D&D 5E Intelligence and Wisdom Checks (Skills) as GM Tool for Plot Rationing or Expository Dump

[Quickleaf]

Pile-on checks are one of my pet peeves. One thing I like about strictly enforcing the play look or going all G&A, is that it means make checks only when I call for them.
Another solution that I implemented after encountering the Group Check (BTW, one of those "why didn't I think of that? - no, wait, why didn't Gygax think of that in '73" type mechanics), was that piling on resulted in a group check, as everyone weighed in with their own opinions, rumors, speculations & preconceived notions (rather like an forum discussion really), debated for a bit and came to a consensus - more than half failures and that consensus was wrong.

In theory, I totally get both of those solutions – strictly enforcing "you can make checks only when DM says" & using group checks for lore rolls. It makes sense, especially with how aggravating pile-on checks can be for a DM.

However, in actual play, I have only rarely seen those work when it comes to lore rolls, specifically. At least in my games.

Here's how those two approaches have played out at my table. Of course, YMMV!

The first plays out with a player asking "what do I know about ___?" or "can I make an Intelligence check to recall what I know" or rolling and saying "I rolled a 19 for History if it's relevant" as a shorthand way for an experienced player to anticipate the DM's call for a check and speed the game along. My experience of actual play is that – sure, I as DM technically have the final say over when a check is called for – but it's much more collaborative than that. If there's a definite narrative reason why making a check would not be possible, sure I'll unequivocally say "no", but more often it makes sense to say "yes, and..."

The second plays out with a player wanting to know something and the DM (me) calling for a check – then either me forgetting to ask if anyone else wants to join in on a group check OR the scenario precluding the possibility of a group check (e.g. one PC acting independently or separated from party) OR it not make sense for any other PCs to participate in a group check because that one PC is the specialist – and then after the check, the players conversing and another player wanting to make a check after the initial check.

I think the root of the problem lies in interpreting a lore roll as "the character focuses and tries to recall what they know." It's a very easy to grasp interpretation, but it limits the stakes to "you misremember ____." Which can work every now or then, but it can get old doing it on every failed lore check. It's also not something that every player is comfortable role-playing.

Whereas interpreting a lore check more like a flashback scene offers a lot more in the way of potential stakes, because then the DM can introduce complications into the past of the PC or the monster/NPC/place/faction in question.

 

[Garthanos]

The point I was making is that, given that, these skills aren't really all that important.

Intelligence the Dump Stat has returned in force hear it roar.

 

[pemerton]

I'm just trying to understand how other people who voted "never" run their games. Given that there is no right or wrong...

Do you ever call (or allow) intelligence or wisdom knowledge checks in your game? Because it seems like your answer is no.

Some examples - none from 5e, but some at least would be adaptable to 5e.

* 4e D&D - the PCs were trying to persuade some Maruts that the time of the Dusk War had not yet come. This was being resolved as a skill challenge. After it had been going on for a bit, the player of the invoker/wizard knew that one successful check was required for overall success. He declares that his PC has intuited what final argument would sway the Maruts, and then rolled an Insight check. It succeeded. I invited the player to tell us what that argument was, which he did. And the Maruts were thereby swayed.

* Marvel Heroic RP - the PCs are lost in a dungeon (mechanically, this was a type of debuff - a Lost in the Dungeon complication). They come to a room which has strange runes in it (mechanically, this was a scene distinction - Strange Runes - comparable to an aspect in Fate). One of the players (the same as in the previous example) declares that his PC is reading the runes, thinking that they might contain some clue as to where the PCs are in the dungeon. He built the appropriate dice pool, made his check, and succeeded - the runes in fact did contain information about where the PCs were in the dungeon (and the Lost in the Dungeon complication was removed).

* Burning Wheel - two PCs are trying to sneak into a mage's tower via the catacombs. The player of one makes a check agains Catacombs-wise and failes - they're lost! That's the narration - the consequence is that their rival, whom they'd earlier drugged so they could get to the tower before she did, wakes up and is now on the move to the tower. (They see her when they come back up into the streets of the city.) So now it's a simple race, and the PCs lose. So the rival gets to the tower first and decapitates another NPC. One of the PCs wanted the NPC for his own purposes (being under a geas to bring the NPC back to a dark naga for blood sacrifice) and so now looks around for some sort of vessel to catch the spilling blood - and succeeds ona Perception check, and so spots a jug on a table and is able to use it to catch the blood of the NPC.

All these actual play examples are a bit like @Manbearcat's hypothetical above, in that they involve a degree of uncertainty in respect of the content of the fiction (on everyone's part, not just the players) which then gets filled out via the process of the knowledge-type check - either in a way that is good or is bad for the PCs, depending on success or failure of the check.

 

[Manbearcat]

@tetrasodium

I don’t have time for a full reply.

Just a couple clarifications:

1) I was envisioning the PCs emerging from the Fey Portal actually upon that sheet of ice (a massive frozen sea perhaps), it’s expanse spreading out one way with the forest flanking them.

