Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Surprise round question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Arial Black" data-source="post: 7102958" data-attributes="member: 6799649"><p>We are saying the same thing here, just using different words.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Your idea, that PCs are only <strong>allowed</strong> to make checks if they are deliberately choosing to put effort into doing so, is a fundamental misunderstanding of the text on Ability Checks (PHB p172), which states:-</p><p></p><p>"An ability check tests a characters or monster’s <strong>innate talent and training</strong> in an effort to overcome a challenge. The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. <strong>When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results</strong>"</p><p></p><p>It's not that the <em>creature</em> is deliberately, consciously trying to overcome a challenge (though it <em>usually</em> is), but the the <em>Ability Check itself</em> is what tests the creatures 'innate talent and training'. <em>There is absolutely no requirement for the creature to be doing something deliberately and consciously in order to have their innate talent and training tested by means of an ability check!</em> It's very common, for example, for a DM to ask for Perception checks to find out if you heard something without you ever stating that you were trying to hear it! The DM might ask for an Insight check to notice that someone is behaving strangely, without you ever stating that you were on the lookout for strange behaviour.</p><p></p><p>What ability checks are in the game <strong>for</strong> is for situations "When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results".</p><p></p><p>Therefore, the idea that sleeping creatures are not permitted ability checks is simply not the case.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>We have a situation where stimulous that may or may not be picked up by a creature's senses may or may not wake it. What does the game itself expect us to do? I'll quote it again:- "What ability checks are in the game for is for situations when the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results".</p><p></p><p>The problem with the way you do it is that you take a situation which is rife with uncertainty and just....decide. No uncertainty. That doesn't make sense.</p><p></p><p>Further, your criteria for <em>choosing</em> whether or not a creature wakes is completely divorced from the things which <strong>do</strong> determine (largely) whether or not a creature wakes due to the stimulous: how loud or quiet the stimulous (Stealth check) and how sharp the senses of the sleeper (Perception check).</p><p></p><p>That's two good reasons why this idea of yours is a poor choice.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As above, I'm using an ability check to test the innate talent and training of the sleeper's senses, and contesting it with the innate talent and training of the assassin to avoid waking the target. You already admit that the sleeper's senses <strong>are</strong> picking up information from their environment, otherwise 'noise' (however loud) would not be detected and therefore could not waken the sleeper. </p><p></p><p>It all makes sense. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>First, it's still a meaningful choice of whether to stay on watch or go to sleep. Those on watch benefit from passive Perception while sleepers don't, and sleepers have disadvantage on their Perception checks for, y'know, being asleep. It's been a long time since the disadvantage thing was mentioned in this thread, but it has been mentioned multiple times.</p><p></p><p>Second, the fact that dice are rolled to resolve the exciting stuff doesn't mean the player's choices don't matter! Sure, it's not like chess where there is no randomness; it's more like a game of bridge where the card distribution is random but your skill includes taking account of the randomness. We know, as players, that d20s get rolled. This does not mean that our choice to attack the ogres or the dragon has no effect. It doesn't mean that the choice to either sleep or stay on watch has no effect just because dice are involved. Our choices <strong>do</strong> have an effect, even if that effect is to skew the odds in our favour. They are <em>meaningful</em> choices.</p><p></p><p>Third: badwrongfun. These forums take accusations of 'badwrongfun' as very poor form. People play what they want to play and it's nobody else's business. I get that.</p><p></p><p>However, I believe it's fair to comment when someone says "I do it <em>this way</em>" if 'this way' seems absurd or unfair. You've put the idea out into the forum, people are going to comment.</p><p></p><p>I can imagine my own frustration if I were playing either an assassin or the sleeping victim of one and the DM rendered my choices as a player moot by ignoring all those skill proficiency/expertise choices I'd made to represent their strengths by simply ignoring the game system and <em>choosing</em> who wins and loses, using criteria that don't match the situation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Arial Black, post: 7102958, member: 6799649"] We are saying the same thing here, just using different words. Your idea, that PCs are only [b]allowed[/b] to make checks if they are deliberately choosing to put effort into doing so, is a fundamental misunderstanding of the text on Ability Checks (PHB p172), which states:- "An ability check tests a characters or monster’s [b]innate talent and training[/b] in an effort to overcome a challenge. The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. [b]When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results[/b]" It's not that the [i]creature[/i] is deliberately, consciously trying to overcome a challenge (though it [i]usually[/i] is), but the the [i]Ability Check itself[/i] is what tests the creatures 'innate talent and training'. [i]There is absolutely no requirement for the creature to be doing something deliberately and consciously in order to have their innate talent and training tested by means of an ability check![/i] It's very common, for example, for a DM to ask for Perception checks to find out if you heard something without you ever stating that you were trying to hear it! The DM might ask for an Insight check to notice that someone is behaving strangely, without you ever stating that you were on the lookout for strange behaviour. What ability checks are in the game [b]for[/b] is for situations "When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results". Therefore, the idea that sleeping creatures are not permitted ability checks is simply not the case. We have a situation where stimulous that may or may not be picked up by a creature's senses may or may not wake it. What does the game itself expect us to do? I'll quote it again:- "What ability checks are in the game for is for situations when the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results". The problem with the way you do it is that you take a situation which is rife with uncertainty and just....decide. No uncertainty. That doesn't make sense. Further, your criteria for [i]choosing[/i] whether or not a creature wakes is completely divorced from the things which [b]do[/b] determine (largely) whether or not a creature wakes due to the stimulous: how loud or quiet the stimulous (Stealth check) and how sharp the senses of the sleeper (Perception check). That's two good reasons why this idea of yours is a poor choice. As above, I'm using an ability check to test the innate talent and training of the sleeper's senses, and contesting it with the innate talent and training of the assassin to avoid waking the target. You already admit that the sleeper's senses [b]are[/b] picking up information from their environment, otherwise 'noise' (however loud) would not be detected and therefore could not waken the sleeper. It all makes sense. ;) First, it's still a meaningful choice of whether to stay on watch or go to sleep. Those on watch benefit from passive Perception while sleepers don't, and sleepers have disadvantage on their Perception checks for, y'know, being asleep. It's been a long time since the disadvantage thing was mentioned in this thread, but it has been mentioned multiple times. Second, the fact that dice are rolled to resolve the exciting stuff doesn't mean the player's choices don't matter! Sure, it's not like chess where there is no randomness; it's more like a game of bridge where the card distribution is random but your skill includes taking account of the randomness. We know, as players, that d20s get rolled. This does not mean that our choice to attack the ogres or the dragon has no effect. It doesn't mean that the choice to either sleep or stay on watch has no effect just because dice are involved. Our choices [b]do[/b] have an effect, even if that effect is to skew the odds in our favour. They are [i]meaningful[/i] choices. Third: badwrongfun. These forums take accusations of 'badwrongfun' as very poor form. People play what they want to play and it's nobody else's business. I get that. However, I believe it's fair to comment when someone says "I do it [i]this way[/i]" if 'this way' seems absurd or unfair. You've put the idea out into the forum, people are going to comment. I can imagine my own frustration if I were playing either an assassin or the sleeping victim of one and the DM rendered my choices as a player moot by ignoring all those skill proficiency/expertise choices I'd made to represent their strengths by simply ignoring the game system and [i]choosing[/i] who wins and loses, using criteria that don't match the situation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Surprise round question
Top