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

[Reynard]

So the DC is hard. Dc 24. Three characters ask if they can do it. 2 trained 1 untrained

The 2 trained have a +7 and a +3.
The untrained one though has 20 stat and a kick stone so they would have +6.

Who gets to roll?

If the knowledge is skill gated, the 2 trained do. +3 could borrow untrained's rock and get lucky.

 

[Bill Zebub]

So the DC is hard. Dc 24. Three characters ask if they can do it. 2 trained 1 untrained

The 2 trained have a +7 and a +3.
The untrained one though has 20 stat and a kick stone so they would have +6.

Who gets to roll?

This is where context, and the challenge of having meaningful consequences to ability checks, matters.

If you are talking about who gets to check if they recall some lore, I think that illustrates the problematic nature of resolving those things with ability checks, and why I don't like to use them.

If you are talking about who gets to try to pick the lock before the guard finishes the circuit, with a failure attracting attention, then it's up to the players to decide who is going to try.

If you are talking about who gets to try to jump over the lava, heck anybody who wants to can give it a shot. (Mwuhahahahaha)

The larger point being that if consequences are defined, the DM doesn't have to made decisions about who gets to try.

 

[Reynard]

This is where context, and the challenge of having meaningful consequences to ability checks, matters.

If you are talking about who gets to check if they recall some lore, I think that illustrates the problematic nature of resolving those things with ability checks, and why I don't like to use them.

If you are talking about who gets to try to pick the lock before the guard finishes the circuit, with a failure attracting attention, then it's up to the players to decide who is going to try.

If you are talking about who gets to try to jump over the lava, heck anybody who wants to can give it a shot. (Mwuhahahahaha)

The larger point being that if consequences are defined, the DM doesn't have to made decisions about who gets to try.

I think this is another place where jettisoning skills would make the game work better. Do you have a background, class or other element that would let you do this thing and give you your proficiency bonus? If so, great!

 

[jmartkdr2]

One situation the new rule changes is opposed checks. Previously, a nat 20 +2 perception check would not see a nat 19 +9 stealth result. Under the new rules, the nat 20 succeeds and therefore sees the hider.

(The playtest doesn’t say what happens with two nat 20’s on an opposed roll unless I missed it, but it’s not a complete rule book)

 

[Parmandur]

So the DC is hard. Dc 24. Three characters ask if they can do it. 2 trained 1 untrained

The 2 trained have a +7 and a +3.
The untrained one though has 20 stat and a kick stone so they would have +6.

Who gets to roll?

Depends on a bunch of other factors, but I can imagine many scenarios where the two trained PCs can roll and the +6 untrained PC cannot.

For example, to get an important clue about the activities of the Cult of Set, the Cleric and the Paladin can roll, but the Wizard who disdains the gods cannot because they never studied Religion. Despite being an intellectual mediocrity, the Paladin has spent 35 years praying the Hyns of Horus 5 times a day, that counts for something even against genius. This gives the Paladin the chance to show how their character brings something to the table that the mega-smart Wizard cannot.

 

[Thommy H-H]

One situation the new rule changes is opposed checks. Previously, a nat 20 +2 perception check would not see a nat 19 +9 stealth result. Under the new rules, the nat 20 succeeds and therefore sees the hider.

(The playtest doesn’t say what happens with two nat 20’s on an opposed roll unless I missed it, but it’s not a complete rule book)

My prediction is that opposed checks won't be in the basic rules (they might be an option in the DMG perhaps) - look at the redone grapple rules, which was basically the only time anyone used them. Stealth, surprise, etc. is also probably going to be heavily redone/clarified, since it's been one of the biggest stumbling blocks in the last 10 years, with the vague implication about opposed checks helping nobody. It'll all be based around flat DCs from passive Perception, or the PC's Dex (Stealth) checks. Like a lot of things so far, they'll rework it based on how everyone has figured out how to do it since they cobbled it together in 2014.

 

[Peter BOSCO'S]

I don't understand why this would be difficult.

A citizen is trapped under a cart. The str 6 halfling wants to lift it. The DM determines it won't be possible, no roll. The str 16 goliath wants to try. Roll.

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.

Why would either of them roll? Don't you just compute the weight of the cart and its contents, compare it to the players Carrying Capacity, and determine it from that?

 

[reelo]

Why would either of them roll? Don't you just compute the weight of the cart and its contents, compare it to the players Carrying Capacity, and determine it from that?

This would call for the good old "Bend bars/lift gates" roll from 2E.

 

[Li Shenron]

So, under what situation would a nat 20 be a success without the "autosuccess rule" AND the GM asked for a roll anyway? If say, he determines that a character needs to roll 27 on the D20 to succeed, he's supposed to not ask for a roll. So no possibility of rolling 20. If there is a possibility of success, 20 will already include a success.

Same, in reverse, with 1.

It is possible that the DM has already determined the task is impossible but doesn't want the players to know.

So the DM can ask for a roll even if will fail on a natural 20. Unless the player rolls 20, they won't know they are wasting time on an impossible task. If they really roll a natural 20, representing the PC doing their absolute best, they fail BUT discover that the task was impossible after all.

 

[aco175]

I could see where a 6 STR halfling gets a roll to move a cart on a commoner. If he happens to have Athletics skill instead of just strength, or maybe the halfling wants to use a rope and make a fulcrum or pully or something smart instead of just lifting the cart. It could be a different DC than the goliath with 16 STR just trying to pick it up. Heck, it could be a different skill.

Remember that big argument about how halflings should not get strength penalties and goliaths or orcs I think at the time might not get the +2 strength. I think it was in a thread about just assigning stat bonus of +2/+1 at character creation. Maybe I'm just reading some into this thread with adding the halfling and goliath part instead of just having a PC with 6 STR.