D&D (2024) Auto-succeed/fail on ability checks

[Smackpixi]

As an example, if the DM decides that only someone proficient in arcana can make an attempt, then the PC without arcana cannot roll since it's impossible for him.

This would be a DM fiat, making up a check requirement not in the rules. Certainly a thing you can do, but infuriating to any player expecting consistency from their DM.

 

[Maxperson]

Denying the roll is overriding player abilities (roll a 20) and pure DM fiat.

So that's simply impossible. The order of events does not allow for what I am saying to override the new rule. Here's how it works.

1. The DM decides if the check is automatically successful, automatically a failure(impossible) or a roll is allowed. He is allowed to use any criteria he wants to determine this.
2. If the DM does not allow a PC a roll, the order of events is over. Full stop. As we have not yet gotten to the auto success on a 20 rule, there's nothing to override.
3. If the DM allows a roll, the auto success rule now comes into play. If the DM doesn't allow the rule to apply at this point, then and ONLY then is he overriding the rule.

"The DM determines whether a d20 Test is warranted in any given circumstance."

"If you roll a 20 on the d20, the d20 Test automatically succeeds, regardless of any modifiers to the roll."

As you can see from the UA quotes above, first the DM decides if a test is warranted/appropriate, then IF you get a roll, a 20 succeeds.

 

[Maxperson]

This would be a DM fiat, making up a check requirement not in the rules.

Making it up is the rules.

 

[Smackpixi]

The DM rates it as impossible for that character like the jump example I gave above. Someone with a 3 strength simply cannot ever go 21 feet no matter what the roll. Gating behind proficiency is a valid reason not to allow every PC to roll. Gating it behind a background. Suppose the PC is from an area of the world where certain information is flat out unknown, he might not be able to roll.

This is all fine and good, but it’s all DM fiat deviating from the RAW in every way other than DM sets the rules.

 

[Maxperson]

This is all fine and good, but it’s all DM fiat deviating from the RAW in every way other than DM sets the rules.

Again, this is completely false. RAW is for the DM to decide by any means he chooses. It cannot be deviating from RAW for him to make that decision.

 

[Smackpixi]

1. The DM decides if the check is automatically successful, automatically a failure(impossible) or a roll is allowed. He is allowed to use any criteria he wants to determine this.

That’s simply a bizarre understanding of ability checks. What’s the purpose of PC abilities if DM just makes up any criteria at every check? DM sets the DC. DC isn’t “20 plus a myriad of other stuff I made up”.

 

[Maxperson]

That’s simply a bizarre understanding of ability checks. What’s the purpose of PC abilities if DM just makes up any criteria at every check? DM sets the DC. DC isn’t “20 plus a myriad of other stuff I made up”.

Read the DMG. At this point it's clear that you haven't and are going by the PHB only.

 

[Smackpixi]

Read the DMG. At this point it's clear that you haven't and are going by the PHB only.

I’ve read it, where does it say that DM gets to turn D&D into a game of Mao where they just make up secret rules no one is allowed to know at every ability check?

 

[Maxperson]

I’ve read it, where does it say that DM gets to turn D&D into a game of Mao where they just make up secret rules no one is allowed to know at every ability check?

Page 237 in the using ability scores section. The DM asks himself two questions that if he answers no, means that it's impossible for the PC to get a roll. No criteria are listed for that decision, which means the DM determines that as well.

 

[Smackpixi]

deleted