A trial implies that the ones who enforce the rules weren’t there to witness the crime…
…therefore the 2 sides of the story must present their cases…
…but in **THIS** case the crime was performed in the full view of a GODDESS, who had the power to enforce her own rules, & the willingness to do so. She is the WITNESS, JUDGE, JURY, & EXECUTOR of the rules, all-in-one.
If those canine criminals don’t like it, then those dumbasses shouldn’t be doing the crime in front of her FACE!
They were just ticked-off that she decided to act, rather than sit there in the sky & do nothing, as she usually would.
In gaming-terms, they rolled for a “bluff”-check against a Goddess, & the dice came up with a “1”.
(For those not familiar, rules as written, a nat 20 is only a critical hit/critical success in attack rolls and saves. While most DMs house-rule crits to be crits for skill checks, this is not the case in the D&D ruleset (at least not for 5e.some of the earlier editions may have included skill checks in the crit rule.). Yes, I do play and have DMed, and yes, I allow crits for skill checks. The Yahooligans would not have been rolling for that bluff though. I don’t call for rolls when someone is attempting the impossible. They just fail to do the thing they were trying to do, the exception being when how well/badly they failed matters.)
I DM for a group as well, my house rules have always been..
Nat 20s always successful. If it’s an attack it’s automatically full double damage. Skill checks always succeed, but I don’t even allow rolls on stuff that seem impossible to me. On initiative nat 20s gives you a bonus attack before combat starts.
Did Diana just vaporize them? Or are they going to be part of Sue’s sword now as her “punishment” for sassing Diana?
Tune in next time as …
I mean…I hope she doesn’t punish Marie for Sue’s errors. Marie would be stuck in the sword with them.
Technically it was a trial by combat and by fire, and they even got a chance to appeal the decision. It just all happened really quickly.
A trial implies that the ones who enforce the rules weren’t there to witness the crime…
…therefore the 2 sides of the story must present their cases…
…but in **THIS** case the crime was performed in the full view of a GODDESS, who had the power to enforce her own rules, & the willingness to do so. She is the WITNESS, JUDGE, JURY, & EXECUTOR of the rules, all-in-one.
If those canine criminals don’t like it, then those dumbasses shouldn’t be doing the crime in front of her FACE!
They were just ticked-off that she decided to act, rather than sit there in the sky & do nothing, as she usually would.
In gaming-terms, they rolled for a “bluff”-check against a Goddess, & the dice came up with a “1”.
RAW, they rolled a nat 20, but the DC was 1000.
(For those not familiar, rules as written, a nat 20 is only a critical hit/critical success in attack rolls and saves. While most DMs house-rule crits to be crits for skill checks, this is not the case in the D&D ruleset (at least not for 5e.some of the earlier editions may have included skill checks in the crit rule.). Yes, I do play and have DMed, and yes, I allow crits for skill checks. The Yahooligans would not have been rolling for that bluff though. I don’t call for rolls when someone is attempting the impossible. They just fail to do the thing they were trying to do, the exception being when how well/badly they failed matters.)
I DM for a group as well, my house rules have always been..
Nat 20s always successful. If it’s an attack it’s automatically full double damage. Skill checks always succeed, but I don’t even allow rolls on stuff that seem impossible to me. On initiative nat 20s gives you a bonus attack before combat starts.
Well Sue, Gods tend to play by their own rules.
I mean if God herself tosses you into a fire, chances are you did something to earn it, right?