I recently tried PF2E and really liked the degrees of success system they use, where there is Critical Failure (roll <= DC-10), Failure (DC-10 < roll < DC), Success (DC < roll < DC+10), and Critical Success (roll >= DC+10). A nat-1 decreases your degree of success by 1 level and a nat-20 increases your degree of success by 1 level. One consequence of this is that a 20 doesn't automatically succeed. For a nearly impossible feat with a DC of 40, if you roll a nat-20 with a +5 (25 overall), your roll is bumped from a Critical Failure to a Failure (you did the ABSOLUTE best job you're capable of, even with some luck thrown in, but it still wasn't enough). On the flip-side, for an extremely simple task with a DC of 5, if you roll a nat-1 with a +15 (16 overall), your roll is dropped from a Success to a Failure (you should be able to do this in your sleep, but either by some screw-up or unfortunate external forces, you managed to still fail).
Most spells call for a basic saving through, which means that on a Critical Success you suffer no damage or ill effect, on a Success you suffer half damage (and possibly no effect), on a Fail you take full damage and suffer any ill effect, and on a Critical Fail, you take double damage and suffer any ill effect.
My party still prefers the majority of 5E's mechanics, so just playing PF2E isn't the solution (for us).
Goal
I would like to incorporate a house-rule like this without taking away from (diluting/nerfing/etc) the Evasion feature of Rogues and Monks (or any other features I haven't thought of).
Proposal
Use the degrees of success system and change Evasion to increase their success level of DEX saves by 2. This would mean that a character with Evasion would never take double damage and they would only take full damage if they roll a nat-1 (and fail by 10 or more). This option seems more in-line with the intent of Evasion, because the only way to take double damage is if the DC is high and the character rolls a nat-1. In most cases, the character would only take half damage and they would typically take no damage.
I am not familiar with PF2E but presumable the whole system is built around this. For D&D there are a lot of save or suck spells so what happens with a spell like polymorph. I once played a camapign where the DM housrules double damage of a critical failure of a saving throw (nat 1) until I begged him to stop as it makes combat far to swingy. Throw a young white dragon at a level 6 party and if the 14 Con Cleric (45 HP) has a critical fail they are insta killed unless someone else in the party has revivify. Even on a -10 that is going to happen one time in 10 (unless they have resiliant con)
By the way in 5e a natural 20 doesn't automatically succeed on ability check or saving throws (other than death saving throws).
For abilty checks there is sometimes but always a scale of success, some of the published adventures say "if the character succeeds (or fails) by 5 or more then .....[something else happens]. It is very common for DMs to ask for a (particularly knowledge based) check and scale the response depending on the answer. For example an NPC asks the party to destroy a banshee and a player asked what there character knows about banshees. A very low rolls gets a "never heard of them", slightly higher would be "some form of undead", at higher rolls they would get that they are incorporal how they act in combat and what there strengths and weaknesses are.
The thing I like about 5e is that it's very simple. Roll a die, add a modifier, and sometimes a bonus. Match it against a DC, you're done, and the game moves on. There's too much going on with the system you're proposing. As a player or a DM, I would not want to mess with any of that. Obviously you can homebrew anything you want for your game. If you and your players like this, then go for it.
PF2E has a very different scaling system to account for this aspect of their game which just doesn't translate to 5e. The most striking example here is that most effects that cause Advantage / Disadvantage in 5e is a +2/-2 in PF2E - this differences means the buffs have a linear effect on Critical rates in PF2E, but that is not the case for D&D Advantage/Disadvantage could double the chance of a Critical which will make the game extremely swingy.
I am not familiar with PF2E but presumable the whole system is built around this. For D&D there are a lot of save or suck spells so what happens with a spell like polymorph. I once played a camapign where the DM housrules double damage of a critical failure of a saving throw (nat 1) until I begged him to stop as it makes combat far to swingy. Throw a young white dragon at a level 6 party and if the 14 Con Cleric (45 HP) has a critical fail they are insta killed unless someone else in the party has revivify. Even on a -10 that is going to happen one time in 10 (unless they have resiliant con)
By the way in 5e a natural 20 doesn't automatically succeed on ability check or saving throws (other than death saving throws).
