D&D (2024) How do I disarm traps? Does Thieves' Tools do anything?

[roguish]

Thanks... I guess? But are you saying you do not agree with my interpretation? If so, no issues, just checking.

I only meant I did not agree that advantage does not apply WHEN you roll sleight of hand with thieves' tools, and have proficiency in both. I think that by the rules it does apply.

Of course, the bigger question is: if you're not a Thief using Fast Hands, DO you roll sleight of hand? Or just dexterity? Nobody knows! The books don't say, therefore we're left with the Tools section, that we KNOW doesn't give complete instructions. It's a mess, and for the DMG's traps it's a moot question anyway: thieves' tools don't come into play at all. Does it matter if you would roll dexterity or sleight of hand, with advantage or without, when you don't get to roll at all?

I wanna make it very very clear that, whether we agree or not, this isn't on us. We're trying to make head or tales of incomplete rules. This is on them.

As for whether the advantage (and generally mixing skills with tools) is a good rule, I'm still ambivalent, but you're making very good points. I'll have to think about DCs before making up my mind, another thing 5e didn't grace us with. Because at the end of the day, whatever the formula of rolling is, the goal is to produce a probability of success that makes sense, depending on the character's abilities and the situation.

However, I know this would never be accepted because the idea of having a skill proficiency and NOT being able to add proficiency bonus flies in the face of 5E's "design".

Who cares? Houseruling is free. There's exactly one group of people that has to accept the changes we make, and it's the group we're playing with.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You know, I'm beginning to suspect that they used to have a nice Skills section in the PHB, at least as detailed as in the 2014 PHB, which neatly clarified all of this (and stealth, and picking pockets, and all sorts of things), and then they scratched it, replaced it with that half-baked half page of vagueness and disgrace (my apologies, I'm the resident skillmonkey and I have NO chill about this), and that's why we're now scratching our heads about everything skill-related.

Level Up has an excellent skill system, including skill specialties and expertise dice. And it otherwise works well with the 5e rule base.

 

[Guest 7037866]

I believe the designers are aiming to allow a wider range of characters to interact with each pillar.

While I see your point, I don't buy it in this case anyway...

Not many PCs have had Sleight of Hand IME. I can't think of more than one, maybe two, cases in the last seven years of playing 5E because Thieves' tools proficiency, which every Rogue and at least one or two backgrounds IICR, was all you needed for picking locks and disarming traps.

Sleight of Hand is already useful in a variety of ways, giving it the "pick locks and disarm traps" makes it almost a must have skill, becoming worse than Stealth IMO.

Also, with 2024 rules, anyone can decide to have proficiency in Thieves' tools, so having the check be Dexterity (Thieves' tools) makes it simple enough if the goal is to allow a wider range of interaction.

They're not troubled by making individual checks easier, because they are considering the probabilities across the many checks that players will participate in.

No doubt. I expect the next version will remove skill checks altogether. PCs "failing" has already gone away in general, even with 2014, with "failed" checks becomeing "not making progess".

I think that by the rules it does apply.

Oh, certainly, by the rules they very much apply. Sorry if I was unclear, I meant I don't agree with that mechanic and don't think they should.

If you "need thieves' tools" in order to make a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check to open a lock, it makes sense to me you should already know how to use those thieves' tools. Basically, the rule is granting advantage for what, IMO, should be the default condition, not the exceptional one.

Of course, the bigger question is: if you're not a Thief using Fast Hands, DO you roll sleight of hand? Or just dexterity? Nobody knows! The books don't say, therefore we're left with the Tools section, that we KNOW doesn't give complete instructions.

Well, according to all the other sections addressing locks, for instance, if you are not a Rogue (Thief), you:

The check is Dexterity (Sleight of Hands), when using thieves' tools, to open a lock.

Do you need Sleight of Hand proficiency? Of course not. If you have it, you add your proficiency bonus as usual. That's all.
Do you need proficiency in thieves' tools? Of course not. If you have it, you add your proficiency bonus as usual. That's all.

The rules are clear on this. If you have both, instead of adding your proficiency bonus for each, you add it for one and gain advantage.

Where it becomes unclear IMO is "do you (actually) need thieves' tools"? Can you just make a Dexterity check without thieves' tools? What about with improvised thieves' tools?

I would rule you cannot make the check without Thieves' tools, or at the very least make the check with disadvantage if you are using improvised tools (like the slim dagger).

It's a mess, and for the DMG's traps it's a moot question anyway: thieves' tools don't come into play at all. Does it matter if you would roll dexterity or sleight of hand, with advantage or without, when you don't get to roll at all?

Yes, when I finally read that I found it patently absurd!

When it comes to disarming a trap I don't recall you having to roll at all. You roll to see the trap and/or understand how it works, then it is just a matter of cutting a wire, using an iron spike, etc. all without the need for a check! Pathetic and lazy game design IMO! Just another way to move the game away from the exploration pillar...

I wanna make it very very clear that, whether we agree or not, this isn't on us. We're trying to make head or tales of incomplete rules. This is on them.

Welcome to 5E!!! It has always been:

Rulings over rules, make up whatever you want, why should we be bothered to come up wit concrete mechanics you can actually use and change if you don't like. It is much easier for us to just handwave things and claim "natural language" and fill pages with artwork than create a solid game system with fleshed out mechanics.

As for whether the advantage (and generally mixing skills with tools) is a good rule, I'm still ambivalent, but you're making very good points. I'll have to think about DCs before making up my mind, another thing 5e didn't grace us with. Because at the end of the day, whatever the formula of rolling is, the goal is to produce a probability of success that makes sense, depending on the character's abilities and the situation.

For myself, I find the 18 skills too universally applied. I prefer tools to take the roles for which they were intended.

If someone has proficiency in the herbalism kit, they know about herbs and such. Do they know any or all of the other things associated with Nature or Survival skills? No, the know about herbalism stuff.

Does someone with Nature or Survival skills know enough about herbs and such to make a potion of healing or similar things? No. That is what the herbalism kit proficiency is for IMO.

Who cares? Houseruling is free. There's exactly one group of people that has to accept the changes we make, and it's the group we're playing with.

Oh, I can houserule things of course and I will. But I care because poor game design leads to issues like those raised in this thread. For all people love 2024 rules, they are colossal fails in there which for me are unforgiveable at this point in D&D design.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You can't have rules for everything. Someone needs to set a scope for what the rules should cover. For some reason they seemed to decide there need to be no specific rules for pickpocketing. I think its ok. They could've leave it in, but in modern D&D games I played pickpocketing came up so rarely that you might just cut the rules and let the DM have a ruling. Maybe that was their line of thinking.

You can have rules for everything, or at least for more things. We shouldn't pretend not doing so isn't a choice on the part of the designers.

 

[GMMichael]

I wanna make it very very clear that, whether we agree or not, this isn't on us. We're trying to make head or tales of incomplete rules. This is on them.

Hey, now. WotC was very clear that they're not publishing a new edition. If you want to disregard the extant skill rules while reading the new book . . .

 

[clearstream]

While I see your point, I don't buy it in this case anyway...

Not many PCs have had Sleight of Hand IME. I can't think of more than one, maybe two, cases in the last seven years of playing 5E because Thieves' tools proficiency, which every Rogue and at least one or two backgrounds IICR, was all you needed for picking locks and disarming traps.

Sleight of Hand is already useful in a variety of ways, giving it the "pick locks and disarm traps" makes it almost a must have skill, becoming worse than Stealth IMO.

One point of divergence between us might be that I do not read RAW to imply that only Sleight of Hand can be used to pick locks and disarm traps. Rather I read that when Thieves want to use a bonus action to pick a lock or disarm a trap, they do so using Sleight of Hand. Most characters don't have that specific bonus action to take.

 

[Guest 7037866]

One point of divergence between us might be that I do not read RAW to imply that only Sleight of Hand can be used to pick locks and disarm traps. Rather I read that when Thieves want to use a bonus action to pick a lock or disarm a trap, they do so using Sleight of Hand. Most characters don't have that specific bonus action to take.

I agree that is how is should be. Rogue (Thief) uses Sleight of Hand because they are doing it swiftly via "Fast Hands." That is how I read it in my response to the OP. It was only when other instances of Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) was brought into the discussion to pick a lock or disarm a trap that I understood, RAW, it wasn't Sleight of Hand just because of the bonus action thing for Thief subclass.

But, that doesn't seem to be the way it is RAW. Under locks in Equipment, for example, it states a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check. Disarming the poison needle sample trap is also Sleight of Hand IIRC.

So, it seems the associated skill is Sleight of Hand for picking locks, not just because it is Fast Hands for the Thief subclass.

As for traps, for the most part it seems nothing is needed skill-wise to actually disarm them.

 

[clearstream]

I agree that is how is should be. Rogue (Thief) uses Sleight of Hand because they are doing it swiftly via "Fast Hands." That is how I read it in my response to the OP. It was only when other instances of Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) was brought into the discussion to pick a lock or disarm a trap that I understood, RAW, it wasn't Sleight of Hand just because of the bonus action thing for Thief subclass.

Do you mean this (emphasis mine)

Without the key, a creature can use Thieves’ Tools to pick this Lock with a successful DC 15 Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check.​

To me the key confound is giving examples of world elements the same standing as system mechanics. They're fundamentally different kinds of texts.

 

[Guest 7037866]

Do you mean this (emphasis mine)

Without the key, a creature can use Thieves’ Tools to pick this Lock with a successful DC 15 Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check.​

Yes, the Lock under the equipment section. Along with this:

Using Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) to disarm the Poisoned Needle trap. It is interesting to note (I was mistaken before), this does not mention the use of Thieves' tools as needed to disarm this trap.

To me the key confound is giving examples of world elements the same standing as system mechanics. They're fundamentally different kinds of texts.

To me the key issue is the dispparity between what makes more sense (IMNSHO) compared to the mess of rules that we have.

First, we have the meager rules about when a "skill most often applies...". Clearly, although picking locks and disarming traps would seem like a "most often" case, there is no mention of it under the Sleight of Hand example uses.

IF WE HAD OPEN LOCKS AND DISARM TRAPS under these examples, the rest would be simple IMO.

Second, we have the Tools mechanics:

Notice it says a tool "helps" you make a specialized ability check, not it is required to make the check. The implication being having both a skill and tool proficiency would grant advantage (RAW this is the case).

Another implication is that by using Thieves' tools, the DC is set by the use of the tool, not by the difficulty in the lock or trap. This agrees with the description of the Lock under Equipment, that the DC is 15 with the use of Thieves' tools.

I guess it comes down to this: do we ever see an example of Thieves' tools being used without Sleight of Hand in 2024??

(To be clear, as I've stated before, I don't think Sleight of Hand should be a skill used with picking a lock or disarming a trap, only the tool proficiency should be used IMO. The above is just what I think RAW says).

 

[roguish]

Level Up has an excellent skill system, including skill specialties and expertise dice. And it otherwise works well with the 5e rule base.

I am SERIOUSLY considering it.