I feel like they really thought the vast majority of players really did use the nat 1/20 house rule though; like that was their reasoning for making it the rule or did I interpret Jeremy Crawford wrong?
Most people do interpret nat 1/20 as special in some way, but not necessarily as auto success/fail; someone with a +12 who rolls a 20 will get a better outcome than someone with a -1 who rolls a 20.
I feel like they really thought the vast majority of players really did use the nat 1/20 house rule though; like that was their reasoning for making it the rule or did I interpret Jeremy Crawford wrong?
Most people do interpret nat 1/20 as special in some way, but not necessarily as auto success/fail.
I'm okay with the inspiration idea, I might limit it to attack rolls and the first attempt on a test, taking 20 effectively should not grant inspiration. That can be the perk for rolling a 20.
I feel like they really thought the vast majority of players really did use the nat 1/20 house rule though; like that was their reasoning for making it the rule or did I interpret Jeremy Crawford wrong?
Most people do interpret nat 1/20 as special in some way, but not necessarily as auto success/fail.
What to they do to treat it as special? I only seen people either treat them as auto fail/success or as regular rolls, in which they work as any other number would mechanically (aside from how they are described in the rules for the purposes of attacks and death saves).
I feel like they really thought the vast majority of players really did use the nat 1/20 house rule though; like that was their reasoning for making it the rule or did I interpret Jeremy Crawford wrong?
Most people do interpret nat 1/20 as special in some way, but not necessarily as auto success/fail.
What to they do to treat it as special? I only seen people either treat them as auto fail/success or as regular rolls, in which they work as any other number would mechanically (aside from how they are described in the rules for the purposes of attacks and death saves).
I and those that I play with generally get excited about a natural 20. For attacks it means extra damage of course, but for skills it means that the character has done the absolute best they could do at what ever they attempted to do, and we play that up in the RP in the moment. We don't really need much more than that. The reward is in how we play the game and enjoy our selves.
What to they do to treat it as special? I only seen people either treat them as auto fail/success or as regular rolls, in which they work as any other number would mechanically (aside from how they are described in the rules for the purposes of attacks and death saves).
Typically it's a 'yes and also a special effect' if the roll would have succeeded anyway.
What to they do to treat it as special? I only seen people either treat them as auto fail/success or as regular rolls, in which they work as any other number would mechanically (aside from how they are described in the rules for the purposes of attacks and death saves).
Typically it's a 'yes and also a special effect' if the roll would have succeeded anyway.
I've rarely seen a 20 give any special effect as most checks don't really give anything extra. For example, if a door is stuck partially opened and needs a strength check to force open/closed, usually getting a NAT20 ain't doing anymore past opening the door than a NAT 19.
What to they do to treat it as special? I only seen people either treat them as auto fail/success or as regular rolls, in which they work as any other number would mechanically (aside from how they are described in the rules for the purposes of attacks and death saves).
Typically it's a 'yes and also a special effect' if the roll would have succeeded anyway.
I've rarely seen a 20 give any special effect as most checks don't really give anything extra. For example, if a door is stuck partially opened and needs a strength check to force open/closed, usually getting a NAT20 ain't doing anymore past opening the door than a NAT 19.
That is very sad.
Edit: That isn't meant to be an insult of any kind. If that is what your table enjoys, then more power to you. It just doesn't sound fun to me.
What to they do to treat it as special? I only seen people either treat them as auto fail/success or as regular rolls, in which they work as any other number would mechanically (aside from how they are described in the rules for the purposes of attacks and death saves).
Typically it's a 'yes and also a special effect' if the roll would have succeeded anyway.
I've rarely seen a 20 give any special effect as most checks don't really give anything extra. For example, if a door is stuck partially opened and needs a strength check to force open/closed, usually getting a NAT20 ain't doing anymore past opening the door than a NAT 19.
That is very sad.
Edit: That isn't meant to be an insult of any kind. If that is what your table enjoys, then more power to you. It just doesn't sound fun to me.
