Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 7161764" data-attributes="member: 2011">And here we differ.Someone establishing a goal and describing approach is no guarantee of success. Search for pit traps. Use a 10' pole. To me, this could give the PC advantage on a check, it doesn't flat give him the autosuccess.As a player, I don't really want to describe in minutia how I am accomplishing a given task. My PC has a skill set. He is better at some skills than others. He has some ability scores better than others. I state my goal, the dice decide if I was successful based on difficulty. I don't know how he picks a lock, he just does.If I do explain in minutia, it might result in the DM giving me a +2 bonus, or advantage, or no change at all. It could even be negative:DM: &quot;Wait, what? You are putting the Goat carcass on your PC's head to try to impress the chief?&quot; Roll persuasion at disadvantage. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing&nbsp; &nbsp; :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" />On the tripwire example, again we seem to differ. The guy is searching. Yes, he stated pit traps because earlier in the adventuring day, the DM shouted &quot;PIT TRAP!!!&quot; by putting one on the board. But to me, the PC is searching.He gets an ability check roll to find the tripwire precisely because he is searching. It might be at a -2 penalty because he is using a 10' pole (i.e. not using the proper approach in the DM's mind), on the other hand, a trap should target a specific point in space, so being 10 feet away for a given trap might give him advantage.Even if he misses the roll, it could still effectively be the equivalent of an auto-success because he is out of range of the trap. He missed the roll, the trap went off, but nobody got hurt. If he had not been using the 10' pole, someone probably would have gotten hurt. If he had made the roll, he would not have triggered the trap, but he would have noticed the tripwire and the PCs might be able to use that trap later on by luring foes to this location.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 7161764, member: 2011"] And here we differ. Someone establishing a goal and describing approach is no guarantee of success. Search for pit traps. Use a 10' pole. To me, this could give the PC advantage on a check, it doesn't flat give him the autosuccess. As a player, I don't really want to describe in minutia how I am accomplishing a given task. My PC has a skill set. He is better at some skills than others. He has some ability scores better than others. I state my goal, the dice decide if I was successful based on difficulty. I don't know how he picks a lock, he just does. If I do explain in minutia, it might result in the DM giving me a +2 bonus, or advantage, or no change at all. It could even be negative: DM: "Wait, what? You are putting the Goat carcass on your PC's head to try to impress the chief?" Roll persuasion at disadvantage. :lol: On the tripwire example, again we seem to differ. The guy is searching. Yes, he stated pit traps because earlier in the adventuring day, the DM shouted "PIT TRAP!!!" by putting one on the board. But to me, the PC is searching. He gets an ability check roll to find the tripwire precisely because he is searching. It might be at a -2 penalty because he is using a 10' pole (i.e. not using the proper approach in the DM's mind), on the other hand, a trap should target a specific point in space, so being 10 feet away for a given trap might give him advantage. Even if he misses the roll, it could still effectively be the equivalent of an auto-success because he is out of range of the trap. He missed the roll, the trap went off, but nobody got hurt. If he had not been using the 10' pole, someone probably would have gotten hurt. If he had made the roll, he would not have triggered the trap, but he would have noticed the tripwire and the PCs might be able to use that trap later on by luring foes to this location. [/QUOTE]

Verification