D&D 5E Toll the Chest

[DND_Reborn]

How does a chest wince or groan with a sudden migraine as their mind blocks a magical effect? It doesn't.

Correct, but (again) nothing says there is any visible effect to the response of a successful mental save. It is purely a DM call, and if the DM ruled as you suggest, with obvious physical evidence, I wouldn't have any issue with it. If the DM called for a Wisdom (Perception) check, that of course would be fine as well. And if the DM said "there is no response by the chest" because the mimic made its save--all good, too.

Any way, objects can't be targeted by the spell, so in this case the spell simply fails to work. But that leads to a different issue...

If the mimic makes the save, does the caster know that the spell worked but fail to have any affect, or that the spell simply failed?

IMO this is simply a DM call, no right or wrong answer.

The Mimic's ability lets it look like an object as long as it isn't doing anything an object wouldn't be able to do

Sure, and what's the difference between:

A. the spell failing and the chest doing nothing
B. the spell working, the mimic saving, and it not showing any sign of movement for the PCs to notice

Again, all up to the DM--no right or wrong answer--and also fine if the DM rules even with a successful save there is some movement to be noticed.

 

[James Gasik]

Correct, but (again) nothing says there is any visible effect to the response of a successful mental save. It is purely a DM call, and if the DM ruled as you suggest, with obvious physical evidence, I wouldn't have any issue with it. If the DM called for a Wisdom (Perception) check, that of course would be fine as well. And if the DM said "there is no response by the chest" because the mimic made its save--all good, too.

Any way, objects can't be targeted by the spell, so in this case the spell simply fails to work. But that leads to a different issue...

If the mimic makes the save, does the caster know that the spell worked but fail to have any affect, or that the spell simply failed?

IMO this is simply a DM call, no right or wrong answer.


Sure, and what's the difference between:

A. the spell failing and the chest doing nothing
B. the spell working, the mimic saving, and it not showing any sign of movement for the PCs to notice

Again, all up to the DM--no right or wrong answer--and also fine if the DM rules even with a successful save there is some movement to be noticed.

Most spells are pretty obvious whether or not the target saves. So I'm not sure what the correct answer here is. Like if you hit an active Mimic with Hold Person, you know whether it works or not from their reaction.

But would the caster know in the case they decided to randomly target an inactive Mimic? I'm inclined to say yes, the same way anyone would recognize a spell's effect (save or no), but I can totally see how some would feel that doesn't make sense- despite the fact a lot about saving throws doesn't make sense (like how even a sleeping person can make a saving throw).

 

[DND_Reborn]

Like if you hit an active Mimic with Hold Person, you know whether it works or not from their reaction.

Well, Hold Monster...

How do you know? It it works, the mimic can't move. If the spell fails, it doesn't move anyway.

But would the caster know in the case they decided to randomly target an inactive Mimic? I'm inclined to say yes, the same way anyone would recognize a spell's effect (save or no), but I can totally see how some would feel that doesn't make sense- despite the fact a lot about saving throws doesn't make sense (like how even a sleeping person can make a saving throw).

I agree there, a lot of 5E doesn't make sense. Consider sleep (unconscious): you automatically fail STR and DEX saves, but your body responds to CON saves to reduce affects, and INT, WIS, CHA saves are made normally (implying almost a subconscious response instead of an active one as you suggest)?

Again it goes back to an issue I have with 5E in that specifics seemed to be largely ignored, leading to each group/table having to make decisions for themselves. I guess I am in the minority on this, however.

As I said, if a DM ruled as you are thinking, I would be fine with it, but it isn't how I would rule it.

 

[James Gasik]

Well, Hold Monster...

How do you know? It it works, the mimic can't move. If the spell fails, it doesn't move anyway.


I agree there, a lot of 5E doesn't make sense. Consider sleep (unconscious): you automatically fail STR and DEX saves, but your body responds to CON saves to reduce affects, and INT, WIS, CHA saves are made normally (implying almost a subconscious response instead of an active one as you suggest)?

Again it goes back to an issue I have with 5E in that specifics seemed to be largely ignored, leading to each group/table having to make decisions for themselves. I guess I am in the minority on this, however.

As I said, if a DM ruled as you are thinking, I would be fine with it, but it isn't how I would rule it.

Oh I assumed a sleeping saving throw would involve disturbed sleep myself. My roommate often talks in his sleep, and once he made this sound of pain that made me wake him up to ask him if he was ok, and he had no idea what I was talking about...

