D&D 5E Players: Why Do You Want to Roll a d20?

[Ashrym]

I invest in character options because they fit the over-all concept I had in mind and I want to play to that concept. So if I make Natasha Romanoff I want to use those abilities. Rolling the dice and adding those modifiers shows me I'm doing just that.

Plus, I'd roll dice in my sleep. They seem addictive. If Sheldon Cooper (Big Bang Theory) can simplify his life letting d20's make decisions for him so can I.

 

[jayoungr]

I'm interested in hearing why you want to roll a d20? Or, if you don't, do you have other reasons why you don't?

I should start this by stating I would never ask to resolve a delicate social situation purely through a die roll. I would explain how I was approaching the situation and treat the die as just an expression of whether my approach was the right one or not.

That said: Whenever I ask to make an ability check, I'm prepared for either success or failure. It's my way of saying "Here's my plan--now let fate decide whether it works, and I'll go with the consequences."

Also, when it comes to things like Persuasion or Deception, I frankly don't trust the person who most often GMs for me to allow it to work. For a while I just quit taking Bluff-type skills because that person would usually decide my roleplaying attempts at bluffing weren't good enough and just tell me they didn't work. That actually discouraged me from playing out certain types of situations, rather than encouraging it. With a die, we both agree to abide by what it says.

And sometimes it's fun when the die says something unexpected. I have players who laugh to this day about how the cleric, four years ago, converted a Dragon Cultist to worshiping Bahamut with a mere Persuasion roll of 4, because the target's opposed wisdom roll was a 2. That would never have happened without the dice.

 

[Charlaquin]

Strikes me as the sort of approach that @TwoSix mentioned above where environmental information is gated behind an ability check. I'm certain I did that as a D&D 3.Xe DM and probably D&D 4e, but in D&D 5e it annoys me to no end to get asked to make an ability check when I haven't described what I wanted to do. It's like, man, I'm trying to avoid making those, so unless you're hitting me with a saving throw, please just stop.

Of course, I try to be understanding about this because I don't imagine most people think too deeply about this stuff and just sort of go with what they know from other games or what they learned from watching other DMs.

Even during 4e that bugged me. I have a passive Perception for a reason, use that or let me take the initiative. But yeah, I try just to roll with it. Their game, their rules, even if it’s not how I would rule.

 

[coolAlias]

And sometimes it's fun when the die says something unexpected. I have players who laugh to this day about how the cleric, four years ago, converted a Dragon Cultist to worshiping Bahamut with a mere Persuasion roll of 4, because the target's opposed wisdom roll was a 2. That would never have happened without the dice.

Perhaps I'm not a fun-loving DM or perhaps there is more context that wasn't presented, but that would have required much more effort in my games. I'd never let a PC persuade an NPC to change religions with a single die roll unless that NPC was already practically on the verge of it themselves.

That said, as a player I love it when I get to do crazy things in games if I roll well. Maybe I should loosen up a little as DM.

 

[ccs]

Been to Vegas lots. My goal is winning, so I employ the best strategy possible (to the limits of my knowledge and skill).

As for rolling the dice, sometimes that's unavoidable as I mention above. If you make an attack and the enemy is defending, you're going to roll. When the villain successfully lobs a fireball at you, you're going to roll. If there are elements of the situation that you can't control that gives your task an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence of failure, you're going to roll. So even with this strategy you can't avoid all dice rolling, even if you really wanted to. But, if the group is operating in the parameters the rules set forth, you'll roll a bit less and that has some big benefits in my experience.

Well I'm not playing D&D as if I were in Vegas. I'm not afraid to roll the dice & maybe roll low. Especially if I'm not in combat/making a Save....

 

[5ekyu]

Well I'm not playing D&D as if I were in Vegas. I'm not afraid to roll the dice & maybe roll low. Especially if I'm not in combat/making a Save....

Yeah, sometimes really fun things happen on bad rolls in 5e.

 

[iserith]

And sometimes it's fun when the die says something unexpected. I have players who laugh to this day about how the cleric, four years ago, converted a Dragon Cultist to worshiping Bahamut with a mere Persuasion roll of 4, because the target's opposed wisdom roll was a 2. That would never have happened without the dice.

Those situations are funny and memorable, sure, and they come up in games that I play in and DM. That sort of thing happens even if the player is trying to avoid dice wherever possible. I offer the best approach I can to converting that dragon cultist ("C'mon, bro, Bahamut's the best of all dragons, don't you know..."), the DM decides there's a roll (dang) and the DC, I decide if it's worth spending resources on it, then we roll. Which, in the case of your example, is that my approach actually succeeded because the DC was 2. As a player, I don't actually have to ask for a roll for that outcome to occur.

 

[iserith]

Even during 4e that bugged me. I have a passive Perception for a reason, use that or let me take the initiative. But yeah, I try just to roll with it. Their game, their rules, even if it’s not how I would rule.

For sure. I'm actually very easy to DM for. I don't question rulings and only chime in on rules if I'm asked. I make my goal and approach clear, then wait. And in terms of enjoying the game, I have two criteria to determine if I'm interested in future games, outside of the normal goals of play - it must be funny and we must get stuff done. And then it only needs to be one of those two (though preferably both). I'm willing to let all other rough edges slide.

 

[iserith]

Well I'm not playing D&D as if I were in Vegas. I'm not afraid to roll the dice & maybe roll low. Especially if I'm not in combat/making a Save....

I would say it's not really fear of rolling low, but rather the desire to be more successful than not successful. That sounds like a very reasonable player behavior to me. To that end, I'd rather take the dice out of the equation if I am able or at least greatly mitigate the impact of their swing.

 

[Shiroiken]

My players are often confused and sometimes annoyed when they describe what they want to do, and I begin describing the results before they even roll the dice (99% of the time in their favor). They are used to the idea that everything they do must have a roll attached to it, despite my insistence that rolls are only for when the outcome is in doubt (this is especially important in my game, since I never allow re-tries of any kind).

If anyone hasn't seen "The Gamers 2," there are two fantastic scenes where a player insists on rolling a die to perform an act the DM explicitly says he can succeed on without a die roll. In both cases, he rolls a 1 and randomly dies (the player has over 100 variations of the same character ready, as his bard dies... a lot).

because in some player's minds it removes the decision from the arbitrary whims of the GM and frames it into perspective. You roll a 20 or a 1 and it will "force" the GM into an answer that gets confirmed.

its also "forces" the GM during any begging and pleading when the players want to do something and the GM says no "Well let me just roll a d20" really means "let me see if I roll a nat 20 then you have to let me get what I want."

Sadly, I think this a major factor as well. In the past, I've had players that have wanted to do something that I felt was fairly ridiculous, but insist that if they rolled high enough, they MUST succeed. Best example was a hostage situation, where the bad guy is holding the hostage completely between himself and the PCs (complete cover); player decides to shoot a crossbow, and is angry that he critically hit the hostage, killing her (I had told them prior that the bad guy was completely protected by her).