A Critical Success or Failure

[Thrasher92]

On page 242 of the Dungeon Master's Guide it has an entry regarding what happens when you roll a d20 on an ability check or saving throw.

CRITICAL SUCCESS OR FAILURE
Rolling a 20 or a 1 on an ability check or a saving throw doesn't normally have any special effect. However, you can choose to take such an exceptional roll into account when adjudicating the outcome. It's up to you to determine how this manifests in the game. An easy approach is to increase the impact of the success or failure. For example, rolling a 1 on a failed attempt to pick a lock might break the thieves' tools being used, and rolling a 20 on a successful Intelligence (Investigation) check might reveal an extra clue.

Personally, I don't use this rule because I disagree with the 5% chance of extreme failure or extreme success. However, I can understand the use of it if you want to make it an interesting part to your story. For me, if you roll a 20 and you have a -2 modifier, it is the same as rolling an 18 with a 0 modifier. But, if you roll a 1, you still get to add your bonuses to the roll. So, if your character has expertise in a skill and has a +9 or something, rolling a 1 is just as good as someone else getting a 10. I believe that is fair.

Do you guys use this rule often? What are some good and bad sides to using it or not using it?

[Hellstick]

I remember once at a bar where I was playing dart with my friends. I'm not particularly good at it - quite the contrary actually - so translating that into dnd terms I would probably have somewhere between -2 and 0 in my dart check. Yet I did the unthinkable and hit the first dart with the second in the same way Robin Hood did in the stories. Would a professional dart player with a considerably larger bonus be able to do the same? Possibly. But if a professional dart player was asked to do the same there is a pretty good chance my throw would be the better result.

In the groups I play in we don't use critical failure but we do use critical success. Rolling 20 on your check, no matter your bonuses, always translates to a success no matter if its a skill check or a roll to hit. Not sure about the exact reason since I've become too accustomed to it to question it, but I like to think of it like in the example above: that it comes down to luck. There is always a chance that a player who is good at a particular skill is thrown off and fail completely, and In much the same way, a player without the skill does have a chance to just get lucky and nail the task.

I guess it encourages players to try I guess? I do get where you're coming from though. My example doesn't really work as well if applied to someone trying to Make a clockwork toy or open a lock since it requires certain knowledge to make those things work. In those cases I think it's up to the gm to decide wether the player is even allowed to try.

[Millstone85]

If I am reading this correctly, it doesn't say that rolling a 1 or a 20 on an ability check or a saving throw would be an automatic failure or an automatic success, just that it would amplify these outcomes. So the impossible remains impossible.

Anyway, I don't like fumble rules. I would give up on criticals if it meant not having fumbles.

[Dudewithknives]

If I am reading this correctly, it doesn't say that rolling a 1 or a 20 on an ability check or a saving throw would be an automatic failure or an automatic success, just that it would amplify these outcomes. So the impossible remains impossible.

Anyway, I don't like fumble rules. I would give up on criticals if it meant not having fumbles.

I am the same way, I am happy that in the base ruled a 1 is just a miss because I suck at rolling dice. It was always a joke in our group that I can build a character that can do anything I want them to, until dice have to be rolled.

I created an item for it eventually.
Ring of the bell curve.
While wearing the ring all 1's are considered a 2, and all 20s are considered a 19.

This was in a pathfinder game though, when I was playing an Unchained Monk with Jabbing Style.
I was making like 12 attacks a round.

[Vaz]

I'd use a Critical Success - never critical failure, because you shouldn't have a 5% chance of failing a test you could otherwise pass perfectly fine (such as on occasions when you'd perfectly be fine passing the check if you didn't have to roll; i.e bonus+1 = higher than the DC), and Critical Success just makes those natural 20's more fun. That said, there's rarely a time when you'd ever be called upon in 5e to make a check when the DC is higher than 20 anyway.

I've had DM's that try to reinforce critical failure, but it just doesn't make sense that the more checks you get to make, the more likely you are to fail when it's as binary as a flat 1/20 dice roll with no ability to mitigate.

I've used monsters as odd encounters which have a chance to do stuff when people make a critical failure (such as a Glue Golem, which causes creatures who fail to hit its AC by an 11 or more having to make a Str check to avoid losing their grip on their weapon or ammunition. The Fighter made more attacks, and naturally rolled a few 9's or less (his to hit was +6, and needing to hit an AC of 19), which meant he had to risk losing the weapon. When the Paladin cast Bless on the party, and he made a couple of Natural 1's, and added the +1d4 to the roll and managed to get over the 9 required, he was able to enjoy the encounter, despite the risk.

[Theodoxus]

I created an item for it eventually.
Ring of the bell curve.
While wearing the ring all 1's are considered a 2, and all 20s are considered a 19.

That's pretty cool - if a bit of a misnomer... I'd of make it make you roll 3d20 every time, and use the middle die. In 5E terms, advantage would let you use the largest result and disad would be the smallest... but in general, it'd have about the same effect - hardly ever rolling 1s or 20s :smalltongue: