Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 8391167" data-attributes="member: 20323">What everyone said about the group check rules is 100% true. Those will work in at least half or more of the situations players tend to find themselves in. I treat those as the quick and dirty rules.When I want something more curated, tailored, boutique, or in-depth, that's when I start to draw on other approaches. A couple examples from my games using those 4 scenarios as a basis...In a recent game, my players were traveling through a canyon (in a miles-spanning necropolis) to reach a tomb. They found skeletal giant vultures resting in a dormant state on several rocky protrusions and canyon walls. The players wanted to sneak past, but it was clear they didn't have sufficient cover or invisibility to sneak the whole way – in other words, it would come down to a sprint, the only question was how far of a sprint. So I used an average of everyone's Stealth rolls to determine how many squares away from the closest skeletal vulture they would start. I think the formula I used was 20 - average Stealth roll in squares (5-foot). IIRC they started 7 squares away.I've only ever had two players express interest in food gathering simultaneously, so it became a Help situation where one player rolled with advantage. In the greater context of exploration, for instance during Tomb of Annihilation, I assembled/created several fun random flora & fauna tables, as well an unexpected discovery tables – so besides the Survival check, I'd also have players roll on one or more of those tables. At one point there were 3 PCs with herbalism kit proficiency, but we tended to resolve each independently because they wanted a maximum diversity of herbs.Last time I did this, there was no ability check. Instead I had each player roll on a Rumors Table, and then narrated each of them acquiring their rumor in a way suiting that PC's background / story / character. It's extremely rare in my games for "listening for rumors" to have a meaningful consequence of failure, so I prefer not to attach an ability check. The only time I recall asking for a check was when the PCs were trying to ask around discretely to avoid attracting unwanted attention – but there were actually multiple abilities/skills involved in that case.Last game my players were tracking a criminal to the docks. I seeded multiple clues. The way I handle clues has a lot in common with the GUMSHOE role-playing game – I don't typically "gate" them behind an ability check; instead you go to the area with the clue, or you ask the person with the clue? You get the clue. It's the interpretation of the clue where you need to put on your thinking cap. For example, they were able to learn from witnesses that the dead criminal was loaded onto a funeral barge, however they clearly found his footprints and no sign of blood, injury, or combat. One minute he was standing, next he was on his back.That's when one player examined the scene more closely (Perception check) and found a bit of dark dirt scattered around the spot the criminal laid down.Another player made an Investigation check to realize this dark dirt was slightly salty and had high clay content – like the grave dirt they'd encountered in a nearby necropolis across the river. So it was grave dirt.Another player made an Arcana check and realized that grave dirt was used as a component in create undead & feign death.Thus they hypothesized (correctly) that the criminal had feign death cast on him so as to be able to get on a funeral barge and cross the river into the necropolis. They still are wondering WHY go to all the trouble, but they also know the spell only lasts 1 hour and they are approximately 30 minutes behind the criminal...</blockquote>

Verification