Is there a rules legal way of having enemies fail saves on a Nat 20?

[heavyfuel]

Exactly what it says on the tin.

No matter how high your Save DC is, a creature can always succeed if it rolls a nat 20.

This is specifically for spells saves, but it can really be anything.

Anyway to avoid that?

[AvatarVecna]

Exactly what it says on the tin.

No matter how high your Save DC is, a creature can always succeed if it rolls a nat 20.

This is specifically for spells saves, but it can really be anything.

Anyway to avoid that?

"Irresistible Spell" is a metamagic feat from the "Kingdom of Kalamar: Player's Guide" campaign setting; in it's original form, it made the altered spell's target automatically fail saves. There's two big problems with it, though: firstly, it's from a campaign setting book, so there's a decent argument for excluding it in other campaign settings; secondly, it's been errata'd to just add +10 to the save DC, which doesn't accomplish what you want.

Beyond that? Any method of forcing the target to reroll, or forcing them to accept a set result. Alternatively, you could use an alternate rule proposed in the 3.0 Epic Level Handbook (that may or may not also exist in the DMG) that says that a nat 1/20 on an attack/save doesn't result in automatic failure/success, but instead lets you reroll while subtracting/adding 20 to your normal roll, with additional 1s/20s rolled resulting in an additional 20 subtracted/added.

[Killer Angel]

By RAW, i suppose you can use Bestow Curse.
You can invent your own curse: the only limit is that it cannot be more powerful than those listed by the spell.

And I'd say that "20 is not an automatic success", is certainly no more powerful than "-6 decrease to an ability score"

[AvatarVecna]

By RAW, i suppose you can use Bestow Curse.
You can invent your own curse: the only limit is that it cannot be more powerful than those listed by the spell.

And I'd say that "20 is not an automatic success", is certainly no more powerful than "-6 decrease to an ability score"

I'd say that's depends a lot on the type of game. High-level/op rocket tag, for instance, is very likely to get a significant boost from such a thing, while a low-level, gritty game probably won't change too much.

[EvilAvocado]

Besides the Afore mentioned options in Pathfinder(Ignore if you don't play with cross compatability)
The Witch Misfortune Hex causes a taget to roll 2 D20's and take the lower. meaning they would have to roll 2 20's simultaneously which drastically reduces the probability.

The spell Ill Omen has the same effect as do Pugwampi Auras, RAW seems to allow these to stack too.

[Zanos]

"Irresistible Spell" is a metamagic feat from the "Kingdom of Kalamar: Player's Guide" campaign setting; in it's original form, it made the altered spell's target automatically fail saves. There's two big problems with it, though: firstly, it's from a campaign setting book, so there's a decent argument for excluding it in other campaign settings; secondly, it's been errata'd to just add +10 to the save DC, which doesn't accomplish what you want.

Beyond that? Any method of forcing the target to reroll, or forcing them to accept a set result. Alternatively, you could use an alternate rule proposed in the 3.0 Epic Level Handbook (that may or may not also exist in the DMG) that says that a nat 1/20 on an attack/save doesn't result in automatic failure/success, but instead lets you reroll while subtracting/adding 20 to your normal roll, with additional 1s/20s rolled resulting in an additional 20 subtracted/added.
I believed the KoK errata was published after they lost their licence to make official content. The errata isn't technically rules legal, making the no save version the legal one.

[heavyfuel]

I believed the KoK errata was published after they lost their licence to make official content. The errata isn't technically rules legal, making the no save version the legal one.

It was. Again, not RAW by WotC's standards, but I think no DM would ever allow for the book without the errata.


By RAW, i suppose you can use Bestow Curse.
You can invent your own curse: the only limit is that it cannot be more powerful than those listed by the spell.

And I'd say that "20 is not an automatic success", is certainly no more powerful than "-6 decrease to an ability score"

Dunno man. This kind of DM fiat is pretty much what I wanted to be rid of.



Beyond that? Any method of forcing the target to reroll, or forcing them to accept a set result. Alternatively, you could use an alternate rule proposed in the 3.0 Epic Level Handbook (that may or may not also exist in the DMG) that says that a nat 1/20 on an attack/save doesn't result in automatic failure/success, but instead lets you reroll while subtracting/adding 20 to your normal roll, with additional 1s/20s rolled resulting in an additional 20 subtracted/added.

Hmmm, a bunch of Unluck spells in a row ought to do the trick. But lets say the creature gets really lucky and is able to roll 2 20s in a row (odds are 1 in 400, not THAT hard)? I still want a more sure fire way.