And yes, Hold Monster. No idea where my head was there.

 

[Hriston]

And you can run the game how you want. However, it smacks at bad faith DMing to me, and if I was a player I would feel extremely aggrieved if the DM ruled that I was surprised by a monster I had sussed out.

It's a matter of player agency: you are saying it doesn't matter what decisions the players make; the trap is going to go off no matter what you do.

You say you've sussed it, but your character hasn't. If you know it's a mimic, then why are you standing within 15 feet of it where it can move and attack you in one turn? Why don't you declare an action to try to ascertain whether it's a mimic or not before blundering into combat with a creature that has not been noticed by anyone in the party? I'd say the decisions that have been described matter very much but on the whole are not very good.

It's a bit much to accuse me of bad faith for having a monster that has been deliberately placed to be interacted with by the party work as intended. But in my defense, I'll share with you that the first thought that occurred to me upon reading the OP was that I would say to the player of the cleric something like, "So you think it's a mimic, but you don't know for certain. Do you realize that by attacking the "chest" you'd be starting combat with a creature that hasn't yet been actually noticed if it does indeed turn out to be a mimic and that you and the entire party will likely be surprised?" Then I'd let the player to revise their declaration if they wished. At my table, I don't like consequences for bad decisions to result from mismatched expectations of how the rules will be implemented anymore than you do.

That's the point. 5e does not use keywords, so it doesn't matter if it says "notice a threat", "perceive and enemy", "spot a bogy" or whatever. They are all synonyms.

Okay, that's your point? Did I say something that relies on 5E using keywords?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

You say you've sussed it, but your character hasn't.

Why can't my character suss it? The player decides what their character thinks. If their character's thoughts are dictated by die roll there is no point in playing at all.

then why are you standing within 15 feet of it

I'm not, unless the room is too small to allow me to stand further away. 15-foot square is a mid-sized room. But if I can throw balls of paper at it room out in the corridor I'm sure going to do that.

It's a bit much to accuse me of bad faith for having a monster that has been deliberately placed to be interacted with by the party work as intended.

It's a trap. Do you disallow your players spotting and disarming traps because you placed it and "they have to work as intended"?

Okay, that's your point? Did I say something that relies on 5E using keywords?

Yes, your obsession with is a threat/is not a threat, which isn't a term in 5e.

 

[Hriston]

Why can't my character suss it? The player decides what their character thinks. If their character's thoughts are dictated by die roll there is no point in playing at all.

Because the mimic succeeded at staying motionless enough to exceed your character's ability to suss it. You can have your character think whatever you want. It's not the same thing.

I'm not, unless the room is too small to allow me to stand further away. 15-foot square is a mid-sized room.

The OP described a roughly 30 by 30 room that the party entered with the mimic in the middle. There's nowhere in the room more than 15 feet away from the mimic. The room is too small to allow you to stand farther away.

Yes, your obsession with is a threat/is not a threat, which isn't a term in 5e.

That's quite an accusation to make about the mental state of someone you don't know on the internet. You might want to rethink that.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Because the mimic succeeded at staying motionless enough to exceed your character's ability to suss it.

My character's ability to suss it is not based on it moving. Which is a good thing, because it does not need to make a stealth check to not move. Not moving is what it spends most of its life doing. Ever watch an Indiana Jones movie? well-honed intuition is a thing. Do people just go round depositing random unguarded chests in the middle of rooms? No they don't.

 

[Hriston]

My character's ability to suss it is not based on it moving.

It is because according to False Appearance as long as it remains motionless you cannot suss the mimic just by looking. You might think you've got it sussed, but that's not the same thing.

Which is a good thing, because it does not need to make a stealth check to not move.

Right, it's the DM's call as to whether it requires a check to resolve your attempt to suss the mimic. If I were running this scenario, I'd give you the benefit of that check as long as your character's attention was not otherwise occupied.

Not moving is what it spends most of its life doing.

Right, it has expertise in Stealth, so it's pretty good at it and stands a reasonable chance of succeeding.

Ever watch an Indiana Jones movie? well-honed intuition is a thing. Do people just go round depositing random unguarded chests in the middle of rooms? No they don't.

I get this, and in this case the cleric player's intuition is correct. It is indeed a mimic. But they don't act on that intuition as if it was fact. Instead, they test to see if it's correct because they know they don't have the suss.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Frankly, to me this would feel like adversarial GMing, and I would quit a game that was run like this.