D&D 5E Combining player-directed search with skill-based searching

[77IM]

Here's a good trick: search rolls never reveal hidden things directly; they reveal clues. For example,

• Instead of "You find a secret compartment on the book shelf," say "One set of books is much less dusty than the others."
• Instead of "You find treasure under the bed," say "Something golden glints from beneath the bed."
• Instead of "You find the wand amongst the firewood," say "One small stick of wood stands out as unusually straight."

The idea is to make search rolls the beginning of an investigative scene instead of a shortcut to the end.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I think the best approach might be a flexible one, with both ways in mind. Sometimes a player might describe looking in the exact right spot - cool, you find the thingy. Other times they'll just say I search the room, ok roll d20, cool you find the thingy.

I'd just be upfront about this and the players will choose whichever method they want to from scene to scene. If theyre interested in a room, theyll talk to you about what they want to do. If not, or they want to push on etc, theyll just declare a general search, instead. The important thing is to let them know that if they take the extra time to roleplay what they do, they might not need to roll at all. Thats a significant incentive sometimes.

 

[N'raac]

I'd just be upfront about this and the players will choose whichever method they want to from scene to scene. If theyre interested in a room, theyll talk to you about what they want to do. If not, or they want to push on etc, theyll just declare a general search, instead. The important thing is to let them know that if they take the extra time to roleplay what they do, they might not need to roll at all. Thats a significant incentive sometimes.

Yup. "If you narrate out the complete search of the room, then you can spend your character resources on other skills than Search since you will never need to roll that skill." Can my Mage narrate skilled knife fighting to enhance his to hit and damage bonuses, or just win the combat without the need to roll at all, or do only certain imports of player skill override character skill/lack thereof?

 

[77IM]

In combat, player skill involves tactical decisions like placement, targeting, which spell to use or special resource to consume, etc. You don't just say "I roll a Combat check" and then the DM narrates the whole outcome, the way you can with "I search the room." There are RPGs like that but D&D is not one.

...except in earlier editions it kind of was. Back when a combat round was one minute and damage was super lethal and there was no grid, it was customary to just say "I attack one of the orcs" and let the dice decide it all. In those same editions, there was no Search skill, so investigation was played out in detail. It's interesting how these patterns have reversed.

 

[Astrosicebear]

Here's a good trick: search rolls never reveal hidden things directly; they reveal clues. For example,

• Instead of "You find a secret compartment on the book shelf," say "One set of books is much less dusty than the others."
• Instead of "You find treasure under the bed," say "Something golden glints from beneath the bed."
• Instead of "You find the wand amongst the firewood," say "One small stick of wood stands out as unusually straight."

The idea is to make search rolls the beginning of an investigative scene instead of a shortcut to the end.

So much this!

 

[The_Gneech]

I vacillate on this; in "the old days" we got sick and tired of "a single 100 gp diamond buried in an urn full of broken glass" style treasure shenanigans (popular in modules of a certain era)– especially when the only way to find treasure was to stand around searching every possible nook while the wandering monster checks punished you for standing around– that we developed a group shorthand. "I take a quick look" (just what it sounds like) or "I Greyhawk the room" (bust open every piece of furniture, gut every corpse, pull every book off the bookshelf, pull every bookshelf off the wall, turn every candlestick, etc., etc., etc.) and just used whichever one was appropriate for the situation.

On the other hand, "I search the room. *roll* 27. What do I find?" is pretty dull, too. And having the PCs wander around the dungeon aimlessly for the next area just because they didn't specify they were searching the one 5' spot of blank wall in a labyrinth of identical stone corridors, also not much fun, for DM or players.

These days, I try to make the search requirements fit the situation. A crafty mastermind is probably going to have treasure hidden in some sort of clever way, and that becomes a puzzle in and of itself; but most creatures and NPCs, if they have treasure, are going to want fairly easy access to it and probably keep it in their lair or on their person.

-The Gneech

 

[Sadrik]

That's my theory, anyhow.

I think codifying this house rule would be enough to get the players moving in the right direction. Then so long as you are consistent in how searching works adding a little more narrative focus can really help.

Perhaps while using a DC in a book you can do something like this:
DC -5 or more: oblivious, you learn nothing
DC -1 to -4: you learn a vague clue (something is amiss, area smells etc.)
DC +0 to +4: you learn a solid clue (book is less dusty, groove in floor near bookcase etc.)
DC +5 or more: you shortcut it and notice it automatically (book pulls to open door, bookcase opens etc.)

I actually think this is something that can be applied to the overall skill system. An array of possible success points to skills is a very desirable thing.

You can also have the players simply ignore the roll by having them be specific or have them increase their success level by one.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Here's a good trick: search rolls never reveal hidden things directly; they reveal clues. For example,

• Instead of "You find a secret compartment on the book shelf," say "One set of books is much less dusty than the others."
• Instead of "You find treasure under the bed," say "Something golden glints from beneath the bed."
• Instead of "You find the wand amongst the firewood," say "One small stick of wood stands out as unusually straight."

The idea is to make search rolls the beginning of an investigative scene instead of a shortcut to the end.

This indeed! A great general guideline that pairs nicely with more active interaction with the environment. If the players wants to just roll and see what clues present themselves that is a valid option. If they would like to examine more carefully then they may discover things without needing to roll.

 

[treebear]

I think the best approach is what is fun for you the DM and the players. Some players have attention problems, are new, or very in the box thinkers, or just slow thinkers for what every reason. A directed search won't work well for these players. They will be left out, left behind or unable to contribute to the group effort. Other player are very detailed and thorough, which can bog the game down and create friction with the rest of the table, that's wants to move on or keep moving.

I try to gauge it by the player. What do they propose? How does it compare to their usual effort or ideas? Then I respond accordingly. This however is very much winging it on the fly. If I wanted a more fixed method I use different DC for the checks, I search the room, very hard, I look in the fire pit, under the rug, behind the bookshelf, in the pot etc. is and easy or very easy or you find it check, assuming there is something to find of course.

 

[Psikerlord#]

Also you could probably combine active searching and rolling, eg, if the player says he searches in the right spot for a secret door, and describes it well, grant adv on the search roll?

that way the skill is still relevant, but if you take the time to roleplay it, you get a bonus