D&D 5E Toll the Chest

[Paul Farquhar]

I think we can deduce that "ordinary object" in the mimic stat block is being used to indicate an "object that is not a mimic".

But, since we know that mimics look like ordinary chests, we know that what it looks like - is a mimic.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

But, since we know that mimics look like ordinary chests, we know that what it looks like - is a mimic.

What? For the OP example, the PC suspects it is a mimic, and is right. In another scenario it might be an ordinary trapped chest so, no, not always a mimic.

 

[James Gasik]

I don't ordinarily find chests to be trapped. Or Mimics. Though I suppose that's campaign dependent.

But rather than keep pressing the joke, I'm willing to concede that what they meant here is that a Mimic is indistinguishable from a chest that isn't a Mimic.

Words do have meanings though, and if there was, for example, an "ordinary chest", it stands to reason that "extraordinary chests" exist as well. Which, by rules as written, means a Mimic cannot become such a thing!

I don't know of anyone who would interpret it that way, but I still find it amusing to think about.

 

[Maxperson]

No, that isn't at all what happens if you run surprise like I do. I've already told you what happens many times, exhaustively and in detail, so at this point I can only assume you're arguing in bad faith.

And no, the surprise rules function just fine without defining threat that way. It's not a term of game jargon and, in the context of the surprise rules, should be understood to refer to a creature that participates in combat on the opposite side from the creature for whom surprise is being determined.

What I'm saying is what happens if you combine what you're saying with RAW. I'm not saying how you do it. No bad faith anywhere and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop implying it.

This implies the wall is not a threat even though the player expects it to be one?

I'm saying that I don't run things as RAW states, because the way I do it makes more sense. If you're focused on the wall and the wall is a mimic, you won't be surprised by it. If you're focused on the wall and the real threat is the ceiling cloaker, you will be surprised by it.

Okay, so you're fixing the problem caused by your "potential threat" houserule by having another houserule.

No. I'm fixing the issue caused by shoddy PHB language by having a house rule.

You can't notice a threat if it isn't a threat, and no peaceful troll is ever a threat unless you provoke it, at which point it THEN becomes a threat. So how do you notice it before determining surprise? It's literally impossible unless threat = potential threat.

Something does not mean everything.

That's what I've been saying, but you've been conflating my statements about being alert to the potential danger of one thing, with being generally alert about nothing in particular, which means everything.

Yeah, this "potential threat rule" you've identified here. That's what's not in the rules.

It's the result of the shoddy PHB language. The surprise rules only work if threat = potential threat, because prior to combat there are many potential threats that are not yet threats, such as the troll walking peacefully by.

Awareness of the presence of a creature is sufficient.

Not by RAW. By RAW has to be a threat, which means immediately hostile. Just noticing a peaceful creature isn't noticing a threat.

That's true of any creature that manages to surprise the party. False Appearance just allows the mimic an additional circumstance where it can try to do that. This is backed up by the fact that the feature doesn't affect the mimic's CR.

It is true that anything that surprises you is more dangerous. The mimic, though, is built to be weak without that surprise. If you're 60 feet away and start attacking it, you have two rounds before it can even attack you back. It's slooooooooooow, which is fine because it's designed so that you have to be close and be surprised by it. The vast majority of those other creatures you mention don't have that flaw.

 

[Maxperson]

From the Mimic entry in the MM:

------
False Appearance (Object Form Only).
While the mimic remains motionless, it is indistinguishable from an ordinary object.
------

so, yeah, ORDINARY chest.

That doesn't make it safe. Many ordinary chests are trapped.

 

[Hriston]

What I'm saying is what happens if you combine what you're saying with RAW. I'm not saying how you do it. No bad faith anywhere and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop implying it.

And I'd appreciate it if you'd stop telling me what it is I'm saying, like this:

That's what I've been saying, but you've been conflating my statements about being alert to the potential danger of one thing, with being generally alert about nothing in particular, which means everything.

You don't get to control the things I said and what I meant when I said them. That you continue to insist on using this manipulative ploy is just one of the reasons I'm disengaging from this conversation immediately.

 

[Maxperson]

And I'd appreciate it if you'd stop telling me what it is I'm saying, like this:

You don't get to control the things I said and what I meant when I said them. That you continue to insist on using this manipulative ploy is just one of the reasons I'm disengaging from this conversation immediately.

What else am I supposed to think when I say, "If the cleric is specifically watching the chest alert for danger, he can't be surprised by the mimic." and you respond repeatedly with, "So then all someone needs to do is walk around alert for anything and nothing can surprise him."? It sure seems like you're conflating two very different things.

 

[Hussar]

I agree. It's similar to the person-hiding-behind-a-five-foot-wide-box-in-the-middle-of-the-room problem. Where I come down on this is if observers see the person go behind the box, and the person stays behind the box once out of sight, then the person cannot be hidden because such circumstances are inappropriate for hiding. However, if the person is already behind the box when observers arrive on the scene, I would allow an attempt at hiding because the observers don't know the person is there. I think the mimic resembles the latter rather than the former.

However, if the person is hidden behind the box, and the players categorically state that they are watching out for someone being hidden behind the box, having their weapons ready and whatnot, I absolutely would never allow that hidden character to surprise the party.

Good grief, this is getting into Monty Python "How Not to be Seen" territory. Sorry, but, again, if the party came into the room, and there's big box in the middle of the room, we get very cautious and wary, looking directly in the direction of the box, ready for some sort of danger to come from the box or at least the places we can't see - which would be inside the box or behind the box- and you ruled that this was a surprise attack from the hidden character behind the box, I would lose my mind.

Well, no. That's not true. I don't get too fussed about stuff like this anymore. I would politely thank you for the game and leave. Because this absolutely is not the game for me.

 

[Hriston]

However, if the person is hidden behind the box, and the players categorically state that they are watching out for someone being hidden behind the box, having their weapons ready and whatnot, I absolutely would never allow that hidden character to surprise the party.

Good grief, this is getting into Monty Python "How Not to be Seen" territory. Sorry, but, again, if the party came into the room, and there's big box in the middle of the room, we get very cautious and wary, looking directly in the direction of the box, ready for some sort of danger to come from the box or at least the places we can't see - which would be inside the box or behind the box- and you ruled that this was a surprise attack from the hidden character behind the box, I would lose my mind.

Well, no. That's not true. I don't get too fussed about stuff like this anymore. I would politely thank you for the game and leave. Because this absolutely is not the game for me.

Whereas I assume the characters, unless the players state otherwise, are always watching out for someone or something being hidden behind every box, every crate, every corner, and every pillar and in every area of darkness. That they are always cautious and wary. That they are competent at their job.

The mechanical benefit for the characters of this assumption is that their Wisdom (Perception) scores are used to determine if they notice hidden creatures and avoid being surprised. The cost is that they cannot have their attention focused on some other beneficial task. There is no mechanical benefit beyond this of the players stating their characters are particularly alert and ready for danger that would, say, render them immune to surprise, because there is no mechanical cost of making such a statement.

You have to take the Alert feat (at the cost of an ASI) for that kind of benefit.

 

[Audiomancer]

So does that mean that all Mimics take the appearance of the same kind of chest? What is an ordinary chest anyways?

Does that mean they can't appear to be an opulent chest made of cedar and gold, encrusted with jewels?

(Ordinary, adj.:
"with no special or distinctive features; normal.").

This suggests a new tactic to avoid being surprised by mimics:

Have the wizard cast an illusion causing the room to look like an ornate, lavishly-furnished throne room.

The mimic, indistinguishable from a merely “ordinary” chest, is now distinctly out of place—it is therefore noticeable and easily identified as a potential threat.