G
Guest 6801328
Guest
Yeah, how could I possibly come to the conclusion that some DMs allow players to bypass skill checks completely.
Tell me if I've got this wrong, but the snarky, sarcastic tone suggests that you think our intent is obvious and you totally understand it. And yet over and over again you seem to not understand it.
For example, I keep repeatedly hearing this dismissive thing about "describing every sword blow". Perhaps you think that if a player would "add some description" to an attack ("Feinting low to get the orc to drop his shield, I switch my stance and instead lunge for his neck!") he would get to skip the attack roll.
No. That's not it at all. That's just describing a goal and a method ("I try to kill the orc, using my sword") using more colorful language. If the DM rules that no roll is needed, it's because the outcome is a foregone conclusion (18th level Barbarian versus lone orc), not because the description was colorful.
Instead, imagine that instead of fighting the orcs, the players open the gate that floods the guard chamber, drowning all the orcs. Now, maybe the DM would still require some rolls in there (to unlock the valve, to sneak into the chamber with the mechanism, etc. etc.) or maybe not, but either way the players are not forced to make any combat attack rolls...which is a good thing because combat is so unpredictable, and even when you win it consumes resources...and instead they solve the problem creatively through describing a goal and a method.
That same approach can be used to solving other problems/tasks/challenges.
That's what we're talking about.
(And, yes, it does require that you trust your DM to adjudicate in the spirit of telling a good story, not to have a power trip or punish players or whatever. If you don't trust your DM to do this then you may want to play 5th edition as if it were 4th edition. Or find a different DM.)