
I hadn't thought of that, but it makes perfect sense. Using a failed check to enhance the game and provide a unique event that wouldn't have happened otherwise.
Generally, it's better to not make players feel like idiots. Instead of saying, "you accidentally let one rip, alerting the guards", say something like "the guards are clearly paying extra close attention tonight. One of them turns around, bringing you straight into the light of his torch".
Make players feel cool (not stupid), and their foes feel intimidating (also not stupid)
You need to re roll to grasp the idea of fun and people laughing with you
I don't know about you, but personally I wouldn't have much fun if my character suddenly became a complete and utter moron for a moment, completely ******* up a task that they're supposed to be an expert at. It's the same reason I've stopped using crit fumbles in my games; if I can, I much prefer to describe how the orc knocks the fighter's sword right out of his hand, than to just say "you're an idiot now lmao guess you threw the sword away".
I like to let the PLAYERS describe their critical fails. There's fun to be found in failing when it's done by the players.
That works, too. I personally just don't believe that the DM should force a character to be an actual idiot for the purpose of comedy. If it's a player deciding that they want their character to **** up completely, that's okay.
I usually ask my players to describe their crit fails, and 9 times out of 10, they make themselves sound like idiots. But it depends on the moment and on the table. Because a crit fail in the middle of a boss fight is not likely go be as lighthearted as in a situation that is more low-key, and a serious RP group may not want to break the mood for a laugh.
Another tack is using one of their strengths to explain the fail. Say a character bombs a stealth check, but they have a really high perception: "You notice a beautiful and rare flower in the trees and the sight of it makes you gasp in surprise." Or instead of strengths, you can comment on an aspect of the character's personality. "Your jokes have the bartender in a really great mood. Unfortunately, he's more interested in hearing the story of the one-eyed abbot than talking about the recent kidnappings."
History: You learned about it in a historical fiction novel, so you mix things that happened with things that didn't and don't tell the player which is which (though you do tell them the name of the book so that they realize that they have to guess which is which)
History: Same as above, but what you know of the situation comes from your roommate at college, who was a conspiracy theorist.
Sleight of Hand: While trying to pick pocket someone, someone startles you and you slap their ass instead.
Sleight of hand: the pocket you are trying to pick has their keys/a squeaky toy/they pet rat on it and they make a sound when you put your hand it (the more random the better)
Insight: You have the uncanny feeling that this person is flirting with you
Intimidation: Your threat would probably have been more effective if you didn't remind the person of that one kid they used to babysit
Investigation: While looking for evidence of wrongdoing, you find the villain's attempt at writing original fiction
Investigation: You keep finding circumstantial evidence of a kingdom spanning conspiracy that has nothing to do with the plot of the adventure
Athletics: Your pants rip while performing the manouver
Investigation: While looking for traps, you find evidence of quick repairs and confuse them for a hiden trap or mechanism (as in, a part of the floor in which the floorboards were replaced because they were rotten looks really suspiscious to you)
Thieves tools: You hear a click while trying to pick a lock but when you move to open the doot, it is closed. It turns out that it wasn't before and you didn't notice.
Performance: You perform a bawdry song about having an affair with the guard captain's wife. Everyone in the tavern is laughing, except for the armored group that just walked in.
Performance: The fun mocking song that you just played was actually about a well connected local. How were you supposed to know that?
Performance: As you you sing, a fly goes into your mouth and the patrons end up worried about you choking instead of roused by your song.
Deception: Your tale might have been more believable if you didn't start laughing partway
Deception: ...they are standing right behind me, aren't they?
Deception/Persuasion: Turns out, the person that you are trying to convince is ALSO a spy within the organization, with a wider perspective
Survival: You are trying to make sense of the tracks but it seems like a whole circle of druids passed through here recently and used this spot for a pit stop so that they could change their wildshape.
One thing to keep in mind is that 5e doesn't have critical fails. A 1 on an attack roll will miss. A 1 on a saving throw or ability check can and will succeed depending on the DC. A character with +9 con save modifier (not uncommon) will succeed at all basic concentration saves since they are only DC10.
A level 9 rogue with 20 dex and expertise in stealth (pretty common) has +13 on stealth checks. This gives them a minimum of 14 if they roll a 1 which will be sufficient to succeed at the stealth check against any creature with a passive perception of 13 or less (which is a lot of creatures). At level 10, with reliable talent, a rogue can't get less than 10 on a proficient ability check.
