D&D 5E How do you handle this? - DM edition

[iserith]

Except, the player has no reason to guess even that.

It's related to the archaeologist background which was the background established in the example by Blue. It's a perfectly reasonable action declaration by the player in that context in my view.

Do not attribute to malice what is as easily described as a different habit. They aren't playing clever tricks - they are just playing as they have learned to play.

I would say it can be a clever trick whether the player is aware of it or not. The outcome is the same either way - the character potentially avoids consequences by engaging in Q&A with the DM outside the context of the character doing stuff in the setting.

 

[Blue]

I would say it can be a clever trick whether the player is aware of it or not. The outcome is the same either way - the character potentially avoids consequences by engaging in Q&A with the DM outside the context of the character doing stuff in the setting.

The character is acting within the setting. They are recalling when they studied hobgoblin history. This just happened "off-camera" so the DM needs to be the window to the player to describe that (or not).

 

[iserith]

The character is acting within the setting. They are recalling when they studied hobgoblin history. This just happened "off-camera" so the DM needs to be the window to the player to describe that (or not).

That's an assumption on the part of the DM that I think is best avoided. I ask players to perform their rules-prescribed role which is to describe what they want to do. It prevents a number of issues downstream.

 

[Slit518]

1. Based on the description of what a player is doing, both a tool proficiency and a skill proficiency are integral in what they describe they are doing, and both applicable. Do you pick one, have them clarify whihc is primary, add both/grant advantage to one, do something else? Especially when the bonuses are not the same like only one proficient, or cases like expertise/magic tools/etc.

It is a case-by-case basis. Some cases both rolls might be necessary, where as others I would have the roll be whatever seems more prominent in the situation.

2. One character examines something, gets a poor roll, calls over another who wants to roll, and then they call over more if the rolls continue to be bad. Since they are being done one at a time it's not the case of one character helping another. So effectively everyone gets a separate roll which is almost like penta-advantage for a 5 person party.

You could just have it be a group roll, where everyone rolls a 1d20, choose the highest result, and you add the highest bonus from the person who has the highest bonus in the party. I know this breaks the rules, but it could be fun for everyone involved.

Or, alternatively, you could have the person with the highest bonus roll at Advantage.

3. A character makes truthful statements in ways that are deceiving. Like "you can have all the gold I'm carrying if you let them go" when they have little on them. They see it as persuasion because the character is truthful they will gladly give you all they have, but since the player intent is to get off cheap, it's like they are attempting to deceive to imply they have more.

This would depend on how smart who the character(s) are interacting with. I feel most would like to know how much money they would be getting out of it, and if they don't like the total, no change in result.

 

[Blue]

That's an assumption on the part of the DM that I think is best avoided. I ask players to perform their rules-prescribed role which is to describe what they want to do. It prevents a number of issues downstream.

Here is the PHB's description of the History skill:

"History. Your Intelligence (History) check measures your ability to recall lore about historical events, legendary people, ancient kingdoms, past disputes, recent wars, and lost civilizations."

Recalling lore is the primary and only function of the skill. I believe it is safe to say that it is not rules proscribed to use the skill to recall lore. Rather is not just supported it is the only listed use case.

Okay, first recalling lore was a "Q&A session with the DM outside the context of the character in the setting" and now it's "rules proscribed". Please, this is what the skill does in no uncertain terms. Please let's stop dancing around that. Characters can recall lore.

 

[robus]

"History. Your Intelligence (History) check measures your ability to recall lore about historical events, legendary people, ancient kingdoms, past disputes, recent wars, and lost civilizations."

Recalling lore is the primary and only function of the skill. I believe it is safe to say that it is not rules proscribed to use the skill to recall lore. Rather is not just supported it is the only listed use case.

But skills are a bonus to an ability check to resolve uncertainty (with a meaningful consequence for failure). The player has to declare an appropriate action for their character in order for that skill to be factored in. They can’t just declare which skill they’re pointing to on their character sheet.

 

[Blue]

But skills are a bonus to an ability check to resolve uncertainty (with a meaningful consequence for failure). The player has to declare an appropriate action for their character in order for that skill to be factored in. They can’t just declare which skill they’re pointing to on their character sheet.

