put bards in garbage can. hm makes sense.

If the players are demanding wild results, especially if they're the kind to roll unprompted, then sure. But in my experience, it's usually just a little flourish or a small bonus, which I think is fine. And if the issue is that a nat 20 doesn't guarantee success, technically, sure, but I'd be more annoyed being asked to make a pointless roll. I know there are reasons, like a hidden target number, or other characters being able to do it, but in general, I'd rather just hear "no" than go through a pointless check.

It's technically homebrew, but basically every table Ive played at will give you a little bonus if you roll a 20 for a check and a little negative if you roll a 1. But we still kept that a 20 does not necessarily mean an auto success and a 1 is not necessarily an auto failure. You still need to beat the DC

They can’t crit, but success can determined by numerical thresholds that the dm sets, and they just so happen to align with rolling a 12 for success, 20 for glorious accomplishment, and 1 for terrible snafu.

Rule of cool If something sounds fun it’s happening at my table. If you roll a 20 on persuasion or something we’re going to have fun, but I’m not turning characters into literal gods (though that did happen one game)

They absolutely do, and the bonus effects are listed in the description of each skill action. Oh. you mean in D&D. *washes hands*


They do in PF2e. And it rocks

Depends what system you're playing

I... did not realize that, I guess it makes sense, but I also think the concept of a skill check being able to do something analagous to critting is actually a good idea, if other rules or the scenario ... fit this as a mechanic.

I like the idea of extraordinary luck given to players. Giving everything they do a 5% chance of incredible success no matter the difficulty is such a small tweak to let some really hilarious, or awesome things play out. And they will take more risks knowing there is potentially a great reward. How do you balance this? 5% chance of terrible failure no matter how easy. No more automatic success. Sometimes shit just happens and when it happens, it _really_ hurts. And also, you can just make regular failure more punishing or even make success a monkey's paw thing: "You want to seduce the lich?! *already rolling dice* "No, you fail. In your attempt to seduce the lich, his aura of evil has made you impotent. Permanently." OR "YES NAT TWENTY!! *DM deadpan for 10 seconds, then* "I have a fetish for fingers. I'll give you the information you want in exchange for a few those delectable, dainty fingers, half-elf" (Some temporary debuffs that can heal, and they get to skip the fetch quest)

In 5e, they do if you like fun. But go off on your "correct" way to play

D&D has all the money in the entire hobby, basically, and they still make terrible design decisions like this. Rolling a nat 20 and getting a crit is the jackpot of d&d mechanics. Don't design a system where sometimes you hit the jackpot but don't win anything. That's an objectively bad choice to make.

Agreed, auto success on a skill check nerfs challenges. If the DC is so high that the PC doesn't succeed with a 20, it seems too random to give it to them. Then again, it depends on the situation: a nat 20 trying to convince the penny pinching tavern owner to give you a discount seems like fun even if the DC should be infinite; but when dealing with something story related, I'd stick a little closer to the rules.

This is the way

::: spoiler Pedant mode activated Erm, ackshually, a natural 20 only increases the degree of success by one. This means, for example, if someone rolls a 20 on an attack roll, the total with modifiers is 28, and the defender's AC is 30, the attack will be bumped up from a failure to a normal success, not a critical success. :::

A jackpot is not 5% odds or a 1 in 20 chance. A natural 20 is not as rare as y'all wanna make it out to be.

Ok, but if the 20 doesn't succed, why did you let them roll in the first place?

But at the same time, if the DC is so high that no roll could succeed, then they shouldn’t be rolling for it in the first place

You're right, but I don't know most of my PCs stats. If the DC on a lock is 21, I'd expect a rogue *might* make it, but another PC who has never picked a lock wouldn't.