D&D 5E Ability Check origins at your table

[Vaalingrade]

Unnecessary nat 20:

P1: "I totally succeeded. A nat 20 is an auto success. Ha."

DM: "I didn't ask for a roll because it's impossible."

Impossible to dismount a horse?

 

[Oofta]

I think my players just don't want to "waste" a roll and wait for me to ask for one because it is possible I will not require a roll depending on what, how, and under which conditions the task is being attempted.

The players will never "waste" a roll in my game. They're not going to ever fail something that was going to succeed anyway.

If someone is picking a lock, there's no amount of description on how they're doing it that will change anything. Trying to determine if someone is being honest will always be an insight check, trying to remember historical significance a history check, etc. They're not going to describe a how they're doing a religion check by doing the watusi. If they declare for an acrobatics check to climb a sheer cliff, I'll just l remind them that it's an athletics check.

How else do you describe things like insight, history, religion or several other things other than doing what it says on the tin? Because there's no value to me to saying "I watch them intently to try to decipher eye movement, patterns of speech and hesitations to determine if they're being honest" when "insight check 15?" accomplishes the same thing.

As far as the number on the die I just remind people that you don't automatically succeed on a nat 20 or automatically fail on a 1 for skill checks.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I tend to do a fluid combo of all three approaches you describe. So I voted "Other."

yeah I wish there was an "all of the above" option

 

[GMforPowergamers]

So if they can describe how they're picking the lock they auto-succeed?

Yeah, I have gone round and round with others before on this, it depends on the skill. Some skill they will let a good description allow a player knowledge (either real life professional level or just enjoying same stories and knowing the DM so they know what to say) to trump what in game the character would know to do.

The example that drives me the most nuts is the high stat trained expertise rogue that the player says "I don't know HOW they do it, but they do" and the other player with an 8 untrained who played a rouge last campaign and knows the right thing to say, the -1 modifier can auto succussed and the +10+ can't even roll

 

[Oofta]

yeah I wish there was an "all of the above" option

You can select up to 3.

 

[Oofta]

Yeah, I have gone round and round with others before on this, it depends on the skill. Some skill they will let a good description allow a player knowledge (either real life professional level or just enjoying same stories and knowing the DM so they know what to say) to trump what in game the character would know to do.

The example that drives me the most nuts is the high stat trained expertise rogue that the player says "I don't know HOW they do it, but they do" and the other player with an 8 untrained who played a rouge last campaign and knows the right thing to say, the -1 modifier can auto succussed and the +10+ can't even roll

The other thing that bothers me is things like history, nature, religion checks and similar. I know what a zebra looks like. I know they don't make good steeds because they're too mean, they live in Africa. How do I know this? When did I learn it? How would I describe that I just think about zebras and also get random facts and info like the fact that zebra stripes are random and can be used to identify individuals, that the stripes probably evolved to minimize biting flies?

Heck if I know. It's not like I think about trying to remember specific facts about zebras, I just think about what I know about them and random facts pop in. Some, like there's a zebra gum, are totally unrelated and useless. So if someone asks for a nature check on zebras, I'll just give them info based on how well they roll. If they ask for a history check I'll give them some historical significance like that they're popular in zoos or that they are rarely domesticated but have been occasionally trained to pull carriages.

But how you describe doing those things other than "I think about it"? Heck if I know.

 

[Burnside]

Generally option 2. Option 1 happens very occasionally and generally that's fine too.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I appreciate all the responses.

I'm in the #2 camp. Pretty much the "fiction first" that @overgeeked mentions earlier in thread.

Unlike what @GMforPowergamers details above, there are no mechanical bonuses for real world knowledge or knowing the "right thing" to say to the DM at our table. All a player needs to do is describe what their character wants to accomplish in the scene and how they're going about it.

DM: "the door is locked"
Player: "my Rogue attempts to pick the lock with her lock picks"
DM: [adjudicates]


This might be a mundane lock on a door leading to an unoccupied room, in which case I'm not going to bother with asking for a roll. Auto-success.
This might be a mundane lock, but it is important that it be picked quietly so as not to alert the guard on the other side of the door. A DC is set and a roll with stakes is called for. On a success, the lock is picked quietly and the guard will be surprised when the party bursts through. On a failure, the lock is picked but the guard hears it.
This might be a particularly tricky lock to a side storage room not critical to the quest. A DC is set and a roll with stakes is called for. On a success, loot! On a failure, the lock is not able to be picked and the time is wasted resulting in... complications.

Etc...

 

[el-remmen]

The players will never "waste" a roll in my game. They're not going to ever fail something that was going to succeed anyway.

No idea what the second sentence has to do with the first based on what I said.

I am talking about player superstition about dice and dice rolls which I have experienced across the board to varying degrees across decades of play.

 

[Oofta]

No idea what the second sentence has to do with the first based on what I said.

I am talking about player superstition about dice and dice rolls which I have experienced across the board to varying degrees across decades of play.

If they roll a 20 they roll a 20. That 20 is not wasted and has no impact on their next roll. I can't help people's superstitions. If a roll was not needed at all, at most they wasted 30 seconds rolling a die. Since descriptions will never impact result it will never hurt.

I simply can't see how it would ever be wasted and I don't care about people's superstitions. People have weird ideas about their dice and there's nothing I can do to prevent that.