GMforPowergamers
Legend
and none of tthis says
just that YOU would not require a roll... not that anyone could see it... becuse again I am not used to anything in the game being hidden so moving a signal object reveals it plane as day
D&D General "I make a perception check."
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
Swarmkeeper
Hero
Um... ok. Do you mind taking it down a notch?
A concealed door is visible once the thing concealing it is removed. That's the scenario @Maxperson proposed.
Do you disagree with that definition of "concealed door"?
Good!
It's only easy to find a hidden thing when the thing obscuring it is removed. Otherwise, probably not so easy, depending on the situation.
iserith
Magic Wordsmith
Except I don't tell you that. You may be conflating what I'm saying with what some other poster is saying. We are not a monolith, even if we agree on some things.
What I will say and have said is what the DMG says: "Roleplaying can diminish if players feel that their die rolls, rather than their decisions and characterizations, always determine success." If my decisions have little to no impact on the DC or whether I have advantage or disadvantage, then yeah, I'm going to just ask to make ability checks because that's all that really matters. That game is definitely not for me.
Alternatively, the DM can balance "the use of dice against deciding on success" thereby encouraging "players to strike a balance between relying on their bonuses and abilities and paying attention to the game and immersing themselves in its world." If I know that my decision may obviate the need for an ability check, then I'm going to pay attention to the game and make good decisions in context. Sometimes I'll still have to roll because the outcome remains uncertain or the meaningful consequence for failure still exists, but I at least had a chance to avoid that outcome. Perhaps my good decision making will net me a lower DC or advantage or disadvantage on the check, too.
GMforPowergamers
Legend
only if you promise to not accuse anyone else in the thread of taking player agency if they tell you they don't
I disagree that I have not in many years that I can remember had a concealed door that required 1 item be moved and then be clear as day AND required any real table time to find it...
I am now imagining the game if no one said they checked behind the book case
again not something I am used to in D&D...
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Wait. Seriously. A door set into a wall that is plain as day if you move the bookcase can be missed? I strongly disagree with that. If you move the bookcase, you WILL see that door just sitting there in the wall. No roll is necessary.
Unless you're misreading this.
"The scenario was a door set into the wall such that peering behind the bookcase could miss it, but moving the bookcase could not."
As for you not being used to such things, I have been encountering them since 1e. That's the point of the DMG going out of its way to specify the difference between a secret door(DMG page 103) and a concealed door(DMG page 104). A concealed door is one that is just hidden from view somehow. Reveal it to view and there is no roll to find it.
Swarmkeeper
Hero
I'm only responding to what was stated - which ended up being a miscommunication. I apologize.
Concealed doors behind tapestries are practically a trope in D&D, IME. I'm not sure that's something that you can disagree with. Something maybe you don't see or remember in your games, sure.
Mannahnin
Scion of Murgen (He/Him)
This paragraph comes off as 99% in accord with how I run games.
I haven't seen a single person in all 51 pages of this thread say they would "force" a player to "just say something". In practice, it's all about the conversation. The dialogue. If the player doesn't have a clear enough picture of the scene in their head, they can ask questions and I'll clarify the situation in front of their character. I gave an example of searching a room with bold text headers for DM & Players dialogue showing what this looks like. Then quoted myself after folks ignored it.
Sure. The conversation is necessary. If the description was intended to indicate that the table is a very poor or impossible place to hide, and the player says they're going to try to hide under it, I'll double-check that we're on the same page about what this table looks like and exactly how little concealment it gives the character.
Right. Because when you describe your processes of play, those processes of play require filling in blanks where the players don't provide them. Like what Celebrim was talking about with the Transcript of Play concept. The way you have described running your game indicates that at least some of the time (more than me in my game, say) you are the guy writing the descriptions of what the characters do which would go in that transcript (if it existed), most particularly after your players say "[skill name]" and roll a die.
And I'm sure you don't use this control to "gotcha" them, but they're clearly ceding control of some of their character actions to you.
Last edited:
GMforPowergamers
Legend
in this case the 'you' was general... and FYI I don't keep note of who said what that is why I say things like "Someone said up thread"
and I can disargree with mike mearls, chris perkins and you all at the same time... becuse my lived experence was and still is that once the roleplay was allowed but not forced we got MORE not LESS...
although CAN could be doing a lot of lifting. maybe they just mean it as a warning to monitor how your indvidual group handles it... or maybe they meant something else.
I don't understand why the role play needs to give you an advantage... is not the benefit the 'having fun' part?
again I saw our RP go up both in quality and quantity when we started doing this and I see nothing to indicated it is dropping
part of this comes from since we spend less time on scenes the players don't give details and more on scenes where they do, in general we spend more game time with details then not
I am not intrested in playing that game
iserith
Magic Wordsmith
If anyone is trying to undercut what someone else is saying by showing that two DMs don't agree that a given approach to a task is an auto-success or auto-failure, you are making a mistake in my view.
What matters is what someone's individual DM says at their given table. DMs at different tables may disagree on what counts for automatic success or failure even with substantially similar context in the fictional situation. Hopefully the individual DM is consistent with their adjudication within the bounds of their own game so that players know, for example, that looking behind a bookshelf may automatically reveal a hidden door, if there is one there. That another DM rules different is not only irrelevant, but it isn't saying anything substantive about an approach to the game that balances the calls for automatic success (or failure) with calls to make ability checks.
What matters is what someone's individual DM says at their given table. DMs at different tables may disagree on what counts for automatic success or failure even with substantially similar context in the fictional situation. Hopefully the individual DM is consistent with their adjudication within the bounds of their own game so that players know, for example, that looking behind a bookshelf may automatically reveal a hidden door, if there is one there. That another DM rules different is not only irrelevant, but it isn't saying anything substantive about an approach to the game that balances the calls for automatic success (or failure) with calls to make ability checks.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Heck, the 5e DMG says that they are normally found without an ability check and are found by stating where you look.
"Normally, no ability check is required to find a concealed door. A character need only look in the right place or take the right steps to reveal the door."
Such as moving the bookcase.
