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]

BUT THIS IS THE WAY THE DM IN THE EXAMPLE DOES IT AND YOU KNEW THAT BEFORE YOU STARTED COMPLAINING ABOUT IT!

That is what stated this whole discussion - you telling me we (i.e. the DM in the game) was doing it wrong!

Incorrecto! It started by me saying that I don't and wouldn't play that way, because it doesn't make sense. That's it.

 

[kermit4karate]

Yes you pretty much did, post 120:

"If he .... was okay staying alone to possibly die to random encounters, then sure."

Like I said, you should just admit you were wrong in your first 5 posts or so and that he way I was doing it was is a perfectly fine method and then bow out of the discussion because nothing else you are posting now is even relevant to it.

He wasn't wrong. You've been wrong. It's OK though. I was wrong at least twice yesterday, and the world kept turning.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes you pretty much did, post 120:

"If he .... was okay staying alone to possibly die to random encounters, then sure."

Like I said, you should just admit you were wrong in your first 5 or 6 posts or so and that he way I was doing it was is a perfectly fine and a great and approved method and then bow out of the discussion because nothing else you are posting now is even relevant to it.

Um, no. You asked me a question about what I would be fine with. I answered which has nothing to do with your game.

"So I guess it would be fine if the player said at the end of the session he was in said "I'm going to hang out over here while you go through some of the other rooms in the dungeon"

In my game the player would have to be fine staying alone to possibly die to random encounters.

 

[ECMO3]

In my game the player would have to be fine staying alone to possibly die to random encounters.

Yeah exactly, you would kill a character (or if you want to be technical possibly kill a character) because he missed a session.

 

[ECMO3]

Incorrecto! It started by me saying that I don't and wouldn't play that way, because it doesn't make sense. That's it.

And then going on to say it is "nonsensical", "illogical" "rediculous" ...

If you can't admit you are wrong how about you just say the following for the record:

"Fade away is a great way to do it, a lot of tables do it that way and it is even one of the recommended options in the DMG"

 

[kermit4karate]

Yeah exactly, you would kill a character (or if you want to be technical possibly kill a character) because he missed a session.

It sounds better if you say it like this:

"Yeah, exactly, you might put a character into a position to be killed as a result of playing them as an NPC during a session in which a player wasn't able to attend in person."

 

[Maxperson]

And then going on to say it is "nonsensical", "illogical" ...

It is.

If you can't admit you are wrong how about you just say the following for the record:

"Fade away is a great way to do it, a lot of tables do it that way and it is even one of the recommended options in the PHB"

Why would I lie? I don't think fading away is a great way to do it. I think it's nonsensical. That the DMG(not PHB) gives it as an option(not a recommendation), doesn't mean that it makes sense. A lot of D&D isn't geared towards making sense. For some like you, that's fine. For me it's anathema.

 

[Maxperson]

Yeah exactly, you would kill a character (or if you want to be technical possibly kill a character) because he missed a session.

No. I would have the PC potentially suffer the consequences of a really, really stupid decision by the player. Staying along in a dungeon is suicidal.

Would a random encounter happen? Maybe yes, maybe no. That's what the die rolls are for. Would the encounter kill the PC? Perhaps it would be weaker than him, perhaps stronger, perhaps waaaay stronger. If it were likely to kill him, I'd have him try to escape. Would he escape? Maybe yes, maybe no. That's what die rolls are for.

That's why he would "possibly die." If I wanted to kill him, I'd just tell the players that if they miss a session their PC is dead. I'm not out to kill PCs, but there are consequences to actions. The world doesn't stop happening to the PC just because the player couldn't make it.

 

[ECMO3]

Why would I lie? I don't think fading away is a great way to do it. I think it's nonsensical. That the DMG(not PHB) gives it as an option(not a recommendation), doesn't mean that it makes sense. A lot of D&D isn't geared towards making sense. For some like you, that's fine. For me it's anathema.

But if the DM does it that way, so you have no choice, it is the only correct way.

Your feelings and logic on the subject are irrelevant. They don't matter because the DM does it that way and the DM decision is prime ..... AND on top of this it is "mentioned" in the rules.

You keep going on and on about how it is the DMs choice and this IS what the DM chose to do in that game!

Just admit it! This is the CORRECT way to do this in the game we are talking about in this thread and stop complaining about your opinions or options that don't matter.

 

[ECMO3]

No. I would have the PC potentially suffer the consequences of a really, really stupid decision by the player. Staying along in a dungeon is suicidal.

Would a random encounter happen? Maybe yes, maybe no. That's what the die rolls are for. Would the encounter kill the PC? Perhaps it would be weaker than him, perhaps stronger, perhaps waaaay stronger.

If he is not there and is not going to let anyone play his character then it is going to kill him.

The world doesn't stop happening to the PC just because the player couldn't make it.

It does in the only game that is relevant to this thread.