For abilty checks there is sometimes but always a scale of success, some of the published adventures say "if the character succeeds (or fails) by 5 or more then .....[something else happens]. It is very common for DMs to ask for a (particularly knowledge based) check and scale the response depending on the answer. For example an NPC asks the party to destroy a banshee and a player asked what there character knows about banshees. A very low rolls gets a "never heard of them", slightly higher would be "some form of undead", at higher rolls they would get that they are incorporal how they act in combat and what there strengths and weaknesses are.
@Jegpeg - PF2E's accuracy system is setup to utilize much higher DCs and ACs to represent things that a normal (or low-level) character would be incapable of doing (or avoiding).
The way the basic save works (and presumably this proposal, as well) for the save-or-suck is that they are unaffected by degrees of success. Only when degrees of success are applicable, would they come into play. Your example of Polymorph is perfect. There's no good way to REALLY turn into a ferret vs. just turning into a ferret. You could get creative, but that's not the idea here.
I can definitely see the problem with combat swinging way to hard on a single bad roll. This may be better suited for a one-shot death-mode game because of that.
As for the skill checks, I hold to the idea that you don't roll unless it could affect the outcome. You might be rolling to see just how badly something goes (trope example: "I seduce the dragon!" A nat-20 with a +12 might make the dragon chuckle at your bravado, and they might not immediately attack, but you're not going to succeed). I have seen the degrees of success sparsely scattered through select adventures and referenced in the DMG (I believe). This concept was more for the saves.
Thanks for the feedback! I'll definitely take this into account.
The thing I like about 5e is that it's very simple. Roll a die, add a modifier, and sometimes a bonus. Match it against a DC, you're done, and the game moves on. There's too much going on with the system you're proposing. As a player or a DM, I would not want to mess with any of that. Obviously you can homebrew anything you want for your game. If you and your players like this, then go for it.
@Lathius - I agree that the simplicity is a MAJOR draw over games like Pathfinder and older DnD editions, and this is a bit of a wrench in that aspect. If I do try this, it will likely be for a one-shot where the players know in advance what we are trying out.
PF2E has a very different scaling system to account for this aspect of their game which just doesn't translate to 5e. The most striking example here is that most effects that cause Advantage / Disadvantage in 5e is a +2/-2 in PF2E - this differences means the buffs have a linear effect on Critical rates in PF2E, but that is not the case for D&D Advantage/Disadvantage could double the chance of a Critical which will make the game extremely swingy.
@Agilemind - Thanks for the feedback. This is exactly why I wanted to reach out instead of just going ahead and trying it. I have very little experience with PF2E, and was hoping that others (such as yourself) would be able to provide some feedback. I was looking for a way to make combat more dynamic that what I've experienced with 5e and this was one thing I considered borrowing from PF2E to make that happen.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Background
I recently tried PF2E and really liked the degrees of success system they use, where there is Critical Failure (roll <= DC-10), Failure (DC-10 < roll < DC), Success (DC < roll < DC+10), and Critical Success (roll >= DC+10). A nat-1 decreases your degree of success by 1 level and a nat-20 increases your degree of success by 1 level. One consequence of this is that a 20 doesn't automatically succeed. For a nearly impossible feat with a DC of 40, if you roll a nat-20 with a +5 (25 overall), your roll is bumped from a Critical Failure to a Failure (you did the ABSOLUTE best job you're capable of, even with some luck thrown in, but it still wasn't enough). On the flip-side, for an extremely simple task with a DC of 5, if you roll a nat-1 with a +15 (16 overall), your roll is dropped from a Success to a Failure (you should be able to do this in your sleep, but either by some screw-up or unfortunate external forces, you managed to still fail).
Most spells call for a basic saving through, which means that on a Critical Success you suffer no damage or ill effect, on a Success you suffer half damage (and possibly no effect), on a Fail you take full damage and suffer any ill effect, and on a Critical Fail, you take double damage and suffer any ill effect.
My party still prefers the majority of 5E's mechanics, so just playing PF2E isn't the solution (for us).
