A question on a natural 20 versus a natural 20
Posted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:03 am
I have recently had a somewhat heated discussion over the idea of a natural twenty versus another natural twenty with one of my fellow gm's and players. In the Unlimited edition it states that a nat 20 'can only' be beaten by another natural twenty.
The question arises from a situation as followed: I rolled a natural 20 (With modifiers a 30) to hit a guardian of a room. He rolled a nat 20 (with modifiers a 28). The GM called it tie to defender, but it wasn't a tie. The fact the rules said "can only" rather than "will only" or "will always" throws the question into the air of what to do in that unique (1 out of 400 shot) of getting a nat 20 versus a nat 20 in combat.
Is there any official ruling on this type of situation?
I question it as, to me personally, that means no matter how good and lucky the striker is, there will always be a 5% chance, no matter his strike, that he will miss, get parried, etc, even in the case of his own "critical".
The question arises from a situation as followed: I rolled a natural 20 (With modifiers a 30) to hit a guardian of a room. He rolled a nat 20 (with modifiers a 28). The GM called it tie to defender, but it wasn't a tie. The fact the rules said "can only" rather than "will only" or "will always" throws the question into the air of what to do in that unique (1 out of 400 shot) of getting a nat 20 versus a nat 20 in combat.
Is there any official ruling on this type of situation?
I question it as, to me personally, that means no matter how good and lucky the striker is, there will always be a 5% chance, no matter his strike, that he will miss, get parried, etc, even in the case of his own "critical".