I didn't say never, but it really depends on what the check is for, sometimes an extra reward just isn't justified in a 20.
So maybe if it's searching a desk for papers in an investigation, a 20 might also find a key to a draw with a pouch of gold, some gems, etc.
But if it's trying to open a door, what is a 20 meant to do? It seems odd to force some kind of special scenario where forcing a door open gives a special extra reward because it got a NAT 20. It's the same for an ability check to jump, what does getting a Nat 20 meant to specially do? So I shouldn't have said rarely, but more so that the combination of a Nat 20 and the right context is not necessarily the most common.
What to they do to treat it as special? I only seen people either treat them as auto fail/success or as regular rolls, in which they work as any other number would mechanically (aside from how they are described in the rules for the purposes of attacks and death saves).
Typically it's a 'yes and also a special effect' if the roll would have succeeded anyway.
I've rarely seen a 20 give any special effect as most checks don't really give anything extra. For example, if a door is stuck partially opened and needs a strength check to force open/closed, usually getting a NAT20 ain't doing anymore past opening the door than a NAT 19.
That is very sad.
Edit: That isn't meant to be an insult of any kind. If that is what your table enjoys, then more power to you. It just doesn't sound fun to me.
For me, it then becomes an issue of we want something special to come from a nat 20 but it is almost always counterbalanced by something extra bad happening on a nat 1, which a lot of people don't like. I personally just use the nat 1 or 20 as just regular rolls for Saving Throws and Ability Checks rather than tackling on additional punishment or rewards. I may give them a bit more fluff but that is about it; mechanically they are just the number rolled.
but it is almost always counterbalanced by something extra bad happening on a nat 1, which a lot of people don't like.
To add to that, there is a certain amount of satisfaction in, particularly in tiers two and above, of rolling a one and still making a DC 10 because you're so good at something, that even on your worst attempt you can keep up with the average.
but it is almost always counterbalanced by something extra bad happening on a nat 1, which a lot of people don't like.
To add to that, there is a certain amount of satisfaction in, particularly in tiers two and above, of rolling a one and still making a DC 10 because you're so good at something, that even on your worst attempt you can keep up with the average.
That's honestly what I have been saying this entire time. There is a huge amount of satisfaction of being able to succeed on a nat 1 because at that point you are really seeing your investment pay off.
I feel like they really thought the vast majority of players really did use the nat 1/20 house rule though; like that was their reasoning for making it the rule or did I interpret Jeremy Crawford wrong?
Most people do interpret nat 1/20 as special in some way, but not necessarily as auto success/fail.
I'm okay with the inspiration idea, I might limit it to attack rolls and the first attempt on a test, taking 20 effectively should not grant inspiration. That can be the perk for rolling a 20.
DND 5e doesn't have a "take 10 or 20" in the sense of dice value. The rules say the attempt takes 10 times as long and you just pass.
Any type of fixed rolls are baggage DMs are bringing over from other editions' take 10/20.
Passive checks are also greatly misunderstood. They're not there to describe when the PC is doing something passively. They are when you want to determine an average outcome when the player is passive.
It was a colloquialism, I was just saying making attempt after attempt until you roll a 20 should not give you inspiration for skill checks and other repeatable actions you should only get inspiration if the 20 is on the first roll.
I feel like they really thought the vast majority of players really did use the nat 1/20 house rule though; like that was their reasoning for making it the rule or did I interpret Jeremy Crawford wrong?
Most people do interpret nat 1/20 as special in some way, but not necessarily as auto success/fail.
What to they do to treat it as special? I only seen people either treat them as auto fail/success or as regular rolls, in which they work as any other number would mechanically (aside from how they are described in the rules for the purposes of attacks and death saves).
I rule it similar to the how the ffg narrative dice work. You succeed or fail at your task, but there will be some possibly unrelated advantage or disadvantage created.
