Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 8442327" data-attributes="member: 97077">In order to understand the DMG's use of shorthand here, we have to take all the underlying rules into account: What needs to be true for the DM to call for a DC 20 Intelligence (Investigation) check in the first place?First, the player declared an action that has an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure (prerequisites for an ability check) and the DM determined that achieving the goal with the stated approach is hard to accomplish (hence the DC). Given that it is an Intelligence (Investigation) check, the character must have made deductions based on clues (as opposed to say, detecting the presence of the trap with keen senses which would instead be Wisdom (Perception)). So for that to be the case, the player must declare an action to that effect, being reasonably specific about how to even have a chance at success (rules for finding a hidden object).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="iserith, post: 8442327, member: 97077"] In order to understand the DMG's use of shorthand here, we have to take all the underlying rules into account: What needs to be true for the DM to call for a DC 20 Intelligence (Investigation) check in the first place? First, the player declared an action that has an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure (prerequisites for an ability check) and the DM determined that achieving the goal with the stated approach is hard to accomplish (hence the DC). Given that it is an Intelligence (Investigation) check, the character must have made deductions based on clues (as opposed to say, detecting the presence of the trap with keen senses which would instead be Wisdom (Perception)). So for that to be the case, the player must declare an action to that effect, being reasonably specific about how to even have a chance at success (rules for finding a hidden object). [/QUOTE]

Verification