Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ibrandul" data-source="post: 8740933" data-attributes="member: 6871736">I've just pored over the relevant sections of the 5e PHB and DMG with a fine-tooth comb. Let me preface this by saying: no one is DMing the game wrong. My argument is only about RAW, and is intended to rebut the several folks who are saying that RAW forbid an ability check when a PC's stats are such that a nat 20 would fail the check.On the contrary: When a player wants to attempt a task that is possible for a character in general but impossible for their PC because of their stats...according to 2014 RAW, the DM calls for an ability check.Here's the PHB:&quot;The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results.&quot; (PHB 174)And here's the DMG:&quot;Only call for a roll if there is a meaningful consequence for failure. [Note: nothing about success here.] When deciding whether to use a roll, ask yourself two questions:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Is a task so easy and free of conflict that there should be no chance of failure?</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Is a task so inappropriate or impossible—such as hitting the moon with an arrow—that it can't work?</li>
</ul>If the answer to both of these questions is no, some kind of roll is appropriate.&quot; (DMG 237; emphasis added)There's a lot riding on that one, slim PHB passage for those who think DMs are never supposed to call an ability check if the PC's mods make it impossible to succeed on a nat 20. And this interpretation directly contradicts the DMG guidelines.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ibrandul, post: 8740933, member: 6871736"] I've just pored over the relevant sections of the 5e PHB and DMG with a fine-tooth comb. Let me preface this by saying: [I]no one is DMing the game wrong[/I]. My argument is only about RAW, and is intended to rebut the several folks who are saying that RAW forbid an ability check when a PC's stats are such that a nat 20 would fail the check. On the contrary: When a player wants to attempt a task that is possible for a character [I]in general [/I]but impossible [I]for their PC because of their stats[/I]...according to 2014 RAW, the DM[I][B] calls for an ability check.[/B][/I] Here's the PHB: "The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results." (PHB 174) And here's the DMG: "Only call for a roll if there is a meaningful consequence[I] for failure[/I]. [Note: nothing about success here.] When deciding whether to use a roll, ask yourself two questions: [LIST] [*]Is a task so easy and free of conflict that there should be no chance of failure? [*]Is a task so inappropriate or impossible—such as hitting the moon with an arrow—that it can't work? [/LIST] [I]If the answer to both of these questions is no, some kind of roll is appropriate.[/I]" (DMG 237; emphasis added) There's a lot riding on that one, slim PHB passage for those who think DMs are never supposed to call an ability check if the PC's mods make it impossible to succeed on a nat 20. And this interpretation directly contradicts the DMG guidelines. [/QUOTE]

Verification