The point I was trying to get across (it didn't come out very well, I suppose); rolling a 1, then letting the character get off just fine with a 4 or a 5 defeats the purpose of the 1 in the first place.
Let's lay out a couple of scenarios:
(Moderate GM)
"I forge a steel sword." {1}
Taking a chunk of waste metal, you plunge it into the magma furnace! Neglecting to wear gloves, you badly burn your hand.
Damage roll {4}: But fortunately the damage is only aesthetic! You maintain full mobility in your hand!
vs.
(Pacifist GM)
"I forge a steel sword." {1}
Perhaps fate conspired against you, but you are unable to locate any steel around you... or a furnace, for that matter. Furthermore, you have no idea how to begin forging a blade.
vs.
(Evil GM)
"I forge a steel sword." {1}
The blacksmith's shop is filled with dangerous tools. Metallurgy has always interested you, and you decide to test your mettle, forging a blade of your own. With no regard for your safety, you pick up a chunk of metal and shove it into the furnace. After a few minutes pass, you grab the molten steel with your bare palm! It sears through your skin! You now have a hole in your hand, and can no longer perform actions competently with it.
These all arose from the same root action, and ultimately, the end result is really up to the GM. In RTDs, the control lies:
50% in the hands of the GM
30% in the luck of the die
20% with the players
Which 'outcome' is better is really just opinion, at this point; some may find the hilarity of an epic fail enticing, while others might be agitated that their character can't perform seemingly mundane actions.
As for the mechanics; finding a balance between what to roll for and what not to roll for is difficult. I'd say trying to keep it down to one roll per player's action (except during fights) would be best. Too many rules ultimately eat away at what an RTD truly is, at heart.