2) I’m not sure where FR or setting stuff is coming from here. I just made up Dawnmote off the cuff (basically a Summer Court themed oasis in the frozen domain).

I think you’re a bit bogged down in the details. Just stuck with:

- on frozen expanse flanked by forest.

- trying to suds our travel direction via environmental inputs/deduction.

- success but with cost or consequence result of action resolution (per 5e DMG) so new obstacle emerges.

 

[tetrasodium]

@tetrasodium

I don’t have time for a full reply.

Just a couple clarifications:

1) I was envisioning the PCs emerging from the Fey Portal actually upon that sheet of ice (a massive frozen sea perhaps), it’s expanse spreading out one way with the forest flanking them.

2) I’m not sure where FR or setting stuff is coming from here. I just made up Dawnmote off the cuff (basically a Summer Court themed oasis in the frozen domain).

I think you’re a bit bogged down in the details. Just stuck with:

- on frozen expanse flanked by forest.

- trying to suds our travel direction via environmental inputs/deduction.

- success but with cost or consequence result of action resolution (per 5e DMG) so new obstacle emerges.

Thank for clearing that up, it makes things easier to comment on knowing it's not too confusing. I think the example is a bad application of using a skill. Partly because getting to the dawnmote seems to be the main goal& too nebulous, but also because it's boring "Lets go this way" might as well be a coinflip & doesn't need or really benefit from a knowledge check without wayy too much information to make the example useful. So lets turn it around & add some spicy action

Situation:

• The players found the dawnmote(mcguffin), but the nazi* fey who were the former owners are not happy about it being stolen last session.
• Last session ended with the party successfully escaping from the fortress where the dawnmote was with Alice** using her survival skill to lead the group on a mad dash into the dark forest of unsettling trees... Three days have since passed in the blink of an eye for reasons of making this interesting .
• During those three days, the party is informed that the bad guys have been hunting them & the well armed large patrols seem to be closing in. Clearly this is not a situation that can be handled by simply rolling stealth or something because there are an insane number of Nazi fey at the fortress's defense & the queen thinks nothing about throwing away the lives of a few hundred if it means recapturing the dawnmote. This so far is literally all the party knows.
• Alice has an idea to use survival to find an herb or plant they can use to make a scent masking paste or similar that will throw off the displacer beast*** trackers being used by the fey thinking that this will help loosen the knots in that net closing in on them.... So she brings up the idea, the gm asks why on a few things & agrees the twist is cool so after a successful nature/survival/whatever check, the gm declares that Alice is able to find a small clearing in the dark forest of creepy trees with a good amount of orcish catnip... and a pack of Horrid Wolves.
• that the party deals with the horrid wolves & grinds up the orcish catnip using Bob's herbalist tools
• Having been smeared in Orcish catnip.the Nazi-fey tracking units are having more difficulty closing in, but things are still going poorly because there are still two hours left in the session even after dealing with the Horrid Wolves.Chuck has been wondering why he got woodworkers tool proficiency in a d&d game, but is getting into things & likes this new gm style hes seeing because now he's getting ideas... Having watched Klaus the other night, he remembers a scene where the characters make a speedy sled. Chuck brings up using his woodworking tools to make a sled, the forest is too thick to sled through, but maybe that ice field will work if Bob wildshape's into a reindeer or something to pull it+.
• So the Party starts cutting down one of those unsettling trees & finds out that it's some irrelevant monster or infested by them. After killing the monster, Chuck fails miserably at making the sled by rolling a 2.
• No Chuck doesn't just fail, that's boring. & like everyone else in the party... Chuck is capable person leading a dramatic life. The sled is built, Bob is harnessed up, everyone hops on & they start moving as fast as bob can dash, things seem good... Unfortunately they find bob's mistake when they get to the ice field because the rails sound like this screaming across the ice & now there are hundreds of nazi-fey streaming out of the forest making it clear that stopping to fix it would be quite a horrible idea.
• Lets say the session ends there. Next week picks up & there are some mounted shifters gaining on the party's screaming sled... Unfortunately, these are the shifters that Dave got in a bar fight with a couple weeks back & they are still upset because he killed one of their magebred direwolves++ causing the chase scene things are unfolding into.
• The exciting combat between the party on a poorly made sled & the shifter totallynotjustamotorcyclegang is irrelevant, but lots of exciting & cool stuff happens. Eddie comes up with a plan to work with Frank the artificer in order to hack+++ the casting of his prepared expeditious retreat spell from self to Bob the reindeer. The GM agrees this is cool but that it's not going to be an all the time thing & it might not always be possible to do that kinda thing because magic in d&d is just too powerful to be making pretzels out of all the time. The pair work together & between Eddie's charisma(arcana) explaining the bits of the spell & Frank's Intelligence(artificer's toolkit) things were no quite good enough Bob the reindeer winds up with a backpack that's got jets & istead of Eddie's spellslot fully powering the spell, so is Dave's very body, He's going to wind up with 3 or 4 points of exhaustion when they get away to safety but that's a problem for next session & the players should tune in next week to see how it gets resolved ;D

