How do criticals interact with degrees of success for attacks in PF2E?

Let’s say my character Strikes an enemy with AC 40. My attack bonus is only +10, so barring crits, it’s impossible for me to get through his AC.

I roll a natural 20, making my total 30 vs his 40 AC. Is this attack treated as a regular hit, because it would have been a failure but the nat 20 improves the degree of success by one step? Or is it treated as a critical hit, because it’s a nat 20?

Similarly, if I’m subjected to a spell with a saving throw I can only fail at, and I roll a nat 20, does that mean I reach a success on the saving throw or a critical success?

ANYDICE – Help with a dice pool showing success against a range of target numbers

I’m having a hard time coding an anydice script to show what I want.

Let me contextualize the mechanic I’m trying to simulate:

You roll a POOL of d10 against a TARGET number. If at least one die from the POOL is equal to or higher than the TARGET, the roll is a success. The count of such dice is the degree of success, but that isn’t my focus at the moment.

I’d like to have a graph for the chances of success of various POOLs of different sizes up to 10 (1d10, 2d10, 3d10…10d10) against different TARGETs from 2 to 10 (2, 3, 4… 10).

The caveat is: I’d like the graph to be layed out in such a way that:

  • the x axis represents the TARGETs;
  • the y axis represents the chances of at least 1 success;
  • each line represents a POOL,

so I can see the chances that each POOL has to succeed against a whole range of TARGETs.

Can any anydice wizard help me with this, please?

How to stop players from trying to gauge success of meta-ideas via meta questions?

I am running a campaign in The Dark Eye, the Year of the Griffon to be exact.

Due to having quite an abundant downtime by having taken initiative quite early

the group had about 2 and a half months of downtime. That in itself is not a problem. Yet my group did spend the downtime in ways that start to make me think carefully: The siege-engineer did recruit all the carpenters and masons to fix up the walls

while the Maga did start to research a variant of Greek fire. That luckily took her most of the time… But exactly there lies the problem:

My players are all students, some of them with at least a good degree of chemistry and physics knowledge (including the Maga, who has 2 semesters of chemistry behind her). As a result, they tend to come up with ideas that make incredible sense in themselves… but the rules for TDE explicitly state that some stuff is simply not possible. For the most part, they did swallow that gunpowder simply can’t be made due to “it’s just like that” and that the recipe for fireworks is not only highly complex but also so arcane, that nobody knows it.

YET this makes them try to figure out how to use the little Greek fire they managed to produce up to now (4 flasks) much more efficiently – as in getting more area of effect. While they did not yet test it, they had ideas like

  • How about training a dog to carry a jar of greek fire into the orc camp and then shoot the jar from the walls with a flaming arrow?

On ideas like this I did say up to now “I did look into that topic in the books and I will have to make a ruling as there are no rules written yet. I have a vague idea how to rule on it, but would you mind stopping to speak in hypotheticals and bring this up in character through action or prompting that in an officer’s meeting?” Pretty much I try to go by In Character Action = In Character Consequences and Not Said = Not Done.

The idea to weaponize the results of a failure on the alchemy I could squat luckily: “You don’t exactly know how you made it create the poison gas it made… you could try to recreate the experiment though. Do you want that?”

Up to now, the only three things they did act on based on sentences like those was to build up some siege engines for defense (a trebuchet, 2 catapults, repairing one ballista), re-inventing greek fire (which did blow up the Maga twice already for it is so dangerous to work with as established in the rules) and digging ramparts1 around the city wall (ongoing, they are about 2/3rds done) and will be finished by the end of the months.


How can I discourage the players from directly adapting ideas from modern warfare methods (like gas, using chemical waste (dioxin) or trained dogs with bombs) and instead staying in the established canon, that puts greek fire at the pinnacle of chemical warfare and lobbing corpses as the pinnacle of biological warfare?


1 – Yes, they made Ramparts, not moats.

URL editing shows success message, but doesn’t carry out function

I’ve been looking into my college’s internal alumni network. In that we can send connections to users and when you send a connection request, you’re taken to a url which is: https://www.website.com/yourwall/sent-invite/username/?Sendcon=true And a message

Your invitation to Name was sent.

is displayed where ‘Name’ is the name of the user associated with ‘username’ Even though we get a success message, the connection request is not sent. And if we supply an invalid ‘username’ parameter into the url we still get a success message but as:

Your invitation to {:user} was sent.

Could this be a vulnerability? How can it be exploited and mitigated?

Making Your Future a Success

Why are you selling this site? https://wiebank.com/
wie is a german word for like, as (like a bank, as a bank), perfect domain name for the german speaking world (Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Lichtenstein)

How is it monetized?
https://wiebank.com/

Does this site come with any social media accounts?

How much time does this site take to run?

What challenges are there with running this site?

Will using Convergent Future give you a critical success if the minimum number you need to hit is 20?

Convergent Future (p185 EGtW) States:

When you or a creature you can see within 60 feet of you makes an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw, you can use your reaction to ignore the die roll and decide whether the number rolled is the minimum needed to succeed…

If that number is a “20” does it meet the requirements of a critical success? (p194 PHB)

How do I calculate d20 success probability using the Halfling ‘lucky’ trait with (dis)advantage?

Here is a comprehensive DPR calculator, and here is the mathematics behind it. I’m trying to follow along with the equations.

At the bottom of the second page are formulas for success probability $ L$ of a Halfling (who has luck) in normal circumstances and with advantage and disadvantage: $ $ L = P + \frac{1}{20}P,$ $ $ $ L_{adv} = P_{adv} + \left(\frac{2}{20}(1 – P) – \frac{1}{400}\right)P,$ $ $ $ L_{dis} = P_{dis} + \frac{2}{20}P^2,$ $ where:

  • $ P$ is the probability of succeeding on any single roll,
  • $ P_{adv} = 1 – (1 – P)^2$ is the probability of succeeding with advantage (not failing both rolls), and
  • $ P_{dis} = P^2$ is the probability of succeeding with disadvantage (succeeding both rolls).

The $ P$ s are quite easy to derive, and $ L$ is just passing outright OR [rolling a 1 AND THEN passing]: $ $ P + \left(\frac{1}{20}*P\right).$ $ But I’m struggling with deriving $ L_{adv}$ and $ L_{dis}$ . Please can someone show a derivation?

4 Steps to Reach Your Goals Achieve Success FASTER Emotional Speech

4 Steps to Reach Your Goals Achieve Success FASTER Emotional Speech Set goals. Setting goals and putting them in a plan is important for achieving them, as there are some basics to follow when setting goals, including: Clearly define the goal, which is what needs to be achieved, and be measurable, in addition to its realism in order to challenge the person himself, while avoiding setting impossible goals to avoid frustration and failure, and a time limit must be set to achieve them. Setting…

4 Steps to Reach Your Goals Achieve Success FASTER Emotional Speech