D&D 5E Adjudicating Unusual Actions

[Bawylie]

We all know how to adjudicate "I hit it with my sword" or "I cast magic missile at it". But as a RPG, as opposed to a computer game, players are expected to do all sorts of creative things which are not specifically covered by a rule.

I think this is a strength of a good RPG, not a weakness. I don't want an RPG to cover every conceivable action the players can imagine, as that's both an impossible task and asking for a tomb of rules so dense that mastering the rules takes over a major part of the game itself.

Instead, a good set of rules provides numerous examples and tools to help a DM adjudicate different kinds of situations, and lets the DM make the call in the moment on how to handle it. I think 5e does this well.

So in this thread I wanted to explore some different scenarios which are just not covered directly by the rules, but which in the moment a player might try to do. And, which a good DM would let them try. I am wondering how you would rule each scenario.

I'll throw out the first one, but do please feel free to throw out your own.

You're the DM. How would you rule on this: The Mummy, Chair Throw

I played d&d for the first time when I was 8. Mid to late ‘80s.

Orcs had invaded a village and one had cornered a woman in her home. I told the DM I wanted to tie a chair to a rope and swing it at the orc and smash it on him. (Because that’s what Hulk Hogan would’ve done and I had a raging case of Hulkamania like every 8 year old boy at the time). And the DM (who was 15 and only letting me play because my mom called his mom) told me an orc could block my cat-o-one-chair with his forearm and not take any harm at all.

It’s neat to be introduced to both D&D and the concept of “This is Bull****!” all at once. I feel vindicated here. Smash a mummy or whoever with a chair and wave the US flag over it triumphantly, Brother! USA USA, etc.

 

[Umbran]

... It may in fact be a terrible idea, and like the 5 year old they may lack the skills to successfully accomplish it, but they can and ought to be allowed to at least try.

...

In other words, a 5 year old may not be proficient at anything, but if you can attempt to do it without proficiency then it should not require proficiency (or a class, or a feat, or whatever) to attempt it.

I think I get what you are saying. However, the two phrases bolded above are mutually inconsistent, as written.

The latter phrase... seems kind of tautological - If you can try it without proficiency, then you should be able to try it without proficiency?

Would it be more like - if a 5-year-old can work out how to try, then the PCs should be allowed to try.

A 5-year-old generally cannot work out how to pick a lock, having never been taught about them, or seen how the innards work. They'd stick some metal pieces in the lock, wiggle them around, and achieve nothing.

A 5-year-old can figure out how to try to grapple, or climb, or throw sand in someone's face.

 

[Celebrim]

But what if it were a catapult or trebuchet instead of a ballista?

Things actually get worse. Now we are talking an indirect fire weapon against a moving target. That's like trying to hit a speeding car with a mortar. Indirect fire weapons tend to very much be weapons that depend on making fire adjustment - see where it lands and adjust the weapon slightly to compensate - but with a moving target you get only one shot.

Worse, if the PC ends up in the air then they end up in the air whether they hit or not, and not just on a hit.

Now we're just launching the PC into the air and getting rid of a lot of complexity. There's no sudden jolt from the rope and the people using a catapult they just need to adjust for the weight of the PC.

Again, things actually get worse on two fronts. First, the catapult or trebuchet is probably scaled to fire between 10 and 80 lb shot depending on the design. If the siege engine is too small, catastrophic failure is basically guaranteed. Only a really big honking trebuchet (some of the largest in the real medieval world) is going to be able to really toss 200lb+ of PC and gear any real distance, so this works best for size small PCs. But, that jerk of the rope is comparable in threat to the acceleration of the catapult arm or trebuchet arm. Unlike a stone, the PC doesn't have a stable well-defined center of gravity, and so its very hard to predictably accelerate the PC through an arc. One of the most likely outcomes here with a catapult is to slide off the end of the arm to soon and then to get slapped/clubbed by the accelerating lever, or failing that to just plop gracelessly (but mercifully) onto the ground behind the engine. Another likely outcome is to be hurled straight up in the air or straight back down into the ground. Literally everything that could happen for laughs to Wily Coyote could actually happen here. Some needs to be massively proficient with siege engines to arrange this, and the PC being fired needs to make some sort of check to not unduly interfere with the process.

