Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Swarmkeeper" data-source="post: 8285307" data-attributes="member: 6921763">The bold is literally paraphrasing the rule in the 5e PHB.&nbsp; If you find it bad advice to follow the rules for when you call for an ability check, I don't know what to tell you.&nbsp; And adding &quot;or success&quot; to the rule does nothing except point out the obvious: if the roll succeeds, the player's PC accomplishes what they wanted to accomplish and avoided the consequence.&nbsp; It's implicit.Who said anything about giving &quot;automatic success in every situation in which the PC wants something&quot;?&nbsp; The DM can say &quot;Yes&quot; or &quot;No&quot;.&nbsp; Making someone roll with the only failure state being &quot;nothing happens&quot; diminishes the role of the dice completely in 5e.&nbsp; Only roll when something interesting can happen, otherwise just say &quot;Yes&quot; or &quot;No&quot; and move on to the more exciting parts of the game.&nbsp; Of course, it calls upon the DM to have some exciting things planned or up their sleeve.&nbsp; As [USER=6779196]@Charlaquin[/USER] said above:&nbsp; &quot;it also encourages you to create challenges that are meaningful and interesting.&quot;&quot;Nothing happens&quot; does not fall into the &quot;exciting&quot; or &quot;meaningful&quot; or &quot;interesting&quot; categories. Yes, they should roll... if there is a meaningful consequence to failure.&nbsp; &quot;The safe door remains locked&quot; is not meaningful as it just gives the same result as an auto-fail except we've wasted time at the table with the charade of rolling.&nbsp; The fiction has not moved anywhere.&nbsp; Now, if you add in the consequence of wasting significant in-world time and/or causing noise and/or setting off an alarm and/or [add your own meaningful consequence here]... now we perhaps have a worthwhile dice roll to introduce where a failure causes potential difficulty for the PCs.&nbsp; The fiction has changed and the PCs have something new to deal with.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Swarmkeeper, post: 8285307, member: 6921763"] The bold is literally paraphrasing the rule in the 5e PHB. If you find it bad advice to follow the rules for when you call for an ability check, I don't know what to tell you. And adding "or success" to the rule does nothing except point out the obvious: if the roll succeeds, the player's PC accomplishes what they wanted to accomplish and avoided the consequence. It's implicit. Who said anything about giving "automatic success in every situation in which the PC wants something"? The DM can say "Yes" or "No". Making someone roll with the only failure state being "nothing happens" diminishes the role of the dice completely in 5e. Only roll when something interesting can happen, otherwise just say "Yes" or "No" and move on to the more exciting parts of the game. Of course, it calls upon the DM to have some exciting things planned or up their sleeve. As [USER=6779196]@Charlaquin[/USER] said above: "it also encourages you to [I]create[/I] challenges that are meaningful and interesting." "Nothing happens" does [I]not [/I]fall into the "exciting" or "meaningful" or "interesting" categories. Yes, they should roll... if there is a meaningful consequence to failure. "The safe door remains locked" is not meaningful as it just gives the same result as an auto-fail except we've wasted time at the table with the charade of rolling. The fiction has not moved anywhere. Now, if you add in the consequence of wasting significant in-world time and/or causing noise and/or setting off an alarm and/or [add your own [I]meaningful[/I] consequence here]... now we perhaps have a worthwhile dice roll to introduce where a failure causes potential difficulty for the PCs. The fiction has changed and the PCs have something new to deal with. [/QUOTE]

Verification