D&D 5E Players: Why Do You Want to Roll a d20?

[TwoSix]

I think one of the general reasons both players and DMs look to roll checks so often is to reinforce character building decisions. When you've spent proficiency, expertise, and a high Dex on boosting your Stealth check, most interactions become a chance to hide in a corner. Proficiency in Diplomacy plus a high Cha becomes "I walk up to the NPC and roll Diplomacy while saying hello."

One thing I do to combat this is to tie success very obviously and concretely to concept and proficiencies, rather than rely on roles. I explain magical concepts specifically to characters who are proficient in Arcana, no rolls required, and inform the table that "Since your character is proficient in Arcana, you know this automatically." I also don't gate any kind of environmental exposition behind Perception checks, which I've found to be a common flaw of DMs who played a lot of 3.5.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yeah. I had a DM that used to ask us to roll “inspiration checks” for our characters to think of things.

Actually, I had something similar happen in the saltmarsh game I’m currently playing in. We killed the bandits in the basement, saw the skeletons in the room marked danger. We had not yet found any of the secret doors in the basement. (Side note, there was 0 telegraphing of the fact that there might be secret doors in the basement, apart from the DM asking us to make Perception checks when we first entered through the trapdoor, and saying nothing when we all rolled low.)

Once we had made the decision to head back to town and update Anders on our progress clearing the slavers out, the DM asked us to all make Wisdom checks. We all rolled low. She said, “Yep, you’ve thoroughly searched the house, no reason to explore any further,” to which I responded, “I mean, I didn’t forget about those stairs in the kitchen. I just figured it was a good time to check in, and we would come back in the morning.” Good thing we decided that too, cause she “let us” make Perception checks again when we returned to the basement. Not sure what would have happened if we had all failed again.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I'm perfectly fine with letting my players ask for checks or tell me what they want to do, or anything in between. However they want to do it. I can easily interpret what their intentions are, so I'm not going to make an issue of it if they say "Can I make a Perception check" instead of "I listen intently, do I hear anything of note?"

For some people I'm sure they'll say that this "breaks the immersion"... but really, how much immersion is anyone really in when they sit around a table with a bunch of plastic figurines on it, cracking jokes, drinking soda, munching on snacks, talking out of character about stuff happening in the encounter? If someone then talks to me using "game mechanic" language, rather than flowery language... there's no noticeable change in the "immersion".

And truth be told, I actually like it when they ask to make checks, because quite frankly I often have little to nothing actually written down. Other than maybe an encounter idea or two that I could plop in whenever I thought it made sense, the area where the PCs are is empty of stuff... until I am forced to improvise something there. And what I improvise and where I improvise its location usually comes directly out of what the players ask of me based on what interests them in where they find themselves. Some other DMs might have a list of like 10 different things to find in a location and the DCs of noticing all those things already established... but I don't waste my time doing any of that. I describe the area, maybe an item of import or two... and then see where they want to go. And if that happens via a question of "Can I roll Survival to see if there are any track around here?", I'll nod and say "Sure, go ahead!". And depending on what they roll, I may or may not improvise something there that they find.

 

[iserith]

I think one of the general reasons both players and DMs look to roll checks so often is to reinforce character building decisions. When you've spent proficiency, expertise, and a high Dex on boosting your Stealth check, most interactions become a chance to hide in a corner. Proficiency in Diplomacy plus a high Cha becomes "I walk up to the NPC and roll Diplomacy while saying hello."

I think of skill proficiencies a bit like insurance - I paid for it in case I need it, but try not to use it. I then usually set about the sorts of things the character is good at, as determined by my character creation and advancement choices, to further optimize my chances of success. The choice in task is the thing that "reinforces character building decisions" not whether I roll associated ability checks with skill proficiencies.

 

[iserith]

(Side note, there was 0 telegraphing of the fact that there might be secret doors in the basement, apart from the DM asking us to make Perception checks when we first entered through the trapdoor, and saying nothing when we all rolled low.)

Strikes me as the sort of approach that @TwoSix mentioned above where environmental information is gated behind an ability check. I'm certain I did that as a D&D 3.Xe DM and probably D&D 4e, but in D&D 5e it annoys me to no end to get asked to make an ability check when I haven't described what I wanted to do. It's like, man, I'm trying to avoid making those, so unless you're hitting me with a saving throw, please just stop.

Of course, I try to be understanding about this because I don't imagine most people think too deeply about this stuff and just sort of go with what they know from other games or what they learned from watching other DMs.