There are still going to be a lot of issues though - hitting a moving creature is going to be really difficult. The PC will need to try to grab onto the dragon somehow. Maybe a grappling hook? Rope of entangling?

I'd probably do the typical DC 20 strength check to grab onto to something while falling. That would actually be the easier step in the problem.

Okay this is still extreme but at least it's Batman level silliness.

Or heroism.

If, of course, you're okay with Batman in your games.

Batman is at least a 15th level character. Do not try to replicate without equivalent skill.

 

[Oofta]

Part of my table philosophy as a DM involves what I call the "Kindergartner Rule", which states that, "Any thing that an imaginative 5 year old could attempt to do, any PC ought to be allowed to attempt to do." It may in fact be a terrible idea, and like the 5 year old they may lack the skills to successfully accomplish it, but they can and ought to be allowed to at least try.

So for example, the Kindergartner Rule insists that "climb" is not something that only thieves can do. It insists that grappling doesn't require a special silo'ed ability, and that anyone can, if they are grappled with something attempt to throw that someone.

In other words, a 5 year old may not be proficient at anything, but if you can attempt to do it without proficiency then it should not require proficiency (or a class, or a feat, or whatever) to attempt it.

Following the "Kindergartner Rule", "I attempt to throw sand in my opponent's face" is a valid proposition. Five year olds could propose to do that, and I can even imagine a 5 year old being successful it at versus another five year old (probably by sheer accident, because the average 5 year old will end up throwing it down rather than up into the face). Then by the rule there must be some chance that this will work when proposed by the PCs.

You may be right that not every proposed action or trope can be replicated in D&D, but I don't have a meta-rule that tells me what those actions or tropes are. The one I have invented that works for my table is that "Kindergartner Rule", and it turns out to

Whereas my approach (as I try to explain in my ballista/catapult post) is more "no, but what are you trying to accomplish"?

Sometimes I just don't understand what the person is trying to do, other times I'll explain why what their doing won't work but try to work out an alternative to achieve their goal. Sometimes it's just not possible, maybe because I didn't describe the scene well enough.

Example from a game a while back - the PC wanted to trip a huge giant. I let them know that wouldn't work but maybe they could do the Star Wars AT-AT trip attack maneuver.

 

[Celebrim]

I think I get what you are saying. However, the two phrases bolded above are mutually inconsistent, as written.

I don't see how. One of them has to do with the chance of success. The other has to do with whether a lack of proficiency serves as some sort of gate keeper that prevents the attempt or ensures failure.

The latter phrase... seems kind of tautological - If you can try it without proficiency, then you should be able to try it without proficiency?

You would think except a huge number of game systems do not in fact adhere to this principle, and insist that things can only be attempted by people who have spent the necessary chargen resources. 3e D&D as a familiar example is rife with them. For example, no matter how observant you are, you can not track someone nor can you detect a trap unless you have spent an additional chargen resource for tracking and trap detection.

A 5-year-old generally cannot work out how to pick a lock, having never been taught about them, or seen how the innards work. They'd stick some metal pieces in the lock, wiggle them around, and achieve nothing.

Sure, but you are also thinking about very modern pin tumbler locks that are difficult to pick and require special tools and practice. As a 5 year old, I promise you that you can work out how to bypass simple skeleton key barrier locks that you might find in older homes using only a coat hanger if you put your mind to it.

 

[Oofta]

Things actually get worse. Now we are talking an indirect fire weapon against a moving target. That's like trying to hit a speeding car with a mortar. Indirect fire weapons tend to very much be weapons that depend on making fire adjustment - see where it lands and adjust the weapon slightly to compensate - but with a moving target you get only one shot.

Worse, if the PC ends up in the air then they end up in the air whether they hit or not, and not just on a hit.



