D&D 5E Manacled by Thieves' Tools

devincutler · Nov 12, 2015

Is the intent of the 5e skill system to basically allow retries on a failure? I am not talking about a retry if you fail to persuade someone. I am talking specifically about:

1. Lockpicking. The DCs are so low that it wouldn't take even someone not proficient in thieves' tools and with a 12 Dex more than a minute to pick most locks. Seems too easy.

2. Manacles. The strength DC is low enough that if you allow a retry almost anyone can break through them in a minute's time.

My house rule is that with lockpicking you can retry but if you fail by 5 or more you break the pick off in the lock and the DC rises by a lot (and it will take time and rolls to clear the lock).

With manacles, I revert back to the old bend bars/lift gates rules from 1e and 2e wherein you get one try, and unless circumstances change (e.g. your Str goes up), then if you fail...that's it.

So I would allow a barbarian, for example, to try once to bust the manacles with his normal Str check and then if he rages I would allow another shot with advantage.

How do you handle these two items?

S'mon · Nov 12, 2015

5e seems to work best like pre-3e, no retries. Either you are able to pick the lock (you succeed on roll), or you aren't.

Celtavian · Nov 12, 2015

I use no re-tries for certain time periods or when it seems appropriate as a house rule. I like the flexibility of 5E in that regard. For manacles, I can say you strain as hard as you can, but they do not break. You cannot summon the strength to try again until you take a short or long rest. I can just say you don't have a good understanding of this lock and fail to pick it. It will take another hour of study until you can attempt it again. I like that you can come up with good story-based reasons for no retries. This is an improvement over 3E/Pathfinder in my opinion.

Shiroiken · Nov 12, 2015

RAW intends that if there is no rush, you can pretty much pull off anything given enough time.

I do not allow retries, unless something changes the situation. For example: you try to break out of the manacles, but just aren't strong enough. When brought before the villain who threatens your family, you have an adrenaline rush that gives you another chance to break free.

Al2O3 · Nov 12, 2015

I do not know if there are hard rules on this, but I would probably restrict lockpicking to those who are proficient with the tools and allow them to use the "passive" value unless they are in a rush or some other circumstance makes it extra hard to just calmly try until it works. If it would potentially add to the story I would probably ask for a check to see if they fumble and break the picks or something along those lines.

ad_hoc · Nov 12, 2015

Keep in mind that if there is no consequence for failure the roll shouldn't be made. They either do it or not.

Like the post above mine, I allow a passive score if there is no pressure and 1 roll if that is not enough. However, if rolling does not accomplish anything then I just allow the attempt to automatically succeed.

JohnLynch · Nov 12, 2015

I'd ask their bonus and then adjudicate. If they've got 11 Dex and aren't proficient then they can break easy locks. If they're extremely dexterous (Dex 20) they can break medium locks. If they're proficient and dexterous then you're likely looking at level 13 to be able to break hard locks reliably (need a 10 on the dice) unless they specialise.

So it largely depends on the DC you're setting. I'd expect competent adventurers (level 3) to not be phased by easy locks and with some time be able to handle medium locks. Hard locks will delay them significantly though with no training or natural aptitude.

MarkB · Nov 12, 2015

Out Of The Abyss starts with the PCs manacled. It lists DCs for various escape methods, and says that any failed check can't be repeated for 24 hours.

Li Shenron · Nov 12, 2015

S'mon said:
5e seems to work best like pre-3e, no retries. Either you are able to pick the lock (you succeed on roll), or you aren't.

This is also my favourite way. No retries unless the situation changes to your advantage.

If I wanted to freely allow retries, I wouldn't even ask for a dice check, and would just let you succeed.

This isn't a hard-rule, just a general principle, but then each case is different. People usually mention combat, chases or other high-stress situations where failure is randomly caused by outside forces, and thus it makes a lot of sense to allow retries. That to me could mean that if there hadn't been a high-stress situation, the task could have been an automatic success.

The point is:

- if you ask for a check it means that you are declaring that success and failure are both possible
- if you are going to allow infinite retries, don't even bother asking for a check!
- if you allow limited retries, just realize that you are merely changing the probabilities, and therefore you are needlessly complicating the system (you could just change the DC instead)

Instead, I just consider the randomness of the check related with the inherent randomness of the object: if you failed to pick the lock, it is because this lock just beats you, and not because this attempt went bad.

---

The only good alternative, is to allow retries but ALSO with added cost (automatic or random chance): more time wasted, the need to spend some resources, or receiving damage/penalty.

Some examples could be, you can retry your Lockpicking over and over, but each time you either:
- take a proportionally longer time (second attempt takes half an hour, third attempts takes two hourse...)
- spend a 'charge' of your lockpicking tools (whatever that means), when 'depleted', the tools are broken forever
- have a random chance of damaging yourself or the tools each time

This is a good system, but clearly requires either some significant work to make it consistent, or good improvisational skills by the DM.

delericho · Nov 12, 2015

S'mon said:
5e seems to work best like pre-3e, no retries. Either you are able to pick the lock (you succeed on roll), or you aren't.

Yep, that's how I handle it - no retries unless the circumstance changes meaningfully. ('Meaningfully' as adjudicated by me, of course.)

Li Shenron said:
The only good alternative, is to allow retries but ALSO with added cost (automatic or random chance): more time wasted, the need to spend some resources, or receiving damage/penalty.

One nice feature of Numenera is that recovery rolls have an incrementing time associated with them - the first takes one action, then a minute, an hour, a day... (I may be mis-remembering the specific times, but I'm sure you get the idea.

) I have considered 'borrowing' that for handling rerolls.