Does Ocular spell make every eligible damage spells have a critical chance since it becomes a ranged touch attack (ray)?

Ocular spell states:

(…)When you release an ocular spell, its effect changes to a ray with a range of up to 60 feet. If the spell previously would have affected multiple creatures, it now affects only the creature struck by the ray. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to strike your target with an ocular spell, and the target is still permitted any saving throw allowed by the spell.(…)

Every spell that has a touch attack (melee/range) Do have a critical hit chance (20X2)

So If I was to release an Ocular Fireball (only affects 1 creature now and it still gets the Reflex Half saving throw though). It could indeed be a critical hit.

Correct?

Sidenote:

I know fireball might not be the best spell for this combination, it was just for the sake of the question.

Do negative modifiers change a critical hit? [duplicate]

I want to play a champion fighter and am considering whether or not to get the Great Weapon Master Feat which states:

Before you make a melee attack with a heavy weapon that you are proficient with, you can choose to take a – 5 penalty to the attack roll. If the attack hits, you add +10 to the attack’s damage.

If I take the -5 to attack roll and roll a critical hit, will that crit still be in effect, or will the -5 counteract that? Also, in the event that I do crit with a -5, would I add the +10 damage before, or after I double damage, like with other modifiers. It doesn’t say that the +10 is a modifier specifically, so I was a bit confused (note: for critical hits, my group usually has house-rule to double the damage and then add modifiers instead of the normal double dice.)

How critical is encryption-at-rest for public cloud hosted systems

I wok as a solutions architect for web based systems on AWS and as part of this role often respond to Information Security questionnaires. Nearly all questionnaires request information about data encryption at-rest and in-transit. However only a much smaller percentage ask about other security aspects, such as password policies or common web application security issues, as published by OWASP.

I wonder how common/ likely accessing of clients data is within a public cloud provider such as AWS, Azure and GCP. It seems a very high barrier to pass for an external party, even data centers of small local web hosting companies seem to have very good physical access security. And informal conversations with bank employees tell me that accessing someone’s bank account without reason leads to instant dismissal, so surely public cloud providers would have similar controls in place?

This is not to challenge the value of encryption at rest, it is very cheap to access, so there is no reason not to enable it, but where does it sit in terms of priorities?

Does a natural 20 on an attack cause a critical hit (even if the attack would have missed)?

Related question

I was going over the degrees of success rules in relation to the above question and it’s answers and came across a bit of rules that seem contradictory.

Step 4: Determine degree of success (Core Rulebook, General Rules, Checks p445)

You critically succeed at a check when a check’s result meets or exceeds the DC by 10 or more. If the check is an attack roll, this is sometimes called a critical hit. You can also critically fail a check. The rules for critical failure—sometimes called a fumble—are the same as those for a critical success, but in the other direction: if you fail a check by 10 or more, that’s a critical failure.

If you rolled a 20 on the die (a “natural 20”), your result is one degree of success better than it would be by numbers alone.

We are, in general, pretty familiar of this concept introduced in the playtest era. However, there are more rules that seem like they may be more specific.

Critical Hits (Core Rulebook, Equipment, Weapons, Attack Rolls p278)

When you make an attack and roll a natural 20 (the number on the die is 20), or if the result of your attack exceeds the target’s AC by 10, you achieve a critical success (also known as a critical hit).

If you critically succeed at a Strike, your attack deals double damage (page 451). Other attacks, such as spell attack rolls and some uses of the Athletics skill, describe the specific effects that occur when their outcomes are critical successes.

This second section makes no accounting for "would have been a success/hit", and says that "When you make an attack and roll a natural 20 […] you achieve a critical success." Does this make attack an exception to the rules that natural 20’s only take you one degree higher on success?

Cortex rules: critical failures

The Cortex rules say (and I’m paraphrasing from memory) that critical failures happen when all the dice are 1’s.

Is this all the dice, or just the stat and skill? If I have an asset that adds a die, does that have to be a 1 for a critical failure? What if I throw in a plot point? I’d say a strict interpretation of the rules is that it is all the dice, but that seems like it’s going to really decrease the critical failure rate.

Do all RPGs have critical failures, and which was the first?