Again, things actually get worse on two fronts. First, the catapult or trebuchet is probably scaled to fire between 10 and 80 lb shot depending on the design. If the siege engine is too small, catastrophic failure is basically guaranteed. Only a really big honking trebuchet (some of the largest in the real medieval world) is going to be able to really toss 200lb+ of PC and gear any real distance, so this works best for size small PCs. But, that jerk of the rope is comparable in threat to the acceleration of the catapult arm or trebuchet arm. Unlike a stone, the PC doesn't have a stable well-defined center of gravity, and so its very hard to predictably accelerate the PC through an arc. One of the most likely outcomes here with a catapult is to slide off the end of the arm to soon and then to get slapped/clubbed by the accelerating lever, or failing that to just plop gracelessly (but mercifully) onto the ground behind the engine. Another likely outcome is to be hurled straight up in the air or straight back down into the ground. Literally everything that could happen for laughs to Wily Coyote could actually happen here. Some needs to be massively proficient with siege engines to arrange this, and the PC being fired needs to make some sort of check to not unduly interfere with the process.



I'd probably do the typical DC 20 strength check to grab onto to something while falling. That would actually be the easier version of this.



Or heroism.



Batman is at least a 15th level character. Do not try to replicate without equivalent skill.

I will admit just about zero knowledge of real world catapults and what weights they throw. On the other hand, who says the PC isn't a halfling? Besides, the point is not to hit the dragon with the PC, it's to get them in the general vicinity of the dragon so the PC can use some other means to attach themselves like a grappling hook. Preferably shot from a hand crossbow with a big bat emblem on it.

I just don't see any way of a ballista being accurate with a rope and PC attached. Or having it's range severely limited. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the scenario. But if you hit a dragon with a ballista bolt, there's little reason to think the bolt will "stick", especially with the weight of the rope, much less with a PC attached.

Unless of course it's a special ballista with bat-symbols on it that fires special grappling hook bolts. Bonus style points if the dragon is flying through a city and can try to knock the PC off by having them hit buildings as it flies.

 

[Maestrino]

There's nothing wrong with a gonzo campaign, they can be fun. I want my campaign a little more based in reality.

Now if a Tabaxi wants to launch themselves that's an exception to the rule. Because then it would simply be a catapult.

This is an underrated pun, right here.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

3e D&D as a familiar example is rife with them. For example, no matter how observant you are, you can not track someone nor can you detect a trap unless you have spent an additional chargen resource for tracking and trap detection.

Ummm...no

Its done as an "untrained check"

It has a disadvantage

Dont remember what book covers that edge case but its a thing

 

[Celebrim]

On the other hand, who says the PC isn't a halfling?

As I suggested, this gets a lot easier if you are tossing a halfling.

Besides, the point is not to hit the dragon with the PC, it's to get them in the general vicinity of the dragon so the PC can use some other means to attach themselves like a grappling hook. Preferably shot from a hand crossbow with a big bat emblem on it.

So now you have just combined all the points of failure from the ballista example to all the points of failure from the catapolt example into one big bundle of failure.

Unless of course it's a special ballista with bat-symbols on it that fires special grappling hook bolts. Bonus style points if the dragon is flying through a city and can try to knock the PC off by having them hit buildings as it flies.

Again, if we are talking a 15th+ level PC, then all of this ridiculous stuff becomes entirely possible, or even potentially plausible with the right skill set. If you are a master siege engineer, acrobat, marital arts master with masterwork gizmos and gadets in the pouches of holding on your utility belt, then all the DC 20 and DC 30 tests in this plan become doable.

 

[Maestrino]

Seriously, the ballista example:

"I tie the rope to the bolt and then around myself." = Sleight of hand check to secure the knots. DC 10 - you know how to tie knots, but you're in a hurry.

"I fire the ballista at the dragon." = ranged attack with a siege weapon. +2 to AC due to the increased difficulty with a rope tied to the bolt.

Then EITHER roll damage, and for any damage number better than average, the bolt lodges in the dragon OR roll a d20 - DC 12 to see if the bolt sticks.

Where is the dragon flying? Acrobatics checks to try to climb up the rope while avoiding being smashed into obstacles. DC varies based on the terrain.