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

[Lyxen]

I've read them

And then, from the rest of your answer, it's clear that we agree that the rules tell it my way.

After that, you can play the way you want, and I'll play the way I want, the DM is the one who chooses when to ask for rolls anyway. I was just pointing our that there is a clear, simple and elegant solution that abides by all the RAW, provides really good tension in the game with minimal interruption due to dice rolling, and as an added bonus, completely eliminates metagaming if it's a concern to you.

Now use it or not, use the rules or not, it's up to you.

 

[Lanefan]

The main issue with 'nothing happens' results is that they are disempowering. The player had an idea, tried to influence the narrative, and was simply ignored. At least 'bad stuff happens also' results mean that the player's input was acknowledged.

If the player had been ignored no roll or check would have occurred at all.

A nothing-happens result does not mean the player was ignored, it means that whatever was tried caused no change in anything in the fiction.

 

[iserith]

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.

What you're doing is assuming the possibility the character touches the chest while searching for traps, thus assuming what the character is doing prior to the roll. This is the DM stepping outside their role. What if I'm only visually inspecting the chest, perhaps because the DM described it being shiny? How did I end up touching the thing? Seems like that's something we'd want to sort out in the action declaration phase to avoid such issues.

 

[Lanefan]

I'm sorry that my finding the phrase "bad advice" strange has possibly offended you. But again, someone telling someone else that they are giving "bad advice" is something which, yes, I do find strange (to put it lightly) - especially when it is advice quoted from the DMG.

Just because advice is given in the DMG doesn't mean that advice is good; and that has been true since D&D began.

 

[Charlaquin]

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

Yes they… do?

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.

Again, I call for the check when it’s relevant, which is when there’s a chance you might be noticed. I don’t think anything in the rules preclude this, nor do they preclude doing as you do and making the check as soon as someone says they’re trying to sneak somewhere.

 

[iserith]

And then, from the rest of your answer, it's clear that we agree that the rules tell it my way.

After that, you can play the way you want, and I'll play the way I want, the DM is the one who chooses when to ask for rolls anyway. I was just pointing our that there is a clear, simple and elegant solution that abides by all the RAW, provides really good tension in the game with minimal interruption due to dice rolling, and as an added bonus, completely eliminates metagaming if it's a concern to you.

Now use it or not, use the rules or not, it's up to you.

I agree that the rules have two things to bear in mind when resolving ability checks related to hiding and that interpreting one as more specific creates problems for the "no metagaming" crowd. But anyway, no thanks. I don't care about "metagaming" and, as it happens, don't create situations for it to occur in the first place in part by employing those two rules in tandem rather than having one supersede the other.

In addition, for specific beats general to apply, the specific rule must contradict a general rule, and I don't think it does in this case because not every attempt to hide needs a roll. Sometimes you just succeed and sometimes you just fail, no roll.

 

[Charlaquin]

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.

Yes, it is, because in the sword case, you decided you swung your sword. In the contact poison case, you didn’t decide you touched the chest.

 

[Lyxen]

Yes they… do?

I don't think so, in particular "slip away without being noticed" or "slink past guards", who might or might not be where you go at the time when you get there.

Again, I call for the check when it’s relevant, which is when there’s a chance you might be noticed. I don’t think anything in the rules preclude this, nor do they preclude doing as you do and making the check as soon as someone says they’re trying to sneak somewhere.

Look, I'm not going to fight with you over this, since we both agree that the rules are supposed to be interpreted as guidelines, and that it's up to the DM to call for rolls or not anyway, my point was just that the rules do actually preserve the tension by people not knowing if someone is watching them or not. If you have another mechanism that works well for you, it's great, I just wanted to present my type of mechanism as a supported option.

 

[Lanefan]

Exploring the history of dwarves and elves is a meaningful purpose a scene might serve. I don’t see how failing a history check serves that purpose.

"Might" here is not an abolute; thus saying that the scene might serve that purpose also implies that it might not, and whether it does is what the history check tells us.

 

[soviet]

What is the purpose of play?

Myself, I want to feel like I am experiencing the events of play. I want the verisimilitude of having characters roleplay full conversations. I want to hear the detail of how they attack their enemy, how they examine the chest for traps, and how they attempt to move quietly through the palace gardens.

Boiling the experience down to Diplomacy check, attack roll, Investigation check, Stealth check with no narration seems to defeat its own purpose. What is it in aid of?