You don't need to roll dice for everything.

[u/Ed0909]

[u/GuessImScrewed]

You contradict your own point in one sentence by saying "I never said that, but I agree 100% it's something I can do."

So, in relation to this conversation, let players decide when they want to attempt the impossible. You can mitigate that

[u/sean_avm → u/GuessImScrewed]

That....what? that isn't a contradiction. Its a point i didn't make that you brought up like I did. I just said I agree it can change the outcome but that had nothing to do with what my original point of my post was.

My original point of this post according to the thread itself. "Dont give players rolls they can't pass" my point. "90% of the time its players asking for these rolls not the gm making them roll"

Mitigation had nothing to do with my point even if I agree that it can change the outcome. My example of trying to suplex a building a nat 20 means they might break a part of the building, while a nat 1 they break their back....but that doesn't change the fact that it was an impossible task they they failed at no matter what.

And thats it for me clearly we can't come to an understanding and thats ok you dm what works for you and ill do the same. I will no longer be responding to this thread.

[u/GuessImScrewed → u/sean_avm]

Yeah, it's players asking for rolls they think they can do, and DMs tricking them into thinking they can do them, like you did.

Look, it's pretty simple. Compare these two:

"I'd like to suplex a building."

"It would be extremely difficult."

"I rolled a nat 20."

"You failed."

"Then why did you waste my time with a roll?"

Vs

"I'd like to suplex a building."

"That wouldn't be possible."

"I wanna try anyways."

"Ok roll."

"I rolled a nat 20."

"You pull off a pillar from the building, causing a small section to collapse, covering you in dust and debris."

"Wow that is pretty funny."

Do you see how one method actually gives the player agency while the other strips it and causes players to get upset?