Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 3034489" data-attributes="member: 22424">That's the very point I'm getting at, though. The poster I quoted seemed to be suggesting that there were (or should be) some problems that simply could not be solved with a d20. That suggests a trap that could not ever be found with a Search check, no matter how skilled the Rogue.In practice, there is no difference between a Search DC of 21 + Rogue's Search modifier and a trap that has no DC at all. Philosophically, there's a world of difference, and I wish to know which it is.The thing is, either there is a (too high) Search DC, in which case the problem can be solved by rolling a d20, or it cannot, in which case...For the purposes of the matter at hand, it's irrelevant whether there should be such a mechanism or not. There currently is no such mechanism, and for good reason. By introducing such, the DM has stepped beyond the parameters of the rules.And I'm inclined to feel that it is not unreasonable for the players to assume that the DM will stick to the rules.I'm not suggesting that the DM must, or even should, stick rigidly to the letter of the rules - I'm a DM myself and would hold that to be absurd. However, I do stick within the bounds of what the rules would allow (so, I add new monsters, but I don't rule that all NPCs always hit, for example). And if I'm going to step beyond the limits of what the rules would allow (eg magic items giving Dodge bonuses) then I'll tell the players about the changes at the start of the campaign. And I would hold that it is unfair to do otherwise, since doing otherwise essentially means "the rules are for players only".</blockquote>

Verification