D&D 5E Using social skills on other PCs

[HammerMan]

DM describes the environment. Players describe what they want to do. DM narrates the results. Repeat.

YUP... same as every other D&D game ever...

Questions are not actions.

but you can understand them. You can use the same analytical mind that has scoured the rules for the one true way to read them, and understand in context what they want/

I can't adjudicate a question without assuming or establishing what the character is doing. None of this suggests players must do anything other than say what they want to do and hope to accomplish.

yes you CAN adjudicate it, you choose not to.

It's not about accepting or not accepting it. It's not enough for me to adjudicate that action fairly without making undue assumptions or asking questions of the player. What if the desk drawer is trapped? Shall I just say the character opens the drawer and sets it off? Shall I ask them questions about whether they open the drawers? All of that is dispensed with if the player is reasonably specific.

lol, cause "I search the desk" is hard for you to understand, but anyone should trust your reading of the rules...

 

[Charlaquin]

Misclick

 

[Charlaquin]

but you can understand them. You can use the same analytical mind that has scoured the rules for the one true way to read them, and understand in context what they want/

You say “understand in what context they want,” I say “assume what they want.” Is it possible to determine from context what a character might want and what they might be doing to achieve that goal? Sure. But doing so leaves the door open for the possibility of getting it wrong, which leads to “But I didn’t say I did X!” moments. No, you didn’t say you did X. You didn’t say you did anything, you just told me what skill you wanted to make a check with. If you had told me what your c character did do in the first place, this wouldn’t have been a problem.

yes you CAN adjudicate it, you choose not to.

Not without making assumptions.

lol, cause "I search the desk" is hard for you to understand, but anyone should trust your reading of the rules...

I understand you’re trying to find something in the desk. I don’t understand what you’re trying to find or how you’re looking for it. Do you open the drawers? If so, tell me that so we don’t end up in a situation where you protest “but I didn’t say I opened the drawer!”

 

[HammerMan]

That’s a preference of mine, because it keeps the conversation focused on actual action that’s occurring in the fiction, instead of stepping back from the action to talk about the fiction in an abstract way. But it’s not a rule or anything and I don’t tell my players they can’t ask questions. I just explain my preference for active language in advance so we’re on the same page from the start.

“I look for an exit” tells me that something is happening in the fiction. The character is actively looking around. The other pauses the action so we can establish, in an abstract manner, what is present in the fiction before the action can continue. Again, this is just a stylistic preference for me, which is a separate issue from the need to understand a player’s goal and character’s approach to resolve an action.

I don’t care how you phrase your action declaration (I do prefer that you declare an action rather than ask a question, but again, that’s a separate issue), as long as I can tell, without having to make assumptions, what you want to accomplish and what your character is doing to try and accomplish it. The “when in doubt” phrasing is just a recommendation for folks who are having trouble grokking what I’m asking for to fall back on.

I am just going to skip all of that... fine, you have a verbal thing that annoys you. got it. You require your players to say things the way you want and have a template for when they start to train them. Okay

Great. I’m glad that works for you and your friends. I am not comfortable making the same assumptions you are.

and I am not comfortable with you telling people how to talk... lucky we don't play in the same circles, but we have spun WAY out of RAW here.

In order to determine if an action can succeed or fail and has meaningful stakes (which remember are my criteria for whether or not to call for an ability check) I need to know what actual activity is taking place, and what the intended result of that activity is.

and 7 out of 10 times you can most likely infer all of that from any sentence, you don't like to Okay got it. BUt don't pretend you are following some rule I am ignoreing.

For example, if you say, “I try the key I got off the cultist’s body on the chest,” I know that if it’s the right key, the approach (use the key) can’t fail to achieve the goal (open the lock), and if it’s the wrong key, I know it can’t succeed at achieving the goal. I can simply narrate the results.

okay, if a player says "I try the key" and the only key in teh scenero is one that came off the cultest and we are talking about the chest, I don't NEED to hear “I try the key I got off the cultist’s body on the chest,” in fact "Does the key work?" even is enough to understand.

Now are there going to be times when the PCs have like 7 keys and we are talking about a locked desk, a chest, and a locked door and they say "Does the key work?" I may need to ask like you would for a clearer statement... but again corner case, not most.

