this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2025
693 points (98.5% liked)

RPGMemes

11133 readers
481 users here now

Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Source (Bluesky)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jounniy@ttrpg.network 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Yes he is and no it does (edit: has) not. That is a common house rule Larian implemented into BG3, but it is not part of the original rules of DnD 5e.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I'm glad you know them so well. In what way is such a popularly used rule not a rule?

Incidentally I find it interesting that d&d 3.5 specifically calls out that a 20 isn't automatic success, and a 1 is not an automatic failure, where 5e removes that clarification, simply saying "if the roll plus bonuses is less than the DC the check fails".

That looks to me like they are leaving it more open to the common house rule

[–] jounniy@ttrpg.network 2 points 1 day ago

I think you answered your rethorical question yourself: If it is not in the official books, it is not an official rule.

And I would not say that they leave it vague. To quote the PHB: "To make an ability check, roll a d20 and add the relevant ability modifier. As with other d20 rolls, apply bonuses and penalties, and compare the total to the De. If the total equals or exceeds the DC, the ability check is a success [...]. Otherwise, it's a failure, which means the character or monster makes no progress toward the objective[...]." That does not leave much room for interpretation. It plainly say that if the exceed, then they succeed and if they don't, than they fail. Yes they don't make an explicit remark about critical results, but they don't need to, because such a rule was never meant to exist in 5e aside attack rolls and death saves.

Not to say that you can't make it a rule at your table (same as with everything else), but there is still not much room for missunderstanding the official print.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

To expand on the other comment, to include in the rules everything that doesn't happen would be insane. If it isn't in the rules it isn't in the rules. You don't have to list every possible thing that a player may say applies for it to not be included. If a player falls out of their chair, does that change the result? It isn't included in either of these rulesets...