D&D (2024) IF you're allowing a PC to roll, WHEN does autosuccess matter?

[Maxperson]

But as soon as you assign a TN of 20 to the Sage-background, Proficient-in-Religion cleric, the wording of the rules that say that a roll is warranted when the TN is no less than 5 and no greater than 30 would be allow the player of the Brute Barbarian to say "hey, a roll is warranted, oh, I made a 20".

The player is not allowed by RAW to say the roll is warranted. Only the DM can say that, and any criteria the DM uses, high DC, proficiency, not an elf, whatever, is reason for a roll not to be appropriate.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you but what reference are you using in the rules that explicitly advocates for "trained only" in 5e?

There are three instances in the 5e DMG where only those proficient in something get a roll to succeed.

 

[Parmandur]

There are three instances in the 5e DMG where only those proficient in something get a roll to succeed.

I would grant that the DMG could make it more clear...good thing theybare writing a new one! But what is written, combined with consistent practice demonstrating RAI, makes it pretty clear already.

 

[Yaarel]

I would grant that the DMG could make it more clear...good thing theybare writing a new one! But what is written, combined with consistent practice demonstrating RAI, makes it pretty clear already.

If ODD clarifies it, I hope it specifies that the DM might require a skill/tool proficiency for certain ability checks, rather than the skill or tool itself requiring proficiency.

Some things depend on context, and only the DM can adjudicate it.

For example, a Bard probably can use Performance to play ANY musical instrument. But the Bard can only spellcast with certain instruments. (I would treat the voice itself as if a specific musical instrument proficiency.)

 

[Reynard]

@Reynard here it is, admittedly it could be more clear: that's where "what do the Adventure Modules do?" and "how do the designers run games?" are extremely relevant, because...they consistently use Proficiency gating at DM discretion. In addition, and probably more important to indicate how the game is understood by the broader culture of players, that's how Matt Mercer runs Critical Role. "Do you have X Proficiency?" is not a hard question in practice to deterif a roll is doable.

It doesn't say what you are suggesting. The GM has lattitde in 5E to play it your way -- and I do -- but it is a 3.x artifact, not a 5E rule.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Do you let players roll for everything? You have to set bounds of what is possible in your world. It's part of the job.

I don’t even like the “let them roll” language. One character tries to lift the cart; the dM narrates a failure. Another character tries and this time the DM asks for a roll.

There is no ‘let’. There is only do.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you but what reference are you using in the rules that explicitly advocates for "trained only" in 5e?

To me the point isn’t “trained only” it’s that the DM decides. And the DM might factor in what they know about the character, including proficiency.

 

[Reynard]

I don’t even like the “let them roll” language. One character tries to lift the cart; the dM narrates a failure. Another character tries and this time the DM asks for a roll.

There is no ‘let’. There is only do.

At least with something like lifting we have a starting number from the carrying rules. The same with jumping a little extra farther. In both of these cases I think I would lean on a variant I sued in 3.x where each point after 10 gives you a percentage increase in your max (5% I think I used to use but I don't remember) rather than set a specific target number.

 

[Parmandur]

It doesn't say what you are suggesting. The GM has lattitde in 5E to play it your way -- and I do -- but it is a 3.x artifact, not a 5E rule.

Yet it is how the 5E Adventures all operate, and how the 5E designers play the rules...

Again, the new DMG could stand to make this more clear, but the autosuccess rule doesn't create any weirdness if this is done.

 

[Reynard]

Yet it is how the 5E Adventures all operate

This makes me curious. i have never noticed it, but a) I have only run a few of the adventures and b) I chnage them pretty significantly when I do. Can you recall an example, preferably in one of the following adventures (since I have copies on the shelves in front of me): Princes, Storm King, Avernus, Dragon heist or Rime? You don't have to give me page and line, just where abouts it was in the adventure. Again, I'm not trying to gotcha you, I am just curious how they set them up.