D&D 5E Rolling Without a Chance of Failure (I love it)

[Charlaquin]

I think it does, if the target is specified. "I check the chest for traps" is specific enough, if /as is likely) neither the players or the GM really knows how checking for medievalish fantasy traps actually works.

I know how checking for whatever trap I’ve designed works, and I have seeded my description of the environment with clues to indicate how to detect it. Just saying “I check the chest for traps” conveys no information about what you are actually doing, only what you are trying to accomplish,

 

[Lyxen]

You’re not accounting for telegraphing. If you need to check the sides/bottom/whatever, there will be an environmental clue that indicates as much.

Ah-ha, this is what I wanted to hear. That means that you shift the space of the problem by giving a more complete description. The onus is still not on the player to know about the exact way to check for traps or even to specifically look for environmental clues.

 

[iserith]

Just read the rules, they are perfectly clear, old people like me obviously learnt how to read better.

I've read them, but the rules serve the DM, not the other way around. What is more elegant? Interpreting them your way, which creates an opportunity for metagaming which you then have to implement a kluge to fix? Or my way which doesn't create that problem to begin with?

 

[Charlaquin]

"When you try to hide, make a Dexterity (Stealth) check."

Funny, my book says “Make a Dexterity (Stealth) check when you attempt to conceal yourself from enemies, slink past guards, slip away without being noticed, or sneak up on someone without being seen or heard.”

Not "when you try to hide from someone, make a Dexterity (Stealth) check contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of the creature that you are hiding from".

Who said anything about a contested Dexterity (Stealth) vs Wisdom (Perception) check? Not me.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

What happens if the chest has a contact poison on it? Do I just assume you touch it?

No. That's why we roll the dice, that's why skills exist. I don't know how to detect contact poison, my character hopefully does. I as player might not be aware of all the myriad bizarre trap types that might exist in D&D (as a long time player I am relatively familiar, a noob wouldn't.) Why would the player necessarily know that a long lasting contact poison that could be used for traps even is a thing? (I don't think it would be at real medieval tech level.) Let alone something even more esoteric. But an expert trap finder living in that world would know of those, and would understand to be cautious. This just sounds a like recipe for gotchas.

 

[iserith]

No. That's why we roll the dice, that's why skills exist. I don't know how to detect contact poison, my character hopefully does. I as player might not be aware of all the myriad bizarre trap types that might exist in D&D (as a long time player I am relatively familiar, a noob wouldn't.) Why would the player necessarily know that a long lasting contact poison that could be used for traps even is a thing? (I don't think it would be at real medieval tech level.) Let alone something even more esoteric. But an expert trap finder living in that world would know of those, and would understand to be cautious. This just sounds a like recipe for gotchas.

So does the character touch the chest or not? Who gets to say what the character does?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

So does the character touch the chest or not? Who gets to say what the character does?

In this instance the dice. The player decides that their character is checking for traps, the dice will decide how well it goes.

 

[iserith]

In this instance the dice. The player decides that their character is checking for traps, the dice will decide how well it goes.

Please explain how you see that working in practice. Because what it sounds like is the DM gets to decide in the narration step of the play loop. And that's a no-go for me, if so. I don't get to say what the character is doing and that includes whether the chest is touched by the character (unless the chest is thrown at the character perhaps!).

 

[Lyxen]

Funny, my book says “Make a Dexterity (Stealth) check when you attempt to conceal yourself from enemies, slink past guards, slip away without being noticed, or sneak up on someone without being seen or heard.”

Not all the cases above mention hiding from someone in particular. It is a possibility, but it's not the general case.

Who said anything about a contested Dexterity (Stealth) vs Wisdom (Perception) check? Not me.

It was just to show you how the rule has been written. When the time comes to make the check, it's not "hiding from someone", it's just hiding.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Please explain how you see that working in practice. Because what it sounds like is the DM gets to decide in the narration step of the play loop. And that's a no-go for me, if so. I don't get to say what the character is doing and that includes whether the chest is touched by the character (unless the chest is thrown at the character perhaps!).

You get to decide whether you want to search for traps, you don't get to decide whether you succeed. GM narrating your search efforts ending in a painful failure and poison on your fingers is no different than GM narrating your sword missing the gnoll when you roll low on your attack roll.