D&D 5E (2024) How can I do a Charisma-Investigation (or a Strength/Dexterity-Investigation if I can't use Charisma) to find a secret door?

[Maxperson]

Yes, all three are options and NONE of them say you can let someone play another player without their permission, nor do they say you should kill a character who chooses to stay behind with Wandering Monsters.

So what. None of them matter even a little bit when it comes to the option the DM can choose. You are not entitled to any of those options and the DM saying that the table will play a character if the player isn't there is every bit as valid as any of those three in the DMG.

As DM you are free to do any of these things or anything else you want: Automatically killing someone who misses a session or have someone else play their PC without the players permission, are NOT presented as options in the rules.

Irrelevant. The DMG does not direct the DM to pick from those options. It simply says the DM should consider those when making his decision.

You are free to do it if you want.

By RAW I am, yes. The rule is for the DM to make a decision. That's it. It does not direct the DM on what decision to make, or even what decision the DM should make.

As far as rules,the method I use IS mentioned in the official 2024 rules .

No. That's 100% false. The method you use is mentioned in the 5.5e DMG. It is not mentioned in any rule. The DMG =/= rules. Some of it is rules. Some is not. Those methods are not.

You can stand behind that strawman all you want and say technically they are not "rules" but they are as a point of fact in the "rulebook".

You need to go learn what a Strawman is. Presenting a counter argument is not it.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes and if you say my character does not continue with the rest of the party while I am gone, then she doesn't.

No. You only get to decide when you are there. When you are not there, the DM decides what happens, per 5.5e RAW.

Nothing about player agency only applies when you are physically at the table. I mean if I go and grab a coke out of the refrigerator or run to the bathroom can the DM or another player do what they want because I am absent?

Yes! And when you are daydreaming! C'mon dude. That sort of ridiculousness doesn't become you. Nobody thinks you aren't at the game if you go to the fridge or bathroom.

 

[ECMO3]

So what. None of them matter even a little bit when it comes to the option the DM can choose. You are not entitled to any of those options and the DM saying that the table will play a character if the player isn't there is every bit as valid as any of those three in the DMG.

But I am allowed that option.

This line started out with multiple posts by you saying I was doing it wrong, insisting that it was not right, until I pointed out that the method we are using is in the DMG.

Now instead of getting on here and defending yourself, trying to justify your method. Just admit that your first 6 or so posts on this thread were incorrect and the way I was doing it is a perfectly fine and normal way to do it.

That is all you have to do and then you can bow out gracefully!

No. That's 100% false. The method you use is mentioned in the 5.5e DMG. It is not mentioned in any rule. The DMG =/= rules. Some of it is rules. Some is not. Those methods are not.

Pay attention, I changed the verbiage because of this rediculous strawman. I am now saying it is "mentioned in the rules" and the 5.5 DMG in one of the three core "rulebooks" and it is mentioned in there.

This was to get around your hemming and hawing and throwing out "it is not a rule it is an option". Fine, whatever, it is not a rule according to you, it is still mentioned in the rules, whether or not it is not a rule itself.

 

[ECMO3]

No. You only get to decide when you are there. When you are not there, the DM decides what happens, per 5.5e RAW.

Can you please provide where the rules state this.

Yes! And when you are daydreaming! C'mon dude. That sort of ridiculousness doesn't become you.

No one I have played with thinks a character should be hunted down by wandering monsters and killed between sessions on their way back to the inn because they want to leave the cult hideout while the rest of the group explores it ..... but you do!

 

[ECMO3]

You don't own your player in your DM's game. You own them when you're away from it, but within the game, it isn't yours.

I would disagree with that and it certainly isn't stated that way in any rules.

If it makes you feel better, if your DM commandeers your character while you're away from the game, you could tell yourself they were using a doppelgänger and you still control the original.

Whatever. A lot of the criticisms were based on how it was not believable that one of the PCs would leave the group, even though IRL I have friends who leave group events all the time.

I think it is far less believable to have a doppleganger take over than it is to say "Bob left for a while, went back to the inn to take a nap and just isn't here"

It is also quite disingenuous that "the DM can do whatever he wants" is the defense when you want to force someone to let another player play their PC or you want to kill an absent PC, but that "DM primacy" principle was ignored at the begining of this thread when talking about how a DM would just not have a character there when the player isn't, even after I relayed my personal experience with it as DM.

This argument cuts both ways, but on this thread it was only used to defend one side and only after I stopped being defensive and pointed out the way I was doing it is in the DMG.

 

[Maxperson]

Can you please provide where the rules state this.

I did, but since you missed it, here it is again.

"When one of your players is absent, what do you do with that player's character? Consider the following options."

The direction is to figure out what to do. Then they say you can consider the following options. None of those is supposed to be decided upon, or it would say, "Pick one of the following three options."

The three options are no more or less valid than the DM saying that the PC WILL be played if the player is absent. You don't have any right or entitlement to one of the three DMG suggestions.

No one I have played with thinks a character should be hunted down by wandering monsters and killed between sessions on their way back to the inn because they want to leave the cult hideout while the rest of the group explores it ..... but you do!

LOL I never said that. I said that leaving to walk away from the group in the middle of a dungeon would open the PC up to that. What I think should be done is the PC should stay where the PC actually is and participate like the PC should do. Friends don't abandon friends to death and danger just because some guy in the real world didn't show up.

 

[Maxperson]

But I am allowed that option.

Not unless you are the DM you aren't. That's not the player's handbook. It's the Dungeon Master's Guide. You are allowed the options the DM gives you, not that book.

This line started out with multiple posts by you saying I was doing it wrong, insisting that it was not right, until I pointed out that the method we are using is in the DMG.

That's a blatant untruth. I never said you guys are doing it wrong. What the DM and players decide to do with their group is every bit as valid an option as how I do it. It's just not more valid than how I do it.

Pay attention, I changed the verbiage because of this rediculous strawman. I am now saying it is "mentioned in the rules" and the 5.5 DMG in one of the three core "rulebooks" and it is mentioned in there.

You changed it because of something imagined in your head. There was no Strawman. And you claimed what you were doing is RAW, but it's not. The option you guys use is not a rule.

Being a rulebook does not make everything in that book a rule. There is no rule that saying what the DM should do when a player fails to show up.

Fine, whatever, it is not a rule according to you, it is still mentioned in the rules, whether or not it is not a rule itself.

It's not a rule according to fact. Options are not rules. Being in a rulebook doesn't make what is written part of "the rules." So it is in fact not mentioned in the rules, since only actual rules are "the rules."

 

[Micah Sweet]

That is rediculous. Making sense has nothing to do with being fair and there are a ton of rules and abilitis for that matter that "make no sense"

It is extremely to be fair - just accept that it is a game and let all your players do it. Your inability to suspend disbelief or accept these very small and specific details (while you easily accept others) has no effect on that.

Killing a player because they want to miss a session is not being fair to that player and their role in the game.

You can disagree with that, but you are not going to change my mind.

Right back at'cha.