I was hanging out with a friend the other day, talking about dnd/rpgs as we usually do, and I was telling him about playing icrpg with my wife/kids and how it went. I said something to the effect of “my son rolled a nat 20 on such and such skill check” and he informed me that “nat 20s aren’t critical successes on skill checks in dnd.” I told him that was how we do it at my table regardless of what the rules say, which he was fine with.
He then asked me the popular hypothetical question of the player that asks the king to give him the kingdom and rolls a nat 20. “Would you give him the kingdom?” I said “of course, but maybe the kings hand immediately assassinates him? Maybe the burden of being king is so heavy that the characters adventuring days must come to an end and the player has to make a new character?” The point being that the player succeeded at the task, but the outcome may not have be what he expected.
I bring all of this up to ask this: how do you handle nat 20s at your table? I’m personally a big fan of the idea that a player can attempt anything they want. If it’s something that should be incredibly difficult, then success can only happen on a nat 20. Hell, even I’ll even allow attempts at something completely impossible if it sounds fun and has good roleplay attached to it, “you want to fly your dragon to the moon, collect moon dust, bring it back and use it to forge an axe? Roll two nat 20s back to back.”
Thanks,
Chris