* Nazi's are a great generic bad guy for examples, their motivation is always irrelevant & they are always bad
** Alice Bob Cindy Dave, Eddie, Frank are great names because they are the alphabet & can later just be A B C D etc
*** Why displacer beasts instead of hounds or something? Alice has an ability to see through illusions & thinks they are cool. For purposes of example, the GM never mentioned displacer beasts & they were not present in the fortress
+ Reciprocity is absolutely critical for these kinds of plans to be interesting. it should always lower the DCs or give better results because now you have two or more players being awesome from one action rather than just one player fixing the problem again. IME running open fate games, that one player is almost always the one who really gets how to think outside the box instead of just using a skill creatively. Without reciprocity pushed in by either that player or the gm you wind up with the sidekick cheerleader squad bored. Unfortunately, the difficult part is getting enough of the group to realize the awesome powers they have with proactive ideas collaborated with the gm & table to keep the game from becoming boring.
++ In many games,, Dave might say "Uhh.. I don't remember that... when did that happen?" but Dave & the GM know that this is fitting with Dave's character & more importantly we now have a chase scene!
+++ Success at cost is great and all, but it really doesn't work with standard heroic fantasy as the d&d mechanics are structured. It's important to have the ability to make rules exceptions & come up with interesting unplanned applications of skills & abilities that might color outside the lines or you wind up with skill challenges like this. Unfortunately that sort of thing is so far outside the realm of what d&d or traditional top down ttrpgs lay out that a lot of players have extreme difficulty even considering it & by extension their PCs wind up being puppets who do whatever people tell them to & their character goes from being a capable individual leading a dramatic life to being a bland boring solution drawn from hammerspace as a olution& immediately rreturned there because unlike dave the reindeer who was doing awesome stuff while the party was dealing with the direwolf rider gang, these players are a distraacting wet blanket covering a bazooka with zero ability to cause any dramatic action like the direwolf gang Dave's hot headed nature created.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Intelligence the Dump Stat has returned in force hear it roar.

"...i'm a monster...rawr! ...""

 

[Tony Vargas]

I think the root of the problem lies in interpreting a lore roll as "the character focuses and tries to recall what they know." It's a very easy to grasp interpretation, but it limits the stakes to "you misremember ____." Which can work every now or then, but it can get old doing it on every failed lore check. It's also not something that every player is comfortable role-playing.

There's a range of checks where the player knowing the result of the die roll undermines the possible consequence of the check, if, as you point out, the player isn't comfortable compartmentalizing player vs character knowledge (which is problematic in quite a number of other ways, as well).

Whereas interpreting a lore check more like a flashback scene offers a lot more in the way of potential stakes, because then the DM can introduce complications into the past of the PC or the monster/NPC/place/faction in question.

Not sure how that helps?

 

[Garthanos]

"...i'm a monster...rawr! ...""

put the pointy hat on and stand in the corner you...

 

[Quickleaf]

Whereas interpreting a lore check more like a flashback scene offers a lot more in the way of potential stakes, because then the DM can introduce complications into the past of the PC or the monster/NPC/place/faction in question.

Not sure how that helps?

I've noticed it helps keep my players engaged, encourages incorporating their backstories, and most importantly reduces the knee-jerk reaction to ask for a pile-on lore check. Here's an actual play example from my game:

Lizardfolk Rogue/Warlock Player: (party is encountering a yellow musk creeper for the first time, having just rolled initiative when it surprised them) "What do I know about yellow musk creepers based on my herbalism and Survival proficiencies, and maybe lizardfolk lore?"

DM: (giving some baseline information based on PC background, then calling for a check) "You know it's a dangerous plant monster that disguises itself as tropical bromeliads. Make an Intelligence check with proficiency?" (player rolls a 9) "You know it creates other plant monsters using corpses of poisoned victims." (this is misinformation that twists the truth – it actually creates undead and poison isn't part of the equation, in fact a yellow musk creeper doesn't use poison & can be affected by poison just like a human can)

Wizard Player: "Hmm. What does my character know about yellow musk creepers? Can I make a Nature check?" (asking for a pile-on check)

DM: (instead of saying No outright, I present stakes) "Sure you can, but your Nature check will represent hands-on study of a yellow musk creeper which you dissected during your arcane studies. If you roll low, that means during your studies you accidentally cut open its musk sac and have suffered a low-grade infection and chronic cough since then, meaning you'll be more susceptible to its attacks and musk than normal. Would you like to roll?" (I was thinking disadvantage vs. musk WIS save and vulnerability to psychic damage delivered by the yellow musk creeper)

Wizard Player: "Uhhh, no. It's not worth the risk. I listen to my lizardman friend."

 

[Garthanos]

Love this thread bunches....