D&D 5E Ability Check origins at your table

[Voadam]

See, that's kinda where I get off the bus. I am not my character. My character is capable of things I am not and vice versa. Me exactly describing how I do something before I roll means that the roll doesn't really matter. If I can simply find the right description and succeed without a roll, that's just pulling me straight out of immersion.

I provide the dialogue, but the dice provide the direction.

I am fairly the opposite. Things happening directly off of what I say I do is generally more immersive for me.

For me immersion is me as the character in the imagined scene, not immersion in the stats on the sheet and the mechanics of the game to see how the character does in the situation.

 

[Oofta]

I really don't get how you guys are going from "the description can help adjudicate the outcome" to "the roll doesn't matter." I know I haven't remotely said that the latter.

Multiple examples have been given that if the player does something "smart" whether that's saying that they jam daggers into a trap, say they search under the desk, smash the bottoms in drawers in case there's a false bottom. If they do those things they automatically succeed with no need for a thieve's tools check to disable the trap, an investigation to find the key or a perception check to notice the false bottom of the drawer.

So in many cases actions as described by other posters the player comes up with a way of doing something without any risk that would normally require a roll being done for the PC. If that's the style of play you like, cool. Just not something I want in my games because as @Hussar stated, I'm not my PC.

 

[AmandaBarbarian]

The player is in full control over how their character thinks, acts, and speaks - as 5e defines roleplaying. If they think he's lying, that's what they think. What a character thinks and what is true in the world can be different, however.

Now, is he lying? That's something that an Insight check might answer.

so you do understand that "Can I use insight to see if he is being sneaky?" is BOTH asking for a skill check AND helping the narrative AND playing the game?

 

[AmandaBarbarian]

As long as the player is clear with their goal and approach, there's no need for anything lengthy or salesy when describing non-combat actions as well.

See that is the thing, as long as both the DM and the player understand why should it matter what words they use?

But player skill is linked to character success

I thought the whole point of the game, and what I was taught day 1 was this was not supposed to be true unless there was no way to avoid it.

 

[AmandaBarbarian]

Yeah, but if the player doesn't know about picking locks, they aren't making an informed choice with those details, are they? Aren't we mostly interested in their informed choices?

over the holiday I was talking to the guy who taught me D&D and he told me he actually had a DM that if you could explain the way lock picks worked you could auto succeed on the check, and if you told the DM you had no idea beyond what you saw on TV you could not even get the roll. The kicker being when someone joined there game that was a locksmith it turned out the DM had the entire wrong idea so he had been for years giving auto successes to things that wouldn't work.

 

[Voadam]

I thought the whole point of the game, and what I was taught day 1 was this was not supposed to be true unless there was no way to avoid it.

Heh, my experience is the complete opposite, that mechanics are generally there for the things you cannot handle as a player (physical combat in a non-LARP RPG, weapon damage in a LARP, magic, etc.) or for things you want an element of risk without pure narration based on player input.

Thinking, talking, etc. could all be handled by dice mechanics for characters, but they are generally the province of the player.

 

[HammerMan]

See that is the thing, as long as both the DM and the player understand why should it matter what words they use?

I thought the whole point of the game, and what I was taught day 1 was this was not supposed to be true unless there was no way to avoid it.

Give up. Trust me. This fight started way back in 3e with the introduction of a default assumed skill system and it has raged on for 23 years. Heck it really started before that when thieves (not rogues) had % skill.

The best you can do is when you find a DM who thinks like this just leave and find a DM that works more the way you were taught.

If you and your group sit at a table with a DM who wants to do it the other way at best you will get nothing done after a check or two and at worst they will think “punishing” you to “teach” you the “right way” is doing you a favor.

 

[AmandaBarbarian]

Heh, my experience is the complete opposite, that mechanics are generally there for the things you cannot handle as a player (physical combat in a non-LARP RPG, weapon damage in a LARP, magic, etc.) or for things you want an element of risk without pure narration based on player input.

Thinking, talking, etc. could all be handled by dice mechanics for characters, but they are generally the province of the player.

so you don't use the skill system at all?

Give up. Trust me. This fight started way back in 3e with the introduction of a default assumed skill system and it has raged on for 23 years. Heck it really started before that when thieves (not rogues) had % skill.

omg that is a long time. So, why did it start? how can people not agree? I don't understand any of this.

The best you can do is when you find a DM who thinks like this just leave and find a DM that works more the way you were taught.

this sounds a lot like kicking players out of play groups, and again that seems the opposite of the point of the games. I was taught this was first and for most a game for people to make new friends.

If you and your group sit at a table with a DM who wants to do it the other way at best you will get nothing done after a check or two and at worst they will think “punishing” you to “teach” you the “right way” is doing you a favor.

wow... That has to be an exaggeration, DMs can't really think they need to punishes a player for not using the right terms?

 

[HammerMan]

wow... That has to be an exaggeration, DMs can't really think they need to punishes a player for not using the right terms?

I wish it was. Ask around both here and IRL and you will find people who had XP taken from them penalties like disadvantage

And something I have been told but never directly seen but it sound like your group might have
MANSPLAINING. Where the DM THINKS they know better then a real life experienced expert and actually gives negatives for doing the thing that would work.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I don't understand how after many post how you think "it really is that simple" applies.

Then I'm not doing a good job of explaining how it works at our table. Sorry for the reductionism.

what is the diffrence between "I want to look more in-depth?" and "Can I make a perception check?"

At our table, we prefer the former.

that comes off pretty insulting, as if people who name skills and ask for a roll aren't not sharing in the story telling

I apologize, the intent is not to insult or put down the playstyles of others. I'm just trying to explain what is going on at our table and apparently not doing so great at it.

except I don't know that I would call it magic words, but I do see why some are saying it is. Are you saying you don't understand what they mean, or are you saying even though you understand you don't like there choice of words?

At our table, we are asking the player to be reasonably specific about what their PC is attempting and how they're going about it. "I use Perception" doesn't cut it at our table when I've just described 3 or 4 important things about a room and, instead of interacting with those details, they shortcut to a generalized statement which then puts the burden on me as DM to describe what their PC is actually doing... which is, again, something I avoid as DM. At our table, it's not my job to dictate what the character is actually doing, only to narrate the result of what they are doing.

It reminds me of all the teachers that used to say things about Axeing questions and aint... like "You understand what they mean"

I don't follow this metaphor. At our table, I literally don't understand exactly what a player means when they say "I use Perception". I need more clarification than that. I hope that is clear from what I said above. And, as a reminder, this is how game flows at our table. It is our preference and is in no way an indictment of how other tables run. All tables are free to play however they like if everyone at their table finds it fun.

Indeed, I come here to learn from how others play and share how we play. I'm not here to put other people down. I would ask that you read my posts through that lens, please.