So failing on a 20 to open a door, I might say it has dislodged or cracked and you can see part of the room beyond. If you roll a 20 and succeed, maybe you surprise those in the room. If you succeed on a Dex check with a 1 maybe you are prone or you’ve dropped something or you get a disadvantage on your next init check (we roll every round). Charm target saves on a 1. target is not charmed but is impressed that you’d be so bold as to attempt it and is positively predisposed.
Usually I will ask the player to narrate a positive effect or negative outcome and I decide the mechanical impact. Players come up with awesome stuff.
I feel like they really thought the vast majority of players really did use the nat 1/20 house rule though; like that was their reasoning for making it the rule or did I interpret Jeremy Crawford wrong?
Most people do interpret nat 1/20 as special in some way, but not necessarily as auto success/fail.
I'm okay with the inspiration idea, I might limit it to attack rolls and the first attempt on a test, taking 20 effectively should not grant inspiration. That can be the perk for rolling a 20.
DND 5e doesn't have a "take 10 or 20" in the sense of dice value. The rules say the attempt takes 10 times as long and you just pass.
Any type of fixed rolls are baggage DMs are bringing over from other editions' take 10/20.
Passive checks are also greatly misunderstood. They're not there to describe when the PC is doing something passively. They are when you want to determine an average outcome when the player is passive.
It was a colloquialism, I was just saying making attempt after attempt until you roll a 20 should not give you inspiration for skill checks and other repeatable actions you should only get inspiration if the 20 is on the first roll.
Well of that's the case you could just make natural ones burn inspiration if they have it automatically. Then the odds of each would make such tactics pointless even if the DM should just not allow stuff like that
Actually, that might not be that bad of an idea. If Nat 1s burned away Inspiration if you had it, it would compel people to use it more liberally just on the off chance that they might end up losing it if they get unlucky in the future.
I feel like they really thought the vast majority of players really did use the nat 1/20 house rule though; like that was their reasoning for making it the rule or did I interpret Jeremy Crawford wrong?
Most people do interpret nat 1/20 as special in some way, but not necessarily as auto success/fail.
I'm okay with the inspiration idea, I might limit it to attack rolls and the first attempt on a test, taking 20 effectively should not grant inspiration. That can be the perk for rolling a 20.
DND 5e doesn't have a "take 10 or 20" in the sense of dice value. The rules say the attempt takes 10 times as long and you just pass.
Any type of fixed rolls are baggage DMs are bringing over from other editions' take 10/20.
Passive checks are also greatly misunderstood. They're not there to describe when the PC is doing something passively. They are when you want to determine an average outcome when the player is passive.
It was a colloquialism, I was just saying making attempt after attempt until you roll a 20 should not give you inspiration for skill checks and other repeatable actions you should only get inspiration if the 20 is on the first roll.
Well of that's the case you could just make natural ones burn inspiration if they have it automatically. Then the odds of each would make such tactics pointless even if the DM should just not allow stuff like that
Actually, that might not be that bad of an idea. If Nat 1s burned away Inspiration if you had it, it would compel people to use it more liberally just on the off chance that they might end up losing it if they get unlucky in the future.
Yeah. I'm not a fan of the natural 1/20 but the same time I can look at the rules and see how easily they're modified to work at a given table, much of 5e is that way, I don't think it's that big of a deal in the end.
Purely speaking on the strategic metagame of the rules, ability checks are already a risky proposition cuz not only does the check need to have consequences for failing they're usually is built in consequences for inaction as well. That means inspiration is most likely going to be burnt canceling disadvantage which has the largest impact on your results assuming you have a half way decent chance to pass the save to begin with.
I really don't think it is a good thing to say that changes to RAW is a good thing because you can house rule it to be something different. RAW often sets the precedent for things and can affect how people house rule things. There is also Organized Play where things have to be run RAW. RAW very much is a big deal because it sets the foundation on which house rules are then added. Plus, as this is UA, this is the chance to change RAW with feedback; we very much should treat it as a big deal.
I have seen DMs do stuff for Nat 1/20 on ability checks, never on saving throws tho.