It's fine to introduce critical fails if a DM and the players like them, maybe it adds some humour, but there are a lot of situations in 5e where a 1 on ability checks or saving throws is still a success unless the DM changes the rules so that a "1" automatically fails any check. If a DM does that, do they also rule that a "20" automatically succeeds? (This was one of the One D&D playtest rules that I personally objected to ... there are a lot of tasks where a 20 should not be an auto-success or a 1 an auto-fail).
One thing to keep in mind is that 5e doesn't have critical fails. A 1 on an attack roll will miss. A 1 on a saving throw or ability check can and will succeed depending on the DC. A character with +9 con save modifier (not uncommon) will succeed at all basic concentration saves since they are only DC10.
A level 9 rogue with 20 dex and expertise in stealth (pretty common) has +13 on stealth checks. This gives them a minimum of 14 if they roll a 1 which will be sufficient to succeed at the stealth check against any creature with a passive perception of 13 or less (which is a lot of creatures). At level 10, with reliable talent, a rogue can't get less than 10 on a proficient ability check.
It's fine to introduce critical fails if a DM and the players like them, maybe it adds some humour, but there are a lot of situations in 5e where a 1 on ability checks or saving throws is still a success unless the DM changes the rules so that a "1" automatically fails any check. If a DM does that, do they also rule that a "20" automatically succeeds? (This was one of the One D&D playtest rules that I personally objected to ... there are a lot of tasks where a 20 should not be an auto-success or a 1 an auto-fail).
The issue I have is that if a player is literally unable to fail a check, there's no point in rolling at all. Same for if there's no chance of success. This is why the outrage regarding the "1 always fails, 20 always succeeds" rule was just as pointless as the rule itself.
Similarly, if a 20 would still fail, then the outcome is not uncertain.
The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It is if fun for a DM to have creative explanations for when things go wrong or right. That is natural 1 or 20. To that end I would like to assemble a table of Critical Fails on Proficiencies.
For example, you roll a natural 1 on a stealth check. Your character is sneaking along and an has uncontrollable flatulence that alerts creatures in 20 feet to your presence.
I would like the groups help, and I will share the results.
For the first one.
Acrobatics Dexterity.
Your Dexterity (Acrobatics) check covers your attempt to stay on your feet in a tricky situation, such as when you're trying to run across a sheet of ice, balance on a tightrope, or stay upright on a rocking ship's deck. The DM might also call for a Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to see if you can perform acrobatic stunts, including dives, rolls, somersaults, and flips.
The big toe on your left foot snags on something and trip. Roll another Acrobatics check to catch yourself.
Generally, it's better to not make players feel like idiots. Instead of saying, "you accidentally let one rip, alerting the guards", say something like "the guards are clearly paying extra close attention tonight. One of them turns around, bringing you straight into the light of his torch".
Make players feel cool (not stupid), and their foes feel intimidating (also not stupid)
[REDACTED]
In our early days, my Rogue player failed a pickpocket. I let her do it with seemingly no consequences. She picked an item and slipped it into her pouch without even looking, deciding to check it out later.
That night, she checked her loot to find a moldy leftover biscuit balled up in a napkin.
Another one I'm saving for a bad stealth check. "You're quiet, and successfully creep down the hall, completely unaware that your cloak has snagged a glass mug on the table next to you. Your party watches in horror as the mug begins to slide towards the edge. Quickly, what do you guys do?"
You need to re roll to grasp the idea of fun and people laughing with you
I hadn't thought of that, but it makes perfect sense. Using a failed check to enhance the game and provide a unique event that wouldn't have happened otherwise.
I don't know about you, but personally I wouldn't have much fun if my character suddenly became a complete and utter moron for a moment, completely ******* up a task that they're supposed to be an expert at. It's the same reason I've stopped using crit fumbles in my games; if I can, I much prefer to describe how the orc knocks the fighter's sword right out of his hand, than to just say "you're an idiot now lmao guess you threw the sword away".
[REDACTED]
I like to let the PLAYERS describe their critical fails. There's fun to be found in failing when it's done by the players.
