So true

how long before he troons

it is how it works because if a character is not capable of succeeding the role the dm is not supposed to let them make the roll in the first place. anything else is being a shit DM and any horror stories you hear of dnd half the time is from a weak shit dm that cant tell the players "no" when they want to roll. "I understand you want to lift the statue however your character is not capable of doing that".

bike cuck
kys troon

2 years at the very most

What should actually happen is the warrior doesn’t get to roll at all. They can still look at it if they want but they’ll never get anything.

Nat20 doesn't mean auto-success, it just means they do the task to the best of their character's ability.

If you walked up to a king and said, "give me your crown and name me ruler of your entire kingdom," then roll a nat20, the king would laugh and say that's a funny joke without tossing you into the dungeon.

people genuinely defend what his "art" has become

Your dumbass in a moment of enlightenment remembers there was an old scholar back in town that had scrolls with similar runes, and you think to make a charcoal print of the carving to take back to him

"I want to attempt to fly"

"roll acrobatics"

"natural twenty!"

"you nearly avoid breaking your neck on the way down"

hurr durr why can't I fly when I have no mechanics by which to achieve flight???

Claiming you should be able to instantly know a lost language through a dice roll is akin to asking to sprout wings through force of will

He actually explained it in some blogpost. The answer is he has makings of a good politician because he talked a lot and answered nothing

Nat 20’s don’t apply to skill checks, you have to have proper modifiers to succeed.

Does this play out in Baldurs gate? I mean like if you have a low skilled character they can still "fail" a check even on a rolled 20?

it is how it works because if a character is not capable of succeeding the role the dm is not supposed to let them make the roll in the first place

Sure, but there are various degrees of success in a lot of cases. The best CharacterA can do, could be a below average roll for CharacterB.
I agree that the DM shouldn't call for a roll where success (or failure) is impossible, it's just a waste of time to do so.

If you really play by 'every 20 is always a success' despite how stupid it is, a dumb character would recognize it from something stupid, or say something offhandedly that would make the smart person switch their thinking.

Agreed unless that specific character has a farflung reason why they could get the thing in question such as based on their background or if the character has spent in character time engaging with something relevant such as during down time (most campaigns dont do proper downtime anymore but still) the character says they spend time doing research. its reasonable at that point to let them attempt a roll.
unless an action has incremental levels of success and failure, letting someone roll on something their character simply can not accomplish is shit DMing. the player that asked the king for his crown should not have been given a roll and if he rolled without asking the roll is not counted for anything as rolls are supposed to be prompted by the DM based on what the player describes themselves doing.

if you wanted to be a less shit DM you would instead turn this into an active roleplay moment where they king reacts to the absurd request in character.

people playing any form of irl tabletop should unironically be shot
twice for good measure

No, because in BG3 and any D&D a 20 is a success. In a video game that has predetermined outcomes the game doesn't know if your 20 is a 20 that a character with high skill or low skill rolled so its treated the same. A DM is flexible enough not to be like a game that cannot have many different varied outcomes

its not a success because its a nat 20, its a success because letting a player roll on something they absolutely can not accomplish is running your game poorly. if you let them roll then it should be when at least one of the numbers on that dice will get them to a number that passes otherwise you tell describe how they attempt and yet make no progress and suggest they find another way to accomplish what they want
I'm fully on board when there are degrees of success but if its a yes/no pass or fail situation then yeah its silly.

Why does he play as a woman?

With the girl of their dreams kiss? I concur fellow DnD roleplayer!

checked

if you wanted to be a less shit DM you would instead turn this into an active roleplay moment

That goes without saying. I personally wouldn't have let the roll happen, but some tables just need a soft no or be allowed to fail gracefully.

dude I love DnD haha I'm such a geek <3
you guys watch critical role? the shorts are so hilarious!

I agree, but if I was the GM i'd only allow the roll if the player could on the spot come up with a reason why their fighter untrained in religion would even care to decipher a religious artefact. No reason to hold back creativity if it makes sense

words

troonout when?

I can't hate him anymore after he managed to get both kinds of terminally online retards on the internet caught up in a gigantic Rorschach test with a series of simple comics about friendship transcending boundaries.

His drawings are cute.
Pic very related, another cute drawing for the thread.

