D&D 5E (2014) Consequences of Failure

[FrogReaver]

So, nobody ever foes z forgery looks st it, sees its mediocre and does another one?

What if they show it to another PC? Csn that PC say "this looks like crap?"

The way I would handle forgery is:

Player: I want to forge some documents. DM: Awesome. You know you will need x,y,z to do that.
Player: I forge the document! DM: awesome, give me a forgery check vs dc 10 to see if you were successful.
Player: I rolled a 10. DM: You have created a forged document.
Player: I check to see how good the document turned out. DM: It's a solid forgery, the DC for the document is 10+your forgery skill (assuming that you prepared it like normal, this could either increase or decrease if you did it in a hurry or spent extra time and resources in preparing it just right).

Player: I attempt to pass off the document to the guard. The guard rolls an investigation check (advantage if rushed or distracted, disadvantage if he doesn't like you etc).

That's how I would handle DC's for forged items

 

[iserith]

I finally made a breakthrough this morning. That bit I bolded? It's wrong.

And I can prove it.

There is never a fail condition on any opposed check, only success conditions. Opposed checks, like a stealth check, cannot be failed. I don't stop hiding because someone rolled a higher perception, I'm still hiding. They just succeeded on their perception check. Or, put it another way, if two characters are arm wrestling, one character does not stop arm wrestling because the other character rolled a higher Athletics check.

So, no, there are conditions where ability checks are called for even if there is no meaningful consequence of failure. Simply put, in any opposed check, like stealth, there is no fail condition, only a success condition. This is why the stealth example doesn't really work with goal and approach methods. Opposed checks can't work like that because the check determines the actions, not the other way around. I cannot narrate any arm wrestling action, other than I push really hard, and the roll represents my best effort at that time.

There are many checks in 5e D&D where the consequence of failure isn't meaningful - it only preserves the status quo or there are no fail conditions at all.

First, to be clear, you're arguing that the rules are wrong, not that I'm wrong. I'm quoting the rules there.

But regardless of that, the situation (and the DM) determine when rules are employed, including contests (which is what I believe you mean by "opposed checks") and that's when there's an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure.

Also, you may be confusing "meaningful consequence for failure" with "something happens when the action fails." That might not be the case, especially in combat, where failure's meaningful consequence for failure is that you effectively "wasted" one of a finite number of turns.

Remember, as Umbran said, you have to examine the situation to determine if there's a meaningful consequence for failure, not necessarily the action.

 

[FrogReaver]

Depends on the situation. Maybe it makes it worse. Maybe you kill the patient. Maybe you expend too much of the medicine and you can't treat the other sick anymore. I dunno, need more context.

So you would make my medicine just as likely to make the guy sicker as to cure him. WOW

 

[Ovinomancer]

So you would make my medicine just as likely to make the guy sicker as to cure him. WOW

Sure, since you've now clarified that the situation is one where those two outcomes are likely and fit the established fiction. It is pretty wow that this works out that way -- you establish a fictional situation, the approach and goal interact with that, and the outcomes flow from the fictional situation. I, too, am often impressed at how this works.

 

[FrogReaver]

Sure, since you've now clarified that the situation is one where those two outcomes are likely and fit the established fiction. It is pretty wow that this works out that way -- you establish a fictional situation, the approach and goal interact with that, and the outcomes flow from the fictional situation. I, too, am often impressed at how this works.

Looks like you rolled a 1 on your helpfulness check. I don't think our DM allows rerolls.

 

[Guest 6801328]

So you would make my medicine just as likely to make the guy sicker as to cure him. WOW

Seriously? Let me quote @Ovinomancer again:

Depends on the situation. Maybe it makes it worse. Maybe you kill the patient. Maybe you expend too much of the medicine and you can't treat the other sick anymore. I dunno, need more context.

And you distill that into:

So you would make my medicine just as likely to make the guy sicker as to cure him. WOW

(In the absence, I might add, of a DC and a modifier, both of which would be necessary to determine "just as likely".)

WOW.

As a general rule of thumb, when people start posts with "So you're saying..." or "So you believe that..." or "So you would...." I expect the rest of the post to be a hyperbolic distortion of what was actually said. But your post sets some kind of record.

 

[FrogReaver]

Seriously? Let me quote @Ovinomancer again:


And you distill that into:


(In the absence, I might add, of a DC and a modifier, both of which would be necessary to determine "just as likely".)

WOW.

As a general rule of thumb, when people start posts with "So you're saying..." or "So you believe that..." or "So you would...." I expect the rest of the post to be a hyperbolic distortion of what was actually said. But your post sets some kind of record.

So your saying a rolled a 20 on my hyperbolic distortion skill. At least someone here has a hot hand!

 

[Guest 6801328]

So your saying a rolled a 20 on my hyperbolic distortion skill. At least someone here has a hot hand!

No. There was zero uncertainty, so I ruled that one an autosuccess.

 

[iserith]

On the forgery issue:

If the player proposes that the character create, say, a forged document for later use to achieve X with the local government, that's easy to adjudicate: The document is created, provided the character has the requisite materials and time. No roll.

When the player later has the character present the forged document to the local government, it actually gets examined at which point the DM decides there is an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure for an attempt to achieve X given the stated approach. If there is, then we roll the ability check.

Examine the situation before racing to ask for an ability check simply because the action smells like a tools use.

 

[FrogReaver]

So in case anyone cares to actually deal with the medicine question.

Suppose you are in a game with a diseased ally. You want to use medicine to heal him. I guess I also need to add, Suppose that the only thing the DM determines is uncertain about your approach is whether you will heal him.

How is that situation handled?