That works, too. I personally just don't believe that the DM should force a character to be an actual idiot for the purpose of comedy. If it's a player deciding that they want their character to **** up completely, that's okay.
[REDACTED]
I usually ask my players to describe their crit fails, and 9 times out of 10, they make themselves sound like idiots. But it depends on the moment and on the table. Because a crit fail in the middle of a boss fight is not likely go be as lighthearted as in a situation that is more low-key, and a serious RP group may not want to break the mood for a laugh.
Another tack is using one of their strengths to explain the fail. Say a character bombs a stealth check, but they have a really high perception: "You notice a beautiful and rare flower in the trees and the sight of it makes you gasp in surprise." Or instead of strengths, you can comment on an aspect of the character's personality. "Your jokes have the bartender in a really great mood. Unfortunately, he's more interested in hearing the story of the one-eyed abbot than talking about the recent kidnappings."
History: You learned about it in a historical fiction novel, so you mix things that happened with things that didn't and don't tell the player which is which (though you do tell them the name of the book so that they realize that they have to guess which is which)
History: Same as above, but what you know of the situation comes from your roommate at college, who was a conspiracy theorist.
Sleight of Hand: While trying to pick pocket someone, someone startles you and you slap their ass instead.
Sleight of hand: the pocket you are trying to pick has their keys/a squeaky toy/they pet rat on it and they make a sound when you put your hand it (the more random the better)
Insight: You have the uncanny feeling that this person is flirting with you
Intimidation: Your threat would probably have been more effective if you didn't remind the person of that one kid they used to babysit
Investigation: While looking for evidence of wrongdoing, you find the villain's attempt at writing original fiction
Investigation: You keep finding circumstantial evidence of a kingdom spanning conspiracy that has nothing to do with the plot of the adventure
Athletics: Your pants rip while performing the manouver
Investigation: While looking for traps, you find evidence of quick repairs and confuse them for a hiden trap or mechanism (as in, a part of the floor in which the floorboards were replaced because they were rotten looks really suspiscious to you)
Thieves tools: You hear a click while trying to pick a lock but when you move to open the doot, it is closed. It turns out that it wasn't before and you didn't notice.
Performance: You perform a bawdry song about having an affair with the guard captain's wife. Everyone in the tavern is laughing, except for the armored group that just walked in.
Performance: The fun mocking song that you just played was actually about a well connected local. How were you supposed to know that?
Performance: As you you sing, a fly goes into your mouth and the patrons end up worried about you choking instead of roused by your song.
Deception: Your tale might have been more believable if you didn't start laughing partway
Deception: ...they are standing right behind me, aren't they?
Deception/Persuasion: Turns out, the person that you are trying to convince is ALSO a spy within the organization, with a wider perspective
Survival: You are trying to make sense of the tracks but it seems like a whole circle of druids passed through here recently and used this spot for a pit stop so that they could change their wildshape.
One thing to keep in mind is that 5e doesn't have critical fails. A 1 on an attack roll will miss. A 1 on a saving throw or ability check can and will succeed depending on the DC. A character with +9 con save modifier (not uncommon) will succeed at all basic concentration saves since they are only DC10.
A level 9 rogue with 20 dex and expertise in stealth (pretty common) has +13 on stealth checks. This gives them a minimum of 14 if they roll a 1 which will be sufficient to succeed at the stealth check against any creature with a passive perception of 13 or less (which is a lot of creatures). At level 10, with reliable talent, a rogue can't get less than 10 on a proficient ability check.
It's fine to introduce critical fails if a DM and the players like them, maybe it adds some humour, but there are a lot of situations in 5e where a 1 on ability checks or saving throws is still a success unless the DM changes the rules so that a "1" automatically fails any check. If a DM does that, do they also rule that a "20" automatically succeeds? (This was one of the One D&D playtest rules that I personally objected to ... there are a lot of tasks where a 20 should not be an auto-success or a 1 an auto-fail).
The issue I have is that if a player is literally unable to fail a check, there's no point in rolling at all. Same for if there's no chance of success. This is why the outrage regarding the "1 always fails, 20 always succeeds" rule was just as pointless as the rule itself.
[REDACTED]
The DM shouldn't be asking for a roll if a 1 is still a success for the PC, see https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/phb/using-ability-scores#AbilityChecks
Similarly, if a 20 would still fail, then the outcome is not uncertain.