In all the games I remember playing, critical failures have always, in every case triggered an event. This critical failure is due to exceptionally bad rolls on dice, either a ‘natural one’ in DnD or a ‘tI’d Failure’ in nWoD. This is committing a failure so catastrophic it makes something bad happen (some special enemy appearing, or some item breaking), sometimes so bad it’s borderline nonsensical.

Does this necessarily have to be like this in every system or game? When we are playing, everyone assumes something is going to happen if they roll a 1 (or the equivalent in other systems), but I have been thinking about it and it doesn’t make much sense. While I agree it’s the worst possible roll and therefore it indicates the least successful or desirable outcome, I’ve never agreed on critical failures necessarily having to generate a special event.

Opinions aside, I’ve only been playing for a few years and I want to know: have roleplaying games always been like this? When did this critical failure trend start? I have casually asked some of the people I play with but no one has given it any thought and I’m really curious about it.

How can I handle critical failure without slowing down the action?

In my last session, my group had in a single encounter over 8 botches, I lost count in fact!

At first, I was statistically amazed at how our ranger botched 4 rounds in a row (in-game interpretation would equal to a birth-deficient kobold with cataracts trying to throw a rock point-blank at a boulder and missing), but then it became agitating coming up with ideas on how to “punish” a botch.

Normally our DM says: “On 1 your bow string snaps, on 2 your arrow hits the fighter adjacent to the enemy, on 3… blah blah blah” and rolls 1d4 to determine the outcome, which in my opinion slows down the fight and does not add to the role-playing experience at all, not to mention each class requires different actions, while AoE attacks can critical hit one target but botch on another… However, I feel critical failure should exist as a means of balancing natural 20 and making multiple attacks during a turn more risky. Being under constant life-threatening stress, even a master would make a mistake, or grow reluctant not knowing his enemies’ traits.

All of the above led to one rational question: how can I introduce critical failure in a way that doesn’t slow down the action?

What are the consequences of removing the potential for critical hit extra damage on spell attacks?

Current table has a house rule that spells attacks can not deal extra damage through critical hits. They have the rule that you can critically succeed or fail on a natural 20 or 1 on saving throws.

I brought up how I was worried about how this would affect the balance of the game, fairly certain this would impair characters who are primarily casters in the long run. (Most of the PCs are half casters or not at all, save for mine and a couple others.)

I was told they are going with this ruling because it is more balanced, but I’m not convinced. Could someone with a more thorough understanding of the rules elaborate on how this could unbalance the game? Or am I just worried over nothing?

This is a pay to play table that I’ve already paid a subscription for so I’d like to not be told to just walk away as an answer. The DM has told me if there really is a balancing issue he’d see to fixing it.

2nd half of this question.

How can giving skill checks critical fails and successes affect game balance?

At my table there is the house rule that skills can crit on a natural 1 and 20.

At least I think a natural 20 would be treated special over a 19. But I do know that 1’s give harsh consequences.

In my last session I rolled natural ones on 2 separate skill checks.

One was a Perception check to listen to the mutters of nearby NPCs, I rolled a natural 1(I had a +6 to it) and the DM said I was talking so loud that all the other PCs had to do their checks at disadvantage.

The second time I rolled insight to see if i could figure out about how badly our setting the dock ablaze affected an invading orc army, whose ship was also set on fire. I rolled a natural 1(+6) and the DM said I did not think it had any effect at all and was going to be frightened for the 1st 3 rounds of the next encounter.

I’m all for having fun and silly things with low skill rolls. And am ok with these harsh consequences if everyone at the table are for the most part. But I feel this kinda screws over bards and rogue who get expertise.

Continuation of another question.

Assassin’s Death Strike Critical?

This is a question regarding the double damage of the Assassin’s Death Strike.

Let’s say a 20th level rogue uses the Sneak attack feature on someone, it is a critical and it fails the CON save for Death Strike. Would the damage be an additional 40d6?

Follow up question. Say that the Rogue in question had purple worm poison on the weapon in which it made the attack. Would the both the critical and Death Strike apply to it, or only one?

Another follow up question: Say the Rogue was using a Giant Slayer Shortsword and the target was a giant. If the giant failed the DC for Death Strike and it was a critical hit, would the 2d6 damage dice be doubled or quadrupled?