D&D 5E (2024) How can I do a Charisma-Investigation (or a Strength/Dexterity-Investigation if I can't use Charisma) to find a secret door?

[Micah Sweet]

Yes, and this is a 2024 forum. If you don't know the rules .....



So I guess it would be fine if the player said at the end of the session he was in said "I'm going to hang out over here while you go through some of the other rooms in the dungeon" or if he said in the middle of a city adventure the investigating cult activity "I'm going to go back to the inn and catch some Zs, see you guys later"

So that kind of trivial "excuse" would make it totally ok? But just assuming something like that happened without explaining it in game somehow breaks the immersion?

Yup. Breaks it wide open for me, because it makes no sense. Neither of the other excuses make much sense to me either, to be honest.

But of course, it's your game. I'm just saying what you're doing wouldn't work for me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But what if there is not random encounters? The last time I played and adventure with random encounters was probably around 2010. If the party is sleeping in the dungeon then presumably I can too. If the party is not then I am not either and I will meet up with them when I am back regardless.

It is not that hard unless someone wants to make it hard for the sake of being hard.



Player agency. If the player wants to leave, that is the player's choice. And if I am not playing next week I am DEFINITELY leaving.

I am not talking about shopping. For example, we are in the middle of investigating cult activity and we are going from place to place, picking up clues and interviewing witnesses and maybe searching some places. Why can't one of the PCs take the day off and go back to the inn?




Or the party can drop bread crumbs so you can find them like Hansel and Grettle did ... which any group is going to do if someone misses a session and the DM starts pushing this BS.



Since this is a game with rules, it is relevant to look at what the rules actually say on this. The first two exerps from the DMG on what to do if a player missies a session:

"Fading into the Background. Have the character simply fade into the background. This requires everyone to step out of the game world a bit and suspend disbelief, but it might be the easiest solution. Act as if the character were absent, but don’t try to come up with any in-game explanation. Monsters don’t attack the character, who returns the favor. On returning, the player resumes playing as if the absence never happened.

Narrative Contrivance. Decide the character is elsewhere while the rest of the party continues the adventure. Come up with in-game reasons for the character to temporarily leave the party and rejoin later, such as following up on a rumor or reporting back to the party’s patron."

So aside from the fact that we do this at every table I play, the rules actually tell us to do it. Nowhere do the rules say you should kill off a character if a player misses a session.

So at the end of the day, yes we decide the character is elsewhere and that is RAW!

Those are suggestions, not hard rules, and they're not ones I agree with or care about.

 

[kermit4karate]

There are 3 options in the DMG. The first two I quoted and the third one starts off "With the absent player's consent, have another player run the missing player’s character, or run the character yourself if you feel you can do so. ..."

If you are playing RAW the player must consent to another player or the DM playing his character and if he doesn't, the two options I quoted are the only options available in the DMG.

It is the DMs choice as to whether the player leaves or fades into the background.



And if the player says no you can not do that RAW.

I get it, this is the homebrew at your table, but it is not RAW in 2024 and I have never played with a DM that played that way.

In no version of D&D at any time in its history has this interpretation of the rules been widespread.

With the rules as written, IMO, the DM can do absolutely anything they want. They are the only authority. The players can advise, suggest, ask (and walk away, obviously), but decisions on how to run the game, including what to do when players don't show up, are the DM's and theirs alone.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

In no version of D&D at any time in its history has this interpretation of the rules been widespread.

This way of playing is very widespread nowadays. Every table I've played at has used Fade Into the Background rules, literally 100% of DMs I've ever played with. Also it is specifically written in the 2024 DMG as the recommended way to handle absent players.

You are all in a thread about using 2024 rules, arguing that the 2024 Dungeons Master's Guide is not RAW because your tables using other rulesets do things differently. What is the point of even posting here? You want people to be impressed that you play with old-school rules, which makes you so much more skilled than us 5.5e noobs "playing on easy mode" whatever the hell that even means?

 

[Micah Sweet]

This way of playing is very widespread nowadays. Every table I've played at has used Fade Into the Background rules, literally 100% of DMs I've ever played with. Also it is specifically written in the 2024 DMG as the recommended way to handle absent players.

You are all in a thread about using 2024 rules, arguing that the 2024 Dungeons Master's Guide is not RAW because your tables using other rulesets do things differently. What is the point of even posting here? You want people to be impressed that you play with old-school rules, which makes you so much more skilled than us 5.5e noobs "playing on easy mode" whatever the hell that even means?

I would assume people are here because the thread topic is relevant to many more games in the D&D-style game sphere than just WotC's 5.5. That's why I'm here. I've noticed folks tend to be fine with discussing other relevant games on these threads until someone disagrees with them. Then it's all, "look at the thread tag! Only 5.5 matters!".

 

[MonsterEnvy]

This way of playing is very widespread nowadays. Every table I've played at has used Fade Into the Background rules, literally 100% of DMs I've ever played with. Also it is specifically written in the 2024 DMG as the recommended way to handle absent players.

as one of the ways, not the only way

 

[ECMO3]

Yup. Breaks it wide open for me, because it makes no sense. Neither of the other excuses make much sense to me either, to be honest.

But it is not your character. The player chooses how to play the character, not the DM. That is the basic premise of player agency.

It doesn't have to make sense to you, it has to make sense to them!

 

[ECMO3]

In no version of D&D at any time in its history has this interpretation of the rules been widespread.

With the rules as written, IMO, the DM can do absolutely anything they want. They are the only authority. The players can advise, suggest, ask (and walk away, obviously), but decisions on how to run the game, including what to do when players don't show up, are the DM's and theirs alone.

The DM can do anything they want, but as a point of fact there are rules on this. The DM can choose to ignore them, like for example I choose to ignore the new version of fighter Indomitable and how MS apparently ignores weapon mastery, but that does not mean those rules don't exist or that they are not there.

Also considering this was the way Adventuring League worked, your claim that it has never been widespread is untrue.

 

[ECMO3]

I would assume people are here because the thread topic is relevant to many more games in the D&D-style game sphere than just WotC's 5.5. That's why I'm here. I've noticed folks tend to be fine with discussing other relevant games on these threads until someone disagrees with them. Then it's all, "look at the thread tag! Only 5.5 matters!".

That is because 2024 is the context we are discussing it in. How it happens in 1E or Pathfinder or Shadowdark, may be interesting and may be of value, but this is a 2024 forum and what I was discussing was specifically about a 2024 game.

Also "fade away" was in the 2014 DMG as well, so it is hardly like this is a new concept for 2024.

 

[ECMO3]

as one of the ways, not the only way

And having someone else play a PC when the player does not agree to it is NOT one of the ways mentioned.

Now that may be how it is done at your table or in your game; but kill them or kick them out if they don't want someone else to play their character is NOT mentioned as one of the ways to deal with this in the 2024 rules.

Also lets be clear, I am the first one who actually brought up the DMG and I brought it up after multiple posts by multiple posters saying the way we did it (which is Fade away) was "unusual" ..... "illogical" ..... "[doesn't] make sense in fiction" .. "are just weak justifications" ... "Poofing Joe".

I pointed out that the method used:
1. IS in the rules

2. IS a codified appropriate way to handle this very thing (whether you use it at your table or not).

I also pointed out that it has never been a problem in play in any of the games I play. I wonder how many people complaining about it have actually tried it and found it wanting.