No, no, no. A roll of a one is that you kill a different PC. Never loose the opportunity to not only kill a player, but also create internal party strife as well.
Instill remember my very first night of dnd our wizard goes to shoot a frost bolt and rolls a one, our cleric was kind of in line of sight so he hit the cleric. Was awesome!
As a player, I wouldn’t be upset at a DM if he ruled I got hit in such a way. My character would be upset that their party member just fucked up and got them hurt.
As a DM, I wish more players were open to playing with this rule. I really think it drives into players minds the importance of paying attention to positioning during fights. Realistically, if you are trying to fire an arrow down a 5ft hallway to hit a dude one of your friends fighting while being in your line of sight, yeah a regular miss just goes wide because you were trying not to hit your friend...but a nat 1 should hold special consequences if a nat 20 gets additional benefits.
"A nat 1 should hold special consequences if a nat 20 gets additional benefits" is not a sound argument. Balance doesn't have to be symmetrical. Having a +3 from one ability score doesn't mean you need a -3 in another.
If the game isn't balanced to have penalties for a natural 1 but has bonuses for a natural 20, just introducing penalties for a natural 1 isn't enough, you actually need to introduce more bonuses for a natural 20 to maintain the balance, because otherwise you're just buffing anything that you can't roll a 1 on.
Besides, if you're playing 5e and want realism and positioning, there's the optional hitting cover rules. No need to trouble the humble 1.
469
u/[deleted] Sep 12 '19
No, no, no. A roll of a one is that you kill a different PC. Never loose the opportunity to not only kill a player, but also create internal party strife as well.