Is it possible for a critical success and a critical failure

"Yes, but" is a long-time solution to the players not really succeeding, but needing to move the story along.
Instead of saying "no, it doesn't work" or "game over"

You can critically succeed your way into a disaster, and you can fail-forward into a situation that's not that bad.
But unless you're making two independent rolls at the same time, no, I don't think you can.

>>51428876

Roll two d20s. Get a 1 on the first and a 20 on the second. Pretty easy, I'd say.

>>51428876
I like the way the FFG Star Wars RPG does it. It's essentially a success-based dicepool system, but there's a secondary mechanic at work called threat and advantage. Basically it means that while you might succeed at a given task, there could be detrimental effects that come out of the action, or vice versa, you may fail at a task, but you might gain an overwhelming advantage from your blunder.

>>51428951
Yep, only a 1 in 400 chance.

>>51428876
Stealthily jump from the balcony to grab the chandelier.

Nobody will see you crash when you miss it.

>>51428876
You charge someone and spear him through the face, killing him, but you took his sword through the heart.

You detonate the gunpowder and it blows up the houses of parliament. And the nearby bridge. And you.

You manage to find incriminating information about your target on a kiddie porn site manned by the FBI.

Your stocks in Weapons R Us skyrocket overnight because of a new customer buying up huge amounts of ammo and making multiple custom orders it turns out to be ISIS and you're now under investigation for funding terrorism but hey you can afford a fantastic lawyer

>>51428920

A good GM understands players rarely succeed so much as just fail forward.

>>51428876
Depends on the system.

>>51428876
>Profession (Photographer)
>Craft (Wind Turbine)

>>51428876
It did, and it broke the campaign setting because it happened multiple times in a row.

>one man's trash...

>>51428962
It seemed up my alley, but it's weirdly chafing because that's the sort of thing I would do anyway. Like, I'm always looking for opportunities to key player actions to the environment and what's going on around them, that's part of what makes GMing fun for me, but then explicitly gamifying it and making it directed by the dice saddles me with those extra considerations and it makes me have to stop and think about it more.

I'm pretty sure it's something I'd grow more comfortable with if I ran it more than twice, but nobody else I play with wants to run it and most of the group picked up on my awkwardness and had kind of a lukewarm experience so they'd rather stick to other systems. It's a bit of a catch-22, which stinks because I really do like the system outside of those probably-growing-pains.
(But on the other hand I have a group willing to try other systems at all--I can't gripe *too* much)

>>51428962

An example might be:
>you've successfully knocked out the Star Destroyer's shield generators
>however, the TIE Fighter recon pickets have just returned from their patrol, and they're not happy

>>51428876
in warhammer's magic system every critical success is also a critical failure.

If a wizard (or psyker) rolls double sixes, the force of the casting is so great that it's impossible to stop (the opposing player is usually allowed to roll to dispel each spell). However, the excess power blows up the wizard. Or sucks the wizard into the warp. Or blows up everyone around the wizard. Or gives the wizard brain damage. Point being, don't roll double sixes.

>>51428981
Anything but impossible.

>>51428876
Only if
1-the system criticals at extreme ends, but critfails on specific numbers eg:99 is a crit, but all paired numbers have negative concequences.

2-the system grades on a curve eg:Teenagers from Outer Space.

3-Your GM is an idiot (willfully or not)