Your jumping in about a dozen back-and-forths in a thread. That part had already been discussed.

 

[iserith]

Here is the PHB's description of the History skill:

"History. Your Intelligence (History) check measures your ability to recall lore about historical events, legendary people, ancient kingdoms, past disputes, recent wars, and lost civilizations."

Recalling lore is the primary and only function of the skill. I believe it is safe to say that it is not rules proscribed to use the skill to recall lore. Rather is not just supported it is the only listed use case.

Okay, first recalling lore was a "Q&A session with the DM outside the context of the character in the setting" and now it's "rules proscribed". Please, this is what the skill does in no uncertain terms. Please let's stop dancing around that. Characters can recall lore.

I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is happening because of course I agree characters can recall lore.

The rules say players describe what they want to do - that is their role in the conversation of the game. If what they say they want to do is to recall lore related to historical events, legendary people, ancient kingdoms, past disputes, recent wars, and lost civilizations, and there's an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure, then the DM calls for an Intelligence (History) check. Easy.

 

[Blue]

I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is happening because of course I agree characters can recall lore.

The rules say players describe what they want to do - that is their role in the conversation of the game. If what they say they want to do is to recall lore related to historical events, legendary people, ancient kingdoms, past disputes, recent wars, and lost civilizations, and there's an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure, then the DM calls for an Intelligence (History) check. Easy.

This seems like a 180 turnaround from what you were saying earlier. You were rquiring us to tell what in specific they were looking for, what advantage they expected to get out of it, and a consequence for a failed roll. Recalling lore you called a "Q&A with the DM out of context of the game".

Is this just a matter of verbiage? If I changed "I examine the statue visually without approaching. Do I know anything about it or see anything besides the scepter that catches my eye?" to include every variation of "historical events, legendary people, ancient kingdoms, past disputes, recent wars, and lost civilizations" for all of my knowledge skills, you'd be okay with it?

I don't think so, that doesn't jive with what you were saying before. But agreeing that a skill like history can recall facts seems like a pretty big departure from what you were saying so now I'm confused.

 

[Coroc]

I don't want to retread the same discussion we've had before that what a character experiences gives some implicit information, and therefore may need mechanical resolution (can you read dwarven? do you smell the wet werewolf in the next room?) Let's bring this back to what were originally talking about instead of going off down that tangent. Maybe an actual example would be useful so I can see what you do and hopefully understand it better.

The party enters a courtyard. It's centerpiece is a 12' tall stone status of a hobgoblin holding some sort of elaborate scepter, standing on a plinth.

As DM, you know that the party may be able to identify the particular hobgoblin in the statue, a famous historical general who's name would be useful later in overcoming a puzzle. Also that the scepter is a religious icon for a splinter sect of Maglubiyet that has the motto "Cunning shall rule the battlefield", which is a password to get past magical guardians without fighting them in the next room.

I believe that you give out just the information that doesn't require a check. 12' statue basics get described.

Samantha (a player), says "I examine the statue visually without approaching. Do I know anything about it or see anything besides the scepter that catches my eye?"

Samantha is playing Dakota Smith, an archeologist diviner wizard, who happens to be proficient in both history and religion (as well as arcana and some others, but history and religion are likely candidates for getting those two pieces of information).

What's the process from here?

Of particular interest to me in this scenario is (a) avoiding "split brain" where a character forgets everything they know and are experiencing except one thing they are focusing on and (b) dealing with an uncertainty that has a meaningful repercussion on success, and the only repercussion of failure is not having that success, which was the original question.

Samantha and only her character gets a DC10 history check and a DC15 religion check.
I asume here no one else has relevant skills on that two fields.
If Samantha is a hobgoblin/grew up with hobgoblins/has spent alot of time with hobgoblins she might get advantage.
Another player trying to help has to invent something really convincing since this is a pure knowledge task.
Ok he could come up with i massage samanthas shoulders so she relaxes and can concentrate on the analysis, then i would give 1d4 extra, like a guidance spell.

The statues in the next room are described a bit vague, i would suggest investigatio nis the right tool.
If Samantha plays it out very cool like climbing the statue analysing the script with a looking glass and making a rubbing of the inscription for her research documentatio nthen i would give advantage eventually.