 

[TwoSix]

I think of skill proficiencies a bit like insurance - I paid for it in case I need it, but try not to use it. I then usually set about the sorts of things the character is good at, as determined by my character creation and advancement choices, to further optimize my chances of success. The choice in task is the thing that "reinforces character building decisions" not whether I roll associated ability checks with skill proficiencies.

I agree, but it certainly helps if the DM reinforces it by specifically NOT calling for a skill check. Part of the reason I emphasize why I'm allowing auto-success due to proficiency or concept is so the players will stop trying to make checks all the time.

 

[TwoSix]

Actually, I had something similar happen in the saltmarsh game I’m currently playing in. We killed the bandits in the basement, saw the skeletons in the room marked danger. We had not yet found any of the secret doors in the basement. (Side note, there was 0 telegraphing of the fact that there might be secret doors in the basement, apart from the DM asking us to make Perception checks when we first entered through the trapdoor, and saying nothing when we all rolled low.)

Yea, I agree that's the sort of thing I find annoying. I tend to gate those behind high DC Passive Perception checks (to reward characters who have invested in Observant/high Wis), but an actual declaration of "I look for anything that might be hiding" will just turn up the door, no check required. I'm not a huge fan of detailed exploration play, but if I'm going to do it, I want explicit interaction with the environment, not a series of checks. I find nothing more frustrating as a player than knowing that there's something there, but because I rolled a poor Perception check, I'm not allowed to act on it.

 

[Bitbrain]

Reply to OP.

Long version: Because nothing is funnier than watching one of the players flub an Intimidation check with a roll of 1, only for my NPC to mess up their Insight check even worse and get a roll of -1.
And the whole thing started because the Druid had burned his last spell slot of the day, but still had an enemy on top of him, so with nothing better to do, he yelled “CRACK!”, hoping the bad guy would think the Druid was about to barbecue him with another Call Lightning and run for the hills.

Short version: because nothing is more awesome than watching two fighters (9th level Eldritch Knight and a 6th level Champion) take down a Challenge 10 home brew dragon by themselves while the Bard and Druid focus on freeing the prisoner the party was hired to rescue.

The heart of the matter: because it’s fun. At least, I find it to be so.

 

[Blue]

I see this mostly because players are human. When someone says "Can I make a survival check to track the wolf", they are assuming there is some uncertainty, not asking for uncertainty to be added if it wasn't there.

I would hear their request as "I want to track the wolf, I'm ready to roll survival if you think it needs it, should I do it now?".

For some of the more general ones, like "I'd like to roll insight", I take that as "what are all the clues I can pick up about their mental state." In other words, I'm not just looking for one emotion. Perhaps they got angry when I mentioned one name during our conversations - that's something the character could notice but the player might not have any reason to specifically ask about.

Now, I prefer hearing what the character is doing, and we do most of that in first person. "I study Brandar as I ask the questions, looking for any eye movements or shifts of weight at my words" would indicate the same thing.

But at times I'm sure I would make others cringe if I tried to mimic my character's proficiencies where I don't share them and am more confrtable using mechanical shorthand. And at other times I'm just not thinking or tired and speak mechanics instead of in-character. It happens from me; I accept it from others.

No problems being open to communciation in multiple forms. If I need a clarification because it isn't specific enough, either in character or mechanically, I ask for clarification. "When you said you were looking at the books in the bookcase, do you examine the left or the right first?" No problems.

 

[Hriston]

Based on my experience with play-by-post and other messageboard games, players often put a roll in their posts in an attempt to boost efficiency. They don't want the game to be held up for hours (even days) because they did something only to have a GM come back with "Make your Wisdom (Insight) check," which then necessitates another post by the player for the roll, followed by yet another for the GM's adjudication of that roll.

I've seen similar behavior at tabletop convention games as well where there is often a time limit on the event.

I did once have to tell a messageboard player in my game,"You don't really need to make a Diplomacy roll every time you talk to someone," because it was getting a bit tedious to see it. But it's not all that problematic a behavior because, even in a game in which I'm encouraged to only call for a roll when I think it's necessary, I can ignore the roll he made in favor of the adjudication I was going to make anyway if it was going to be an auto-success or auto-fail.

I recently joined my first PbP game over in dndbeyond’s forums, and this seems to be the general practice over there from what I’m experiencing. So far I haven’t given in, but it’s a little frustrating because I keep getting the feeling that the DM is going to ignore my character’s actions unless I attach a roll. So far, the only roll I’ve been asked for was a Survival check to find some tracks for which I hadn’t even said I was looking.