even though those are rules as written, i like to honor the crits, with a bit of nuance. if you’re super stealthy and roll a 1, maybe it makes a small noise but doesn’t cause an alarm. if you’re dumping strength on your wet noodle wizard, maybe you’re able to move that heavy thing an inch on a 20. it’s always situational though. people get excited to see a crit, and i think it makes it more fun.
If you want to play with house rules, that’s fine. If nobody at your table has any problems with this, you are golden. This is a fairly common house rule and CritRole (Mercer) uses it quite liberally.
As someone who disagrees with critical success/failure on skill check rolls, I would like to better understand your position. I feel reliable talent and other abilities like it are diminished by this house rule. What would you say to me if I was one of your players and brought this up as an issue?
if a player brought it up as an issue, i’d probably go back on it. i’m an easy DM. i like Rule of Cool, but it’s about everyone having a good time ultimately, whatever that means to them
I would 100% enjoy playing at your table. I’m all for anything that makes the game more enjoyable for the most people, just as you said.
The only thing that really bothers me is when people have problems with a game and don’t talk about it, opting to just flake on the game instead. It’s all about communication.
I feel like rogues will get more excited to avoid a nat 1 than eating it, given that they have a trait specifically to avoid it.
It’s not about being super stealthy, it’s about having a trait that effectively doesn’t let you roll less than a 10 in any trained/expertised skill iirc. They are not just good, they are reliably good.
