What is your prefered method of narrating low/high rolls in combat?

>>54365088
One of my recent campaigns i shamelessly used the lines of the narrator in Darkest Dungeon .
Good times were had

>>54365088
I played a game with a guy that was a professional muay thai fighter irl, he wasn't the DM but the flavor he threw in to his combat was fantastic. He was of course playing the monk.

>>54365088
Depends on what they're fighting and what the character is. I generally avoid describing misses as 'you miss' in favour of enemies defending themselves successfully or taking an otherwise telling blow on armour. It makes the character seem competent and the enemy threatening.

>>54365088
This is how we do it:

>Player rolls
>Player narrates their characters action.

This way, players have some artistic license in how their characters successes or failures look like, they have motivation to learn more about the thing their character does in order to make it entertaining for the rest of the group, and the game doesn't turn into the stupid "roll dice, look at DM" marathon.

I once had a player who had luck as a main theme, and narrated all his biggest successes and biggest failures as incredibly unlikely strokes of luck, it was hilarious.

Anyone who's read a couple decent fantasy novels or even better, historical fiction can fake a reasonably convincing fight to make their actions more entertaining than "I roll 16."

This also discourages my players from playing characters they can't narrate in a way that's interesting/helps immersion/is fun for the rest of the players.

Don't play a charming party face if you hate dialogue, don't play a skilled fighter if you can't say anything cool about fighting.

>>54365088
I just give more brutal and over the top descriptions for higher rolls, like when the warrior kills an enemy with double-crit and near max damage possible, I describe how the impact of his blow makes enemy skull explode in a bloody mess, and then his continued slash cleaves the headless body in two, spilling blood everywhere. Sometimes I steal lines from games like this guy >>54365201 and I can recommend Fallout 1/2/Tactics for nice gorey death descriptions. Sometimes I let the players narrate their results too.

Rolling high/low is a measure of luck. I.e. when rolling to stop bleeding rolling lower is wound being harder to process (dirty/torn/artery hit). At least character sees it this way.

>>54365489
No, roll is a measure of how well you can use your skill in a stressful or uncertain situation.

Rolling low doesn't magically change the reality of the underlying situation, it didn't turn out to be worse because you rolled low, you failed at using your knowledge correctly because you're in a rough spot.

Otherwise, what happens when two characters try to help each other with something? One character rolls low, and one rolls high, and then magically the situation was far worse than they realized, but then also way better?

This is why every system emphasizes that your character should only roll in situations where the outcome is uncertain or there's an element of danger.

You don't have to roll the dice to open your mailbox and check for your newspaper every morning, you have to roll when you're trying to unlock your door while someone's running at you with a knife.

>>54365413
Huh, that's a pretty neat idea, but how do your players now how successful their attack should be? Like, how do they know whether the amount of damage they dealt results in a mortal blow or just a nonlethal wound? They have to narrate according to that.

In most games I've played it'll be the players describing their intent with the attack roll and the DM describing the outcome depending on the roll eg.
>"I bring my sword down upon its head."
>18
>"Your sword cleaves through the goblin's head as well as the rest of its body. It falls apart in two neat pieces."
or
>"The sword glances off the knight's helmet and bites into his shoulder. He's badly hurt."
We had one DM who would call a finishing blow with 'How do you kill him?'

>>54365413
I make my characters narrate what they're TRYING to do, but I don't let them narrate how it works out.

If a character goes in for a flying spin-kick to the werewolf's throat, I'm not having him describe what the effect is because we may not be on the same page. If he hits, I will narrate how the werewolf staggers back and begins wheezing, and if he misses, I will narrate how the player falls flat on his ass.

Letting the player have that power is too much of a conflict of interest.

Other than that, I 100% agree with your post, right down to the fact that we're an alignment in our opinion about the kind of people who use "It's a roleplaying game." as an excuse to play a role they're unable to portray. If you're boring and can't say anything clever, don't make a bard. "I roll to convince him of my plan" fucking SUCKS.

>>54365088
depends on what i've been playing lately, so probably with a lot of head and body explosions

In D&D3.5 I would describe misses based on defense vs roll.

Under 10
> Your shot goes wide
Under Dex+10
> Your opponent doges the attack
Under Dex+Armour+Other+10
> Your strike lands, but the armour/magic takes the hit

For intensity of the attack, look to damage to total/remaining HP left and be creative.

For other systems, something similar?