D&D 5E Handling Skill Challenges

[MarkB]

I dunno - as long as the player describes both a goal and approach that should be enough to determine whether the action succeeds, fails or is in doubt and therefore needs the dice + rules. That is the one "system" that underpins the entire game IMHO.

Sure - but I was talking about the sort of rules the OP was considering, like who gets to participate, and who chooses what checks to make. There's no one-size-fits-all system when it comes to those sorts of choices.

If a player said something like this, I'd encourage him to roleplay or describe exactly what he was doing. My interpretation, based on what you shared, would be that the player is asking to make an Intimidation check but wants to use Strength as the ability for the check instead of Charisma – most likely because their PC is strong but uncharismatic.

IOW he's trying to game the system, and hasn't even bothered to come up with an interesting narrative to justify it.

To be fair, this is one area where the system doesn't do a very good job. A person who is physically strong and clearly well armed and equipped should be considered at least something of a threat, but the rules don't really allow for it. Having the local tavern yobs be completely unfazed by the hulking barbarian while quaking in fear when the halfling troubadour walks through the door does become weird after awhile.

 

[iserith]

To be fair, this is one area where the system doesn't do a very good job. A person who is physically strong and clearly well armed and equipped should be considered at least something of a threat, but the rules don't really allow for it. Having the local tavern yobs be completely unfazed by the hulking barbarian while quaking in fear when the halfling troubadour walks through the door does become weird after awhile.

Which is why all action declarations pass through the DM first before rules are involved. For any DM who thinks that a "physically strong and clearly well-armed" adventurer is a threat to the "local tavern yobs," there's no ability check at all. The barbarian fazes them, straight up, no roll.

That's on the player to declare a goal and approach (and refrain from asking to go to the d20) and the DM to rule fairly and consistently.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

[MENTION=6892365]Triumph_Fork[/MENTION]
If a player said something like this, I'd encourage him to roleplay or describe exactly what he was doing. My interpretation, based on what you shared, would be that the player is asking to make an Intimidation check but wants to use Strength as the ability for the check instead of Charisma – most likely because their PC is strong but uncharismatic.

IOW he's trying to game the system, and hasn't even bothered to come up with an interesting narrative to justify it.

If he couldn't come up with an interesting narrative, I'd consider ruling it an automatic failure or requiring him to make a Charisma (Intimidation) check with disadvantage.

Or he could be (un)aware of the official variant where you can use different abilities for different skills as appropriate. Whether he's "trying to game the system" or not, it's a valid approach in my mind, and one that's been well demonstrated in various mediums before. A similar one that comes to mind is McAllister holding the lighter to Mr. Joshua's arm to show that they mean business.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Agreed it drives me crazy when my players just call out "I rolled 25!" when I haven't even asked for a roll! I'm trying to train them but it's like herding cats!

..."And the guard looks at the die on the floor, and back at you quizzically, seemingly unaware of what your sudden outburst means."

 

[Ilbranteloth]

And here "role-playing very well" doesn't mean a great acting performance, but that player is utilizing their knowledge of the game world and current situation to present a compelling argument as to why their character should succeed. It's great if the player can act but it's not required.

I'll second this. Role-playing does not equal acting. It doesn't even mean they can fully articulate what they are trying to accomplish. If one of my players provides a decent explanation of what they are trying to accomplish, but is having difficulty explaining exactly how it will work, I don't have any problem helping fill in the blanks. Not to give them ideas, but to clarify.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Sure - but I was talking about the sort of rules the OP was considering, like who gets to participate, and who chooses what checks to make. There's no one-size-fits-all system when it comes to those sorts of choices.


To be fair, this is one area where the system doesn't do a very good job. A person who is physically strong and clearly well armed and equipped should be considered at least something of a threat, but the rules don't really allow for it. Having the local tavern yobs be completely unfazed by the hulking barbarian while quaking in fear when the halfling troubadour walks through the door does become weird after awhile.

But it does. The Intimidation skill is specifically for this type of thing, and it's also a perfect example of making a skill check using a different ability. I would go so far as to say that if that character chose to take intimidation, they could declare right from the start that they are basing it off of their Strength instead of Charisma.

 

[Tormyr]

There is a good example of a 5e version of a skill challenge that lets everyone participate and has a "number of success out of a limited number of attempts" resolution in the Zeitgeist Chapter 1 Act 1 that was just released on EN5ider.

 

[robus]

..."And the guard looks at the die on the floor, and back at you quizzically, seemingly unaware of what your sudden outburst means."

Yeah I've got to start doing that!

 

[cmad1977]

If a player says they want to do a thing I let them try.
Skill challenges always seems like needless die rolls.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk