NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 6569727" data-attributes="member: 97077">Figuring out how to open a secret door or the like can be resolved an Investigation check when doing so has an uncertain outcome. Detecting the secret door or the like is still a Wisdom (Perception) check. See DMG, page 103-104. I haven't read the module you're referencing, but I don't doubt that sometimes the designers get this "wrong."I find this all becomes a lot easier to adjudicate when the DM keeps two things in mind: (1) The need to telegraph when describing the environment and (2) that we only call for rolls when we think the character is doing something with an uncertain outcome. Not every action calls for a check.Investigation: When you look around for clues and make deductions based on those clues, you make an Intelligence (Investigation) check. Perception: Your Wisdom (Perception) check lets you spot, hear, or otherwise detect the presence of something. As we can see here, the key difference is clues. Investigation does not deal with detecting the presence of clues per se - it deals with deducing things from the clues you have in hand if said deduction is not a certainty. If the clues are hidden, then their presence is detected via Perception if detecting them is uncertain. If you're telegraphing, that means you're providing clues to the players (or suggesting there may be hidden clues) from which they can draw conclusions when they have them in hand. Oftentimes, a player will simply draw conclusions on his or her own and act accordingly, thereby skipping the need for an Investigation check. A good practice when playing, however, is to state, "Chuck Dagger considers what these clues mean and tries to deduce whether [player's theory] is correct..." as a means to confirm the validity of a conclusion the player has drawn. This way you're mitigating the chance you're acting on assumptions that are incorrect. It's also a good action to describe when you've got the clues but you can't put two and two together - but maybe your character can.At the end of the day though? It probably doesn't amount to much to get this "wrong." It comes down to how you're describing your scenes and whether or not the actions described by the players have an uncertain outcome. Consider describing the environment in an interesting way that invites the players to engage with the exploration pillar by telegraphing threats and clues. In the doing, you will encourage players to make deductions about their environment and take actions accordingly. They can therefore sometimes rob randomness of its power and solve for X without ever needing to roll a die.</blockquote>

Verification