Opposed attack rolls and auto fail / success (Q106)

[Raum]

From the thread:

Q106: If a roll that would normally have automatic passes or fails becomes opposed, does it still have the automatic passes and fails? Example: An opposed attack roll, one character has a +21 attack bonus and the other has +10. The character with +21 rolls a 1, the other an 8. Which succeeds?

A106 Automatic success doesn't work with opsed rolls or checks. In your case the one with +21 attack bonus wins.

Do you have a RAW reference for this?

From the SRD under attack rolls:

Originally Posted by SRD
Automatic Misses and Hits

A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on an attack roll is always a miss. A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a hit. A natural 20 is also a threat—a possible critical hit.

Since a grapple is a modified attack roll, a natural 20 will result in an automatic hit - which doesnt mean anything.

Shhalahr Windrider did post a FAQ entry dealing with grapple, but the FAQ didn't seem to address either disarms or sunder attempts. Lord Silvanos agreed with Rigeld2.

It's worth pointing out that Disarms (and Sunders) are phrased differently from Grapples in the SRD. Grapple states "grapple check is like a melee attack roll." and both Disarm and Sunder state "make opposed attack rolls".

Since both Disarm and Sunder are specifically "attack rolls" and not simply like attack rolls, why would they not automatically succeed or fail as other attack rolls?

[Rigeld2]

You do automatically succeed - you hit. Thats all the roll is for.

[Raum]

I agree. However that is not what was stated in the thread. A grapple check isn't an attack roll hence is out of the original question's scope. To the best of my knowledge, Disarms and Sunders are subject to the automatic success and failure rule.

[silentknight]

Ah, but it says automatic hit or miss, not success or failure. So you automatically hit to disarm or sunder, but you do not auto succeed or fail.

[Rigeld2]

I agree. However that is not what was stated in the thread. A grapple check isn't an attack roll hence is out of the original question's scope. To the best of my knowledge, Disarms and Sunders are subject to the automatic success and failure rule.

Reference Opposed Checks (under the skills section, but bear with me):

An opposed check is a check whose success or failure is determined by comparing the check result to another character’s check result. In an opposed check, the higher result succeeds, while the lower result fails. In case of a tie, the higher skill modifier wins. If these scores are the same, roll again to break the tie.

This would seem to say that no opposed roll has the auto success/failure option.

[squishycube]

I think both interpretations are stretching the rules.
A reasonable houserule could be made either way

[Raum]

Ah, but it says automatic hit or miss, not success or failure. So you automatically hit to disarm or sunder, but you do not auto succeed or fail.

If you hit on a disarm attempt you disarm your opponent. If you hit on a sunder attempt you roll to damage the weapon.

Reference Opposed Checks (under the skills section, but bear with me): This would seem to say that no opposed roll has the auto success/failure option.

No skill roll, opposed or otherwise, has an auto success / fail option in RAW.

Edit: Err, except UMD. Hopefully got that in before it gets pointed out. :)

[Rigeld2]

If you hit on a disarm attempt you disarm your opponent. If you hit on a sunder attempt you roll to damage the weapon.

No. If you beat your oppoenent, you disarm/sunder. Hitting isnt involved.

No skill roll, opposed or otherwise, has an auto success / fail option in RAW.

And theres no definition for opposed attack rolls, RAW, so theres no way to define what happens even on a roll of 10 for both parties.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

As I already said in the thread and as has been stated here:

The concept of a succesful hit is meaningless in an opposed roll situation.

You are making an opposed roll you are not rolling to hit.

[Matthew]

Have to agree with that. Opposed Rolls are opposed.

[Raum]

No. If you beat your oppoenent, you disarm/sunder. Hitting isnt involved.

Why isn't hitting involved in sunders? I'll grant disarm could be interpreted either way, but in sunders you're rolling damage.

And theres no definition for opposed attack rolls, RAW, so theres no way to define what happens even on a roll of 10 for both parties.

True. I agree the rules cover opposed attack rolls inadequately.

As I already said in the thread and as has been stated here:

The concept of a succesful hit is meaningless in an opposed roll situation.

You are making an opposed roll you are not rolling to hit.

You have so stated. I still haven't seen support for your statement in RAW. Or do you mean RAW doesn't cover the situation when you say "meaningless"?

Have to agree with that. Opposed Rolls are opposed.

Yep...and attack rolls are attack rolls. :)

-----
If it's not covered in the rules I can accept it. But characterizing a house rule (whether to cover the lack of a written rule or not) as RAW is simply misrepresentation.

[marjan]

OK, lets say that natural 20 is an automatic success on oposed rolls. We now have fighter A trying to disarm fighter B. Both of them roll natural 20s so fighter A disarms fighter B and at the same time fighter B resists disarm. What now?

[Rigeld2]

Why isn't hitting involved in sunders? I'll grant disarm could be interpreted either way, but in sunders you're rolling damage.

But Sundering does not require a hit. It requires a success. A nat 20 on an attack roll is an auto-hit, not an auto-success.

[Matthew]

Indeed, Automatic Hits and Misses only apply to AC, according to the Glossary. Hits and Misses against Opposed Attack Rolls wouldn't qualify. The only case where Automatic Success and Failure applies is to Saving Throws.

[Piccamo]

If it's not covered in the rules I can accept it. But characterizing a house rule (whether to cover the lack of a written rule or not) as RAW is simply misrepresentation.

I misrepresented your mom!

I have to agree with the others. You are not rolling to hit, but for success. There is a distinction:

Step Three: Consequences. If you beat the defender, the defender is disarmed. If you attempted the disarm action unarmed, you now have the weapon. If you were armed, the defender’s weapon is on the ground in the defender’s square.

It doesn't say if you hit the defender.

Step 3: Consequences. If you beat the defender, roll damage and deal it to the weapon or shield. See Table: Common Armor, Weapon, and Shield Hardness and Hit Points to determine how much damage you must deal to destroy the weapon or shield.

Same wording. If you beat the defender.

[Raum]

Hmm, I see your point and concede. Thanks for beating it through my skull. :)

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Hmm, I see your point and concede.

You could edit your post in the FAQ thread to reflect this.