[Metahuman1]

Custom Items using the rules in the DMG and Expanded Psionics Handbook to give you unlimited no action use of multiple spells that force multiple rerolls and all have take worse result clauses?

It could be expensive but if you work it out with lots of discounting measures (30% off for specific race only, 30% off for specific alignments only, Curse to be unremoveable once used the first time so 50% off, that kinda stuff.) could make them affordable.

You could chain like 3-4 Rerolls that way I'd think on every save an enemy has to roll, and not only should that eliminate Nat 20's sans rigged dice, it should also when combined with suitably jacked up DC's on your spells make opponents cripplingly dependent on there own Saving throw bonuses.

[Doctor Awkward]

Exactly what it says on the tin.

No matter how high your Save DC is, a creature can always succeed if it rolls a nat 20.

This is specifically for spells saves, but it can really be anything.

Anyway to avoid that?

Stop using spells that offer your enemies the chance to save.







... *shrug* What?



Yeah Unluck, and Misfortune Hex are things, but if your problem is a target with extraordinary saves, you are not going to deal with it by offering it more saving throws.

If what you want a particular effect that offers a saving throw to be guaranteed it might be helpful to state what that effect is.


Other than that... I dunno, man. Ask for a house rule, I guess.

[Metahuman1]

If it's 3.5 D&D, make an affiliation using the rules in the PHB II that requires all saves rolled by opponents to be rerolled multiple times and take lowest result maybe? You'd have to build up to it during play, but once you do it's there and rules legal.

[Psyren]

"Irresistible Spell" is a metamagic feat from the "Kingdom of Kalamar: Player's Guide" campaign setting; in it's original form, it made the altered spell's target automatically fail saves. There's two big problems with it, though: firstly, it's from a campaign setting book, so there's a decent argument for excluding it in other campaign settings; secondly, it's been errata'd to just add +10 to the save DC, which doesn't accomplish what you want.


I believed the KoK errata was published after they lost their licence to make official content. The errata isn't technically rules legal, making the no save version the legal one.

It's still third-party though - despite the D&D license on the cover, it was published by Kenzer & Co., not WotC.

[Twurps]

By RAW, i suppose you can use Bestow Curse.
You can invent your own curse: the only limit is that it cannot be more powerful than those listed by the spell.

And I'd say that "20 is not an automatic success", is certainly no more powerful than "-6 decrease to an ability score"

You need to beat a will save to get this to work, making it self defeating in most cases.

[LooseCannoneer]

Our group house-rules that out as to prevent level 1 Commoners resisting Psion 20s. If there's a difference in the bonuses of more than +15, 20s or 1s don't affect automatic success or failure.

[Killer Angel]

You need to beat a will save to get this to work, making it self defeating in most cases.

That's why I would use "no save" spells... :smallwink:

[Seclora]

To answer your question: Rerolls are probably your best bet. There are ways to make an enemy reroll saves, and there are feats that will let you treat a nat1 as a nat20 and vice-versa(but for your enemies).
However, generally speaking, the 5% chance that a non-dire rat will shake off your dominate monster is intentional on Wizard's part. It ensures that there is always a chance to succeed, and always a chance to fail. It is not an easy thing to bypass, and probably easier to just work around using no save effects and targeting enemies with weaker saves against those effects.

To use LooseCannoneer's example, sometimes that lvl 1 commoner will survive a psion's fully augmented mind thrust(or whatever). Maybe that's the moment when the lvl 1 commoner realizes that he has a natural gift for fighting psionics, and sets out on a quest to learn all the best counter-psionic tactics in order to avenge his people who were slaughtered by some lvl 20 psion. Maybe the psion realized mid-manifest that he probably shouldn't be using fully augmented powers on single HD humanoids and his power manifested weaker than it should have. These are the dynamics that the mechanics are intended to include. It's not just numbers, its the things behind them.

So yes, there are a few ways to work around it. Generally speaking though, that 5% chance of failure is the tradeoff for having a 5% chance of succeeding at something you shouldn't be able to, like becoming an optimized level 20 character.

[Crake]

Use an SLA geas to force the target to willingly fail all saves from spells you cast. Arguably suicidal (depending on how hostile you are and the scenario in question) since you could just cast a save or die spell on them, but they would need to identify the spell first.

[atemu1234]

By RAW, i suppose you can use Bestow Curse.
You can invent your own curse: the only limit is that it cannot be more powerful than those listed by the spell.

And I'd say that "20 is not an automatic success", is certainly no more powerful than "-6 decrease to an ability score"

Also that penalty is untyped, and also why I paired it with both contingent spell and an evil necromancer in the party of my current group.