D&D 5E Impossible Ability Test

[was]

Not sure, but is there more than one thread for this? Alternatively, are you a moderator now? Be friendly, son.

EDIT: My bad. I see now that there is, in fact, two threads about this. Have an XP for your trouble.

Don't forget books. The character is question is a scholar, so reading about something she'd never seen is completely reasonable.

TY for calling me son. Makes me feel young again.

More seriously, no I am not a moderator. It was a polite request. I am not sure why you think it was unfriendly. I did say please and thank you.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The good way to handle it would have been to set a ridiculously high DC and just say that the character didn't recognise it, without explanation.

This can be rather unsatisfying to the player, especially after rolling a 20 for a modified result of 25 or more. If the outcome of the test is not in question, then players are likely to respond more poorly in that situation than if you just say that no check is allowed.

So: Should someone who studied Religion and is proficient in Religion be able to roll a Religion test to try and identify something related to Religion? Or does it depend on his background (the descriptive part, as in "I lived near a forest")?

Dice are used to resolve uncertainty, but a check is only called for when the outcome is uncertain. The DM is the one who judges whether the outcome of any action is certain or uncertain.

It is often the case that player characters find themselves in situation where there is no possible chance that they could know about something. If an ancient civilization has been lost for thousands of years, then there's a less than 5% chance that someone halfway-across-the-world would know about their customs, so no roll should be allowed. Even scholars.

If the descriptive part of your background had it that you grew up in a city adjacent to the jungle where that civilization was lost, then maybe you would get to try that DC 25 check, based on unsubstantiated rumors that never made their way out to the world at large. The descriptive part of your background is vital toward determining what your character might actually know.

 

[Li Shenron]

We are having a problem with our DM. He suddenly stated that a scholar elf could not even roll a test to try and recognize a creature from the desert because he had never been in the desert. What do you think about that?

There is no universal answer, because it depends on the level of cooperative storytelling in your game: in some games the DM completely provides the world and the players just play their PCs, in some other games both players and DMs provide ideas about how the fantasy world is.

In the first case, the DM decides what knowledge exists and is available to a PC (or even if there is any desert at all in the world).

In the second case, the DM allows players to create their PCs more freely and let the PC's abilities define (at least partially) what exists in the world.

With specific relation to Knowledge skills, the first DM is totally entitled to say to even a PC that is specialized e.g. in geography skills, that there something in the world that she still cannot know at all, simply because maybe no one knows. The second DM is eventually going to let the dice roll decide.

The discussion exists because we have a policy of house rules: they have to be agreed upon by everyone. But he's saying this is not a house rule. It's his interpretation of the book.

Whether it is a house rule vs an interpretation, is probably a house rule itself!

Try to have your group answer the previous question, about how much they want PC's characteristics (and therefore player's decisions) to have a meta-influence in shaping the fantasy world, or if instead they want to allow the DM to have more control over it.

Just keep in mind that more freedom to the players is not always a good thing (in this case, too many cooks can spoil the recipe), so you have to find your suitable compromise.

 

[Henrix]

This can be rather unsatisfying to the player, especially after rolling a 20 for a modified result of 25 or more. If the outcome of the test is not in question, then players are likely to respond more poorly in that situation than if you just say that no check is allowed.

Dice are used to resolve uncertainty, but a check is only called for when the outcome is uncertain. The DM is the one who judges whether the outcome of any action is certain or uncertain.

There is an uncertainty to be resolved.

If the player gets a high enough result they will know that the information is, at least to them at this stage, not obtainable.

With a low roll they only know that they are not familiar with it.

Just like a perception check to see whether there really is something moving out there in the dark. In that case calling for a check gives uncertainty, which is fun.

 

[Cyberen]

And, by the way, killing you with Tiamat is, by RAW, the recommended option in this case...

 

[steenan]

I agree that this is a GM call.

On the other hand, I completely don't understand the reasoning behind the GM's decision here. If the character had been in the desert and had met the monster, they wouldn't need a roll, because they would have the knowledge. The roll is there to decide is the character read/heard about something when they haven't encountered it personally.

But I generally tend to err on the side of giving too much information to my players, not too little...

 

[1of3]

It doesn't matter, whether the character has ever been in a desert. A knowledge check might be impossible, if now one the character learned from, either directly or through books, has ever been in the desert. Even then a knowledgeable character might make an educated guess, and at least determine what known creature it most closely resembles.

Please note: The GM is always WRONG. I need to stress, this because everyone else here is redacted, who will argue that the GM is always right. That is obviously moronic, because now one is always right. It follows that the GM is always wrong.

Mode note: Insulting people isn't acceptable. Nor is using less-than-clean language to do it. Rule #1 of EN World is "Keep it civil" - we expect you to abide by that rule, folks. ~Umbran

 

[wedgeski]

There is no right answer, but "No" is rarely the right answer.

IME the game is not going to be made worse by letting the players roll on this kind of thing. The DM is still in control of both the DC and of the information he gives to the player. If the creature is particularly important to the adventure or the campaign, then it's an opportunity to provide clues to the PC's or, on a particularly bad roll, throw 'em the odd red herring.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Over all the DM is right as this is an NPC BUT...Side bar and talk to the DM as it all comes down to knowledge and this JUST may be bad DMing and running the NPC.

IF the scholar does not have it the knowledge, he can't recognize it BUT the DM should be looking at a number of things; can the animal be found in other regions which the scholar does have knowledge on. The next, the number of books and materials available to the scholar (there are a number of on-line generators that can be used for this). The scholar, would say; "at 50 GP a day I can see what I can find out, come back tomorrow at this time for a status update, that will be 50 GP now." Tomorrow the scholar would have an answer or ask for another 50 GP to continue, repeat as needed.

 

[sithramir]

I think he should have allowed a roll with a high DC roll. That's the point of a scholar to know random things.

The only thing you might point out is that you ARE a scholar and make sure you tell him what things interested you as a scholar. If you liked far away exotic places then why wouldn't you get a check?

Really need to make sure he has what you think you had interest in reading.

Like said above if he said oh you might have knowledge about this creature because it was from your local area you might say "no I wouldnt because I researched exotic things" if it was local you probably shouldn't need a roll if that wasn't something yoy r character read into.

YOU choose what you want your character to know. It might not be relevant or useful on a creature like this example but it is your character