Probably never. He drops "breadcrumbs" specifically because it makes insufferable people engage with his comics more. He's in it for the money.

instead of translating they recognize a mnemonic visual pattern and identify the same set of runes used in a couple places which allows them to assume it's a proper noun about the space they are in and a vague idea of what they might be able to do about it

I'll admit it took the better part of a year to get my players out of the habit of rolling before prompted, but In the case of rolling where no number is high enough I found they would just be more frustrated if they got a 20 and made absolutely no progress. they'll feel like they "wasted" the roll so its best to just describe it out

that game is for losers lol imagine trying to gatekeep that shit in 2025

go make a family or something youre 40

so he's a gay narcissist, a spiritual troon if you will

you have to be creative first, which is difficult to come by for many people

why is this artist being memed now when they had more famous comics years ago?
this better not be about some terminally online Anon Babbleullshit

In a video game that has predetermined outcomes the game doesn't know if your 20 is a 20 that a character with high skill or low skill rolled so its treated the same.

It's not that difficult to code those predetermined outcomes to include an alternate outcome for "character is unskilled or low intelligence"

waiting for cheetus

i want the elf comic audience to cuck me

He's gonna troon out to avoid the shame of being a cuck

visual "joke" gone and file name becomes a "must"

no happy incest ending, just endless edge

yaaaaawn

A 5% chance to critically succeed or fail in any given task outside of combat is cancer and, at best, only a suggested rule. Sadly, podcasts and video games not only make this seem like an actual rule but the best rule in the game. It was a mistake not gatekeeping.

the joke is still in there, the filename just hints at it

heh

Why does this guy gets free advertisment on Anon Babble? How low IQ are the people reposting his shit here?

This is what Alec Guinness meant when he called Star Wars 'childish banality'

Thats what im saying. TTRPGs are meant for people who can imagine a fully detailed spinning apple in their heads. I like to reward creativity so long as it's outlandish

2 more weeks

So long as it's not outlandish*

not gatekeeping I just think it was always really lame and I'm kinda tired of seeing it everywhere because it's the hot new thing for people trying to look nerdy (but they don't actually play it seriously like a nerd, they just treat it like a wacky improv comedy session + fetishes)

Thanks for thew bump kind stranger.

Anon Babble - Video Games

For once, this thread should be on Anon Babble

Even the worst D&Dfags are leagues better than the slop consumers that permeate this board.

Oh I got the joke, you sneaky fucker.

Not as good as the 30-min nazi gif, but still really good.

Already in progress

A good GM would inform you of that and just flat out say you can't roll if something is truly impossible. When you're a newbie GM (as every single one was at some point) there's a pervasive idea that more rolling == fun for your table. Playing like that will, invariably, lead to moments where a character's success and failure don't make any goddamn sense. Some GMs will try to justify this, making their world wackier, whereas other will try to walk these moments back while the players usually grumble a little bit for feeling their roll was ignored or lessened.

It takes a while to develop the instinct to tell a player a flat "no" when they have a really stupid idea. It also helps to condition your players to not just roll dice out of habit, and instead wait for you to tell them when to roll. That way, you only do so when there truly is a reasonable chance of varied outcomes.

I guess in this specific example you can equate it to chinese ideograms

warrior rolls a nat 20 on comprehending the runes

wow, this 木 looks like a tree, it must mean tree

wow, this 月 looks like a moon, it must mean moon

wow, this 鷹 looks like a hawk, it must mean hawk

how the hell did you get hawk from that? It just looks like random scribbles

because it looks like a hawk, duh. anyways the door opened, so it turns out I was right all along. It's a hawk!

hot new thing

you're at least 10 years late saying that, almost all thats left is people that genuinely gather for periodic sessions. Stop being an angsty faggot

go back to

playing as a girl

Troonout soon fellow retards

I get ads for AI generated campaigns and "play dnd right on your discord!" and the movie came out a couple years ago
so yes I would say the zoomer concentration is probably higher than ever

it is how it works because if a character is not capable of succeeding the role the dm is not supposed to let them make the roll in the first place.

This is wrong.
You can have varying degrees of failure. Let the players have consequences to their actions and don't just stamp your foot like a toddler crying about playing seriously.

Ehhh that's pretty out there since most campaigns wouldnt actually have the text in writing, but if there was say a picture I could provide the players and they either in or out of character make an assumption like that I'd allow it

so hollywood which is always late to the punch released a movie 2 years ago, and you're getting ads based on what you click on for the shitty algorithm. no it seriously sounds like you're just being a bitch. Of course there are still people playing it, people hopped on the bandwagon and then the trendchasers left over the years across the life span of 5e and now you have mostly people that maintained some interest in the game.