This is a very basic example. I hope you can imagine how a more abstract activity like trying to intimidate someone might get even more complex to try and understand in concrete terms if the player is not specific about what they’re trying to accomplish and why.

no, because everything you guys want clarity on seems so straight forward to me.

Now, I could make assumptions - many DMs do. But that’s not something I want to do, because in my experience it can lead to “I didn’t say I was touching the handle!” moments.

okay but that doesn't support or not support any argument about the RAW. It is your play style and your preference.

Besides that, I don’t think it should be my job, as DM, to establish what your character is doing in the fiction. That’s your role, you decide what your character thinks, feels, and does, and describe it to me.

yes but within reason. If we all understand what "Does the key work" in the context of the scene, why make them rephrase it?

My role is to determine and describe to you the results of what your character does, possibly asking you to make a check if needed to make that determination. Then to describe the environment again to repeat the play loop.

 

[HammerMan]

C'mon now, dude... You don't have to be that defensive. Everyone here is just sharing how they play their games. It's not about "training" people. Setting table expectations at the start of a campaign is something... expected.

he literally said "I tell new players to use X phraseing"

 

[Bill Zebub]

may I ask what about the current rules seems to be the biggest hurdle for you?

Just getting them to describe what their character is doing. Instead it’s “I’ll make an Investigation check” (reaches for dice) or “I’ll make an Arcana check” (reaches for dice)

 

[HammerMan]

You say “understand in what context they want,” I say “assume what they want.” Is it possible to determine from context what a character might want and what they might be doing to achieve that goal? Sure. But doing so leaves the door open for the possibility of getting it wrong, which leads to “But I didn’t say I did X!” moments. No, you didn’t say you did X. You didn’t say you did anything, you just told me what skill you wanted to make a check with. If you had told me what your c character did do in the first place, this wouldn’t have been a problem.

and how often has this happened? I can tell you I have seen it a handfull of times in decades of playing, and not once was it "I didn't say I touched the handle when I said I opened the door"

It just isn't something that comes up enough for me to care.

Not without making assumptions.

more like educated guesses.

I understand you’re trying to find something in the desk. I don’t understand what you’re trying to find or how you’re looking for it. Do you open the drawers? If so, tell me that so we don’t end up in a situation where you protest “but I didn’t say I opened the drawer!”

why would anyone say they search then say they were not opening the draw to search

 

[Bill Zebub]

YUP... same as every other D&D game ever...

but you can understand them. You can use the same analytical mind that has scoured the rules for the one true way to read them, and understand in context what they want/

yes you CAN adjudicate it, you choose not to.


lol, cause "I search the desk" is hard for you to understand, but anyone should trust your reading of the rules...

Are there multiple ways to search a desk, that a normal person would understand, some of which might find a trap, or a secret drawer, or a document taped underneath, and some of which might not find those things?

And wouldn’t you, as a player, rather have the DM say, “Well in fact there IS a document taped there…” and not, “Give me an Investigation check”?

 

[HammerMan]

Are there multiple ways to search a desk, that a normal person would understand, some of which might find a trap, or a secret drawer, or a document taped underneath, and some of which might not find those things?

yes and my character who is trained or not is what matters, not what I can think of off top of my head,

And wouldn’t you, as a player, rather have the DM say, “Well in fact there IS a document taped there…” and not, “Give me an Investigation check”?

NO
use game mechanic for a reason.

 

[Bill Zebub]

You know, there's a whole other aspect of this that's important, and without it I can understand why @HammerMan might think this sounds crazy: it involves a shift from randomly sprinkling traps and secret doors and hidden items, with no clue to their presence, and both using those things more sparingly and giving players a reason to search for them.

So instead of just hiding a document under a desk, the players already know they are searching for a document.

Instead of randomly trapping some doors and chests and desks, the players get some kind of signal that they should be extra cautious.

Etc.

And that's because it can get exhausting if you have to describe how you search every door you come across.

If traps and secrets ARE randomly sprinkled then, yeah, I can see what you just want to say, "I roll Detect Traps" or "I roll Perception."

So the two playstyles....narrative description by players and "broadcasting" by DMs...go hand it hand.