Most people do interpret nat 1/20 as special in some way, but not necessarily as auto success/fail; someone with a +12 who rolls a 20 will get a better outcome than someone with a -1 who rolls a 20.
I'm okay with the inspiration idea, I might limit it to attack rolls and the first attempt on a test, taking 20 effectively should not grant inspiration. That can be the perk for rolling a 20.
What to they do to treat it as special? I only seen people either treat them as auto fail/success or as regular rolls, in which they work as any other number would mechanically (aside from how they are described in the rules for the purposes of attacks and death saves).
I and those that I play with generally get excited about a natural 20. For attacks it means extra damage of course, but for skills it means that the character has done the absolute best they could do at what ever they attempted to do, and we play that up in the RP in the moment. We don't really need much more than that. The reward is in how we play the game and enjoy our selves.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Typically it's a 'yes and also a special effect' if the roll would have succeeded anyway.
I've rarely seen a 20 give any special effect as most checks don't really give anything extra. For example, if a door is stuck partially opened and needs a strength check to force open/closed, usually getting a NAT20 ain't doing anymore past opening the door than a NAT 19.
That is very sad.
Edit: That isn't meant to be an insult of any kind. If that is what your table enjoys, then more power to you. It just doesn't sound fun to me.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I didn't say never, but it really depends on what the check is for, sometimes an extra reward just isn't justified in a 20.
So maybe if it's searching a desk for papers in an investigation, a 20 might also find a key to a draw with a pouch of gold, some gems, etc.
But if it's trying to open a door, what is a 20 meant to do? It seems odd to force some kind of special scenario where forcing a door open gives a special extra reward because it got a NAT 20. It's the same for an ability check to jump, what does getting a Nat 20 meant to specially do? So I shouldn't have said rarely, but more so that the combination of a Nat 20 and the right context is not necessarily the most common.
For me, it then becomes an issue of we want something special to come from a nat 20 but it is almost always counterbalanced by something extra bad happening on a nat 1, which a lot of people don't like. I personally just use the nat 1 or 20 as just regular rolls for Saving Throws and Ability Checks rather than tackling on additional punishment or rewards. I may give them a bit more fluff but that is about it; mechanically they are just the number rolled.
To add to that, there is a certain amount of satisfaction in, particularly in tiers two and above, of rolling a one and still making a DC 10 because you're so good at something, that even on your worst attempt you can keep up with the average.
That's honestly what I have been saying this entire time. There is a huge amount of satisfaction of being able to succeed on a nat 1 because at that point you are really seeing your investment pay off.
It was a colloquialism, I was just saying making attempt after attempt until you roll a 20 should not give you inspiration for skill checks and other repeatable actions you should only get inspiration if the 20 is on the first roll.
I rule it similar to the how the ffg narrative dice work. You succeed or fail at your task, but there will be some possibly unrelated advantage or disadvantage created.
So failing on a 20 to open a door, I might say it has dislodged or cracked and you can see part of the room beyond. If you roll a 20 and succeed, maybe you surprise those in the room. If you succeed on a Dex check with a 1 maybe you are prone or you’ve dropped something or you get a disadvantage on your next init check (we roll every round). Charm target saves on a 1. target is not charmed but is impressed that you’d be so bold as to attempt it and is positively predisposed.
Usually I will ask the player to narrate a positive effect or negative outcome and I decide the mechanical impact. Players come up with awesome stuff.
Actually, that might not be that bad of an idea. If Nat 1s burned away Inspiration if you had it, it would compel people to use it more liberally just on the off chance that they might end up losing it if they get unlucky in the future.
I really don't think it is a good thing to say that changes to RAW is a good thing because you can house rule it to be something different. RAW often sets the precedent for things and can affect how people house rule things. There is also Organized Play where things have to be run RAW. RAW very much is a big deal because it sets the foundation on which house rules are then added. Plus, as this is UA, this is the chance to change RAW with feedback; we very much should treat it as a big deal.