D&D 5E Consequences of Failure

[Oofta]

Ok.

Um....should I interpret that to mean that you don't understand what I'm describing, but that you no longer care to have me try to explain it?

I only ask because you accused me of making up problems that don't exist, and while you can apologize for the tone, the accusation is still out there. I would like the opportunity to help you understand that while the paradox that I experience may not bother you at the table, it does in fact exist.

Not sure what else you want me to say. I probably completely misread your post. I understand you have an issue I don't; at a certain point whether I understand doesn't really matter.

I do my best to give advice, sometimes I completely whiff.

For me, lack of progress is enough of a punishment. Heck, I've even admitted sometimes I just ask for checks because I'm messing with my players (in a good way) because I think it can at times help with a sense of immersion. You think having something beyond that will enhance your DMing skills. I don't see why it would.

 

[Guest 6801328]

All the sarcophagi are in various states of aged decay, except one

The sarcophagi are in three neat, even rows, except for the last row, which has one extra.

There is a faint breathing sound in the room (EDIT: the PCs can hone in on it by being vewy, vewy qwiet)

There is a gauntlet strangely stuck to the side of one of the sarcophagi

"One of the sarcophagi looks more like a cartoon of a chest, and it has a mouth with teeth."

 

[Campbell]

Lack of progress can be meaningful in an environment where time pressure or at least the possibility of time pressure exists. After all this is how missed attacks work in Dungeons and Dragons. I do think for something like this to be meaningful it is important to utilize something like count down clocks, defined time constraints for actions, reactive dungeons with real ecosystems and the like. B/X makes these meaningful by utilizing 10 minute turns and wandering monster checks. It makes time feel precious.

There needs to be some way that player characters are under pressure (or at least possibly under pressure) for these things to have meaning. Something should change even if it is only we know or think we have less time.

 

[BookBarbarian]

Y'all are pretty good telegraphers.

I would just say "You see six sinister looking sarcophagi." And my Players would ask "Why are they sinister?" and I'd have them paranoidly checking everything for the rest of the session.

 

[5ekyu]

What is the purpose of placing secret things that players won’t find and sometime won’t even have a clue of their existence?

Whats the purpose of calling something secret if the character will find it?

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Y'all are pretty good telegraphers.

I would just say "You see six sinister looking sarcophagi." And my Players would ask "Why are they sinister?" and I'd have them paranoidly checking everything for the rest of the session.

Nice, and all you really meant was that all six open from the left-hand side. I like that.

 

[5ekyu]

I wouldn't say "won't find", rather "may not find". If a secret is critical, I don't make it secret.

But a secret passage that they may find that the murderer used to get away? Sure. If they find it on the first pass the investigation bypasses some other clues. If they miss it, they'll find it later.

Exactly.

If the fact is taken for granted that the characters will find everything in the "dungeon" then there is no secret.

Its not unlike asking if it should always be that every encounter and adversary must be beatable by the Party in a straight up fight.

So, for instance, maybe there is a room where the beastie is too tough to slug it out with but the creature is one who they can interact with in other interesting ways?

Just like a door might be so hidden they are unlikely to or really just not gonna find by casual walk thru but where certain actions they might take or creatures they can interact with might be able to reveal it to them - if they dont kill eveeything on sight.

 

[cmad1977]

Just out of curiosity, how would phrase a passive Perception discovery of, say, a secret door, that avoids leading with "You..."

I have some ideas, but wondering how others would do this.

Something along the lines of
‘Me shuffling a couple pages checking a characters passive perception.
“Ok, so the party heads through the rusty gate and into the Hall of teh Bad. While it seems like nothing more than a dusty hallway leading to the Bronze door of Teh Bad, Elanon feels a slight draft from nearby the wall(or maybe he sees dust kinda eddying(?) where it shouldnt)”

“Hold up... check the walls guys”

“You find a loose stone on the right wall... it jiggles and part of the wall itself slides open slightly, revealing a space beyond....”’

That’s what I’d do I guess. Something like that.

 

[Lanefan]

As the DMG states, if there's no consequence of failure there's no need for a roll. I simply view consequence of failure including "no progress towards the goal" as stated in the PHB. Not being able to tell if an NPC is telling the truth or not is a valid consequence.

I'm missing something here - again.

There's many cases, of which the 'is the NPC lying?' is but one, where the relevant consequence doesn't arise on failure, but on success; and the primary (or only) consequence of failure is simply the continued absence of the success condition. That absence may or may not have knock-on consequences down the road e.g. the PCs believe the lie and act on it, but here and now it's merely the status quo - nothing changes.

So why all the worry about having specific consequences for failure as well as for success? Isn't it enough to have just one or the other be significant with the other being status quo, and roll to determine which occurs?

I don't get it.

 

[5ekyu]

Yeah, you hit the same issues with a number of monsters such as gargoyles and any number of "you can't tell this is a creature".

In my campaign if you want to detect them there has to be some environmental factor indicating that they aren't what they seem. Maybe all the other sarcophagi are covered in dust, etc.

How you could tell it was breathing without getting close enough to be attacked I have no clue.

Spend 2 minute per chest firing chill touch at them. A mimic is a creature and a chest is not. Chill touch cannot target or harm objects.



There are a lot of cantrips that can,fill in for chill touch. Firebolt is one exception.

But it might get much more fun to try a Friends cantrip "approach" on the mimic.