D&D 5E Ability Check origins at your table

[CleverNickName]

And, there's nothing really wrong with that, but it (not you, personally - but the method in general) has a few points to note:

1) Sometimes the thing the player wants doesn't "look like" anything. What does using Insight to get a read on an NPC "look like"? How many different narrations of getting a read on NPCs should we make players come up with over time?

2) Presumably the character with a skill knows how to use the skill. The player however, may not. An archetype here is use of Persuasion - a character with it knows what to say to persuade, but the player may really not. Indeed the GM may not either - most of us GMs are not high-end negotiators, and able to survive in the wilderness with just a penknife, and experts in alchemy all in one person, right?. So, we can end up gating character success on whether the player gets the GM's concept of what should work.

3) The character is supposed to be able to do stuff. Why does the player have to "sell it" for the character to be able to succeed? What if the player's not really a salesman (or, really - narrator)? Do we really want to link character success to player narration skill?

"Selling it" was a poor choice of wording on my part...sorry about that. The goal is to help me, as the DM, understand what the character is attempting to do, so that I can assign the proper ability check to it (if a check is even necessary), that's all.

Really, that's all.

Some folks don't want the DM to do that. Maybe they want to "call the shots" themselves, maybe they want to use their optimized stats as often as possible, maybe they don't like the way their DM runs the game, etc. I think that's really what this debate boils down to, and why this is historically a touchy subject: it sits on that fine line between "following the rules" and "telling me how to play."

 

[Li Shenron]

I grant checks.

My players have learned it's better for them to not ask to roll dice. If they tell what they're doing, I often might simply tell them they succeed. If they ask to roll the dice, they certainly have a chance of failure. And it's not symmetrical, asking to roll the dice on something beyond their capability still doesn't make it possible.

 

[Voadam]

As a DM I sometimes ask for a check, sometimes I ask for a nonstandard check (different ability score, or it is ambiguous which skill applies), sometimes I narrate a resolution with no check.

Picking locks is probably the most straightforward to do with a predetermined check.

Sometimes I do a whole 4e style skill challenge with multiple party members declaring actions and I will call for skill checks from everybody.

Sometimes it is one big discrete check with aid another or enhance ability to get advantage and bardic inspiration and such coming in to work all the mechanical angles.

It can also vary on pacing at the moment.

So fairly by the book RAW 5e DM's discretion which is option B alone.

Mostly my players will ask at most, "Would that be an x check?" after making an action declaration, also "In the tower or not?" which is a Fantasy Grounds option for the DM only seeing the result of their roll.

 

[Hriston]

It seems to me the poll asks the question the wrong way around because it presupposes an ability check is made, so I've started a new poll here because I believe it matters even when an action declaration is not resolved with an ability check.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

It seems to me the poll asks the question the wrong way around because it presupposes an ability check is made, so I've started a new poll here because I believe it matters even when an action declaration is not resolved with an ability check.

I agree that it matters that some action declarations are resolved without rolling. But, that was not the point of this particular poll. So, I guess I'm quibbling with your phrasing of "wrong way around" since the poll explores the topic as intended. In other words: how are ability checks initiated at your table?

(don't get me... ahem... wrong... I find your poll interesting, too)

 

[Hriston]

I agree that it matters that some action declarations are resolved without rolling. But, that was not the point of this particular poll. So, I guess I'm quibbling with your phrasing of "wrong way around" since the poll explores the topic as intended. In other words: how are ability checks initiated at your table?

(don't get me... ahem... wrong... I find your poll interesting, too)

Apologies for my poor choice of words. By "asks the question the wrong way around", I meant something like "puts the cart before the horse". Ability checks are a tool for resolving certain action declarations (as your second option alludes to) which must necessarily be made before an ability check is called for to resolve them. I believe that focusing on a presupposed ability check rather than an action declaration which may or may not give rise to one invites responses like some repeated in this thread along the lines of "If there's going to be a check anyway, then why make the players say extra stuff/magic words/etc.?" The problem with those responses is they presuppose a check is going to happen, which is exactly how the poll is presented.

 

[Umbran]

Some folks don't want the DM to do that. Maybe they want to "call the shots" themselves, maybe they want to use their optimized stats as often as possible, maybe they don't like the way their DM runs the game, etc.

Those all sound like they call for an out of game discussion with the player, rather than a specific prescription for action declaration.

I think that's really what this debate boils down to, and why this is historically a touchy subject: it sits on that fine line between "following the rules" and "telling me how to play."

You, of course, can play however you like.

But, this is a discussion thread, on a board full of discussion threads. When folks bring up how they play the game, unless given pretty clear statement otherwise, it being up for discussion is kind of the base expectation. If that's not what someone wants out of the discussion, it would be better to tell everyone else up front.

 

[Hussar]

The way I look at it the more info a player gives me the easier and smoother it is to make adjudications not only about the skill performance itself but all the potential myriad consequences and factors that may be involved. I don’t expect a player to have to know how to pick a lock, I do expect a player to tell me (and when they don’t I frequently ask) if their character is trying to be fast, being slow, trying to be quiet, squatting down in front of the door or standing to one side the best they can, etc.

Oh good god. Why?

Who cares? Fast or slow doesn’t matter. It’s not in the players control. Squatting? Wtf? Seriously? You seriously expect players to describe their posture when picking a lock when they probably have zero idea what that lock actually looks like?

 

[el-remmen]

Oh good god. Why?

Who cares? Fast or slow doesn’t matter. It’s not in the players control. Squatting? Wtf? Seriously? You seriously expect players to describe their posture when picking a lock when they probably have zero idea what that lock actually looks like?

Yes. I care. My players care. That’s the game to us. If a trap goes off, if a monster overhears, etc matters in our style of play. I honestly can’t imagine enjoying a game where it doesn’t ever matter.

But you already knew that because this is at least the 4th time you’ve expressed surprise and annoyance when i describe my game approach.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Apologies for my poor choice of words. By "asks the question the wrong way around", I meant something like "puts the cart before the horse". Ability checks are a tool for resolving certain action declarations (as your second option alludes to) which must necessarily be made before an ability check is called for to resolve them. I believe that focusing on a presupposed ability check rather than an action declaration which may or may not give rise to one invites responses like some repeated in this thread along the lines of "If there's going to be a check anyway, then why make the players say extra stuff/magic words/etc.?" The problem with those responses is they presuppose a check is going to happen, which is exactly how the poll is presented.

No worries - and thanks for the clarification.