Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How do you handle insight?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7788978" data-attributes="member: 6919838"><p>"I'll echo some advice I've heard before here on ENWorld: Why would a player ask to make a specific ability check in 5e? Given that the 5e DMG points out that the DM should "Only call for a roll if there is a meaningful consequence for failure", a player requesting to make a specific ability check is asking for a chance to fail and thus harm the party in some way. "</p><p></p><p>That is where we fundamentally disagree and I believe there is a major difference in what we both see the rules saying. </p><p></p><p>If I as GM see a task as auto-success for a character, I will not ask the player to make a check barring some degree of success aspect at play. </p><p></p><p>That's just like your quite.</p><p></p><p>But, that quote does not say, nor will you find in the rules "if a player asks for a check, the hm must add a meaningful consequence of failure even if one did not exist before."</p><p></p><p>Do, nope the DMG does not say </p><p></p><p>"a player requesting to make a specific ability check is asking for a chance to fail and thus harm the party in some way. ""</p><p></p><p>It does not say that a player asking for a check means the GM has to make a consequence for failure. </p><p></p><p>Some GMs believe that is how it should be done, but that is just AFAIK just their own choice, not the rules in the DMG. </p><p></p><p>To me, this very notion of punish the player for asking for a check and advocating for the "tactic" of waiting etc is one of the big turn offs to that position. It comes across as a lot more adversarial GM posture than I myself enjoy on either side of the table. </p><p></p><p>To me its sort of a logic flaw - like elephants are mammals but mammals are not necessarily elephants.</p><p></p><p>So, nope, at my table the player asking for a check is not "asking to fail". The difficulty snd consequences of the outcome are the same, regardless of who asks. </p><p></p><p>Moreover, they do not know the DCs in some cases, so it's more than possible that they should not know that its automatic either way.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7788978, member: 6919838"] "I'll echo some advice I've heard before here on ENWorld: Why would a player ask to make a specific ability check in 5e? Given that the 5e DMG points out that the DM should "Only call for a roll if there is a meaningful consequence for failure", a player requesting to make a specific ability check is asking for a chance to fail and thus harm the party in some way. " That is where we fundamentally disagree and I believe there is a major difference in what we both see the rules saying. If I as GM see a task as auto-success for a character, I will not ask the player to make a check barring some degree of success aspect at play. That's just like your quite. But, that quote does not say, nor will you find in the rules "if a player asks for a check, the hm must add a meaningful consequence of failure even if one did not exist before." Do, nope the DMG does not say "a player requesting to make a specific ability check is asking for a chance to fail and thus harm the party in some way. "" It does not say that a player asking for a check means the GM has to make a consequence for failure. Some GMs believe that is how it should be done, but that is just AFAIK just their own choice, not the rules in the DMG. To me, this very notion of punish the player for asking for a check and advocating for the "tactic" of waiting etc is one of the big turn offs to that position. It comes across as a lot more adversarial GM posture than I myself enjoy on either side of the table. To me its sort of a logic flaw - like elephants are mammals but mammals are not necessarily elephants. So, nope, at my table the player asking for a check is not "asking to fail". The difficulty snd consequences of the outcome are the same, regardless of who asks. Moreover, they do not know the DCs in some cases, so it's more than possible that they should not know that its automatic either way. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How do you handle insight?
Top