Goal
I would like to incorporate a house-rule like this without taking away from (diluting/nerfing/etc) the Evasion feature of Rogues and Monks (or any other features I haven't thought of).
Proposal
Use the degrees of success system and change Evasion to increase their success level of DEX saves by 2. This would mean that a character with Evasion would never take double damage and they would only take full damage if they roll a nat-1 (and fail by 10 or more). This option seems more in-line with the intent of Evasion, because the only way to take double damage is if the DC is high and the character rolls a nat-1. In most cases, the character would only take half damage and they would typically take no damage.
While not perfect, i'm satisfied with 5E check vs DC rating system.
PS This should be better in the Homebrew & House Rules thread.
I am not familiar with PF2E but presumable the whole system is built around this. For D&D there are a lot of save or suck spells so what happens with a spell like polymorph. I once played a camapign where the DM housrules double damage of a critical failure of a saving throw (nat 1) until I begged him to stop as it makes combat far to swingy. Throw a young white dragon at a level 6 party and if the 14 Con Cleric (45 HP) has a critical fail they are insta killed unless someone else in the party has revivify. Even on a -10 that is going to happen one time in 10 (unless they have resiliant con)
By the way in 5e a natural 20 doesn't automatically succeed on ability check or saving throws (other than death saving throws).
For abilty checks there is sometimes but always a scale of success, some of the published adventures say "if the character succeeds (or fails) by 5 or more then .....[something else happens]. It is very common for DMs to ask for a (particularly knowledge based) check and scale the response depending on the answer. For example an NPC asks the party to destroy a banshee and a player asked what there character knows about banshees. A very low rolls gets a "never heard of them", slightly higher would be "some form of undead", at higher rolls they would get that they are incorporal how they act in combat and what there strengths and weaknesses are.
The thing I like about 5e is that it's very simple. Roll a die, add a modifier, and sometimes a bonus. Match it against a DC, you're done, and the game moves on. There's too much going on with the system you're proposing. As a player or a DM, I would not want to mess with any of that. Obviously you can homebrew anything you want for your game. If you and your players like this, then go for it.
PF2E has a very different scaling system to account for this aspect of their game which just doesn't translate to 5e. The most striking example here is that most effects that cause Advantage / Disadvantage in 5e is a +2/-2 in PF2E - this differences means the buffs have a linear effect on Critical rates in PF2E, but that is not the case for D&D Advantage/Disadvantage could double the chance of a Critical which will make the game extremely swingy.
@Plaguescarred - You are absolutely right about the thread. I missed that. Thank you.
@Jegpeg - PF2E's accuracy system is setup to utilize much higher DCs and ACs to represent things that a normal (or low-level) character would be incapable of doing (or avoiding).
The way the basic save works (and presumably this proposal, as well) for the save-or-suck is that they are unaffected by degrees of success. Only when degrees of success are applicable, would they come into play. Your example of Polymorph is perfect. There's no good way to REALLY turn into a ferret vs. just turning into a ferret. You could get creative, but that's not the idea here.
I can definitely see the problem with combat swinging way to hard on a single bad roll. This may be better suited for a one-shot death-mode game because of that.
As for the skill checks, I hold to the idea that you don't roll unless it could affect the outcome. You might be rolling to see just how badly something goes (trope example: "I seduce the dragon!" A nat-20 with a +12 might make the dragon chuckle at your bravado, and they might not immediately attack, but you're not going to succeed). I have seen the degrees of success sparsely scattered through select adventures and referenced in the DMG (I believe). This concept was more for the saves.
Thanks for the feedback! I'll definitely take this into account.
@Lathius - I agree that the simplicity is a MAJOR draw over games like Pathfinder and older DnD editions, and this is a bit of a wrench in that aspect. If I do try this, it will likely be for a one-shot where the players know in advance what we are trying out.
@Agilemind - Thanks for the feedback. This is exactly why I wanted to reach out instead of just going ahead and trying it. I have very little experience with PF2E, and was hoping that others (such as yourself) would be able to provide some feedback. I was looking for a way to make combat more dynamic that what I've experienced with 5e and this was one thing I considered borrowing from PF2E to make that happen.