D&D 5E Skill Checks (non time sensitive) homebrew fixes

[Rhenny]

While playtesting Pathfinder 2, similar concerns came up with the out of combat healing mechanic where a pc could use a medicine check every 10 minutes. Success allowed treated pc con bonus hp recovery. Critical success doubled it. But, if there was a critical failure, the victim could not benefit from the same healer for a full day. In a way, my group began liking this healing mechanism. Players could forfeit time for benefit, but the small chance of crit fail made it so sometimes it wasn’t worth trying your luck.

You could play with different severity crit fails to se what works for your game. Most of the time the threat of ruining a relationship or breaking an item may be cool.

 

[Bawylie]

We already agree that a d20 roll is a sufficient method to determine the result of an activity with uncertain outcomes. So rather than waste table time on an infinite number of d20 rolls attempting to hit a target number, I propose the following solution:

You roll 1d20 (with whatever modifiers you feel apply) as a stand-in, or an approximation if you like, for the infinite rolls. If that 1 check failed, we can assume that infinite checks would also have failed. And if that 1 check succeeded, we can assume that one roll out of an infinite number of rolls would have succeeded.

 

[Charlaquin]

We already agree that a d20 roll is a sufficient method to determine the result of an activity with uncertain outcomes. So rather than waste table time on an infinite number of d20 rolls attempting to hit a target number, I propose the following solution:

You roll 1d20 (with whatever modifiers you feel apply) as a stand-in, or an approximation if you like, for the infinite rolls. If that 1 check failed, we can assume that infinite checks would also have failed. And if that 1 check succeeded, we can assume that one roll out of an infinite number of rolls would have succeeded.

That would be intensely unsatisfying to me. If the target number is equal to or less than my modifier +20, then a roll where I did not meet or exceed the target number is a very poor approximation of infinite rolls.

 

[77IM]

In addition to this, I’ve been adding a house rule.

If an action is High Profile (that is, noisy or noticeable), I roll on the “something happens” table.

If an action is Low Profile (relatively quiet and/or unobtrusive), I mark the passage of time.

Every hour or so of time passing also gets a roll on the “something happens” table.

If my players were to try consecutive High Profile actions, the chances of a random encounter are higher.

All that really means is that I’m systematically including consequences for rolls, in addition to whatever other stakes are involved in the roll.

Can you share your "something happens" table?

 

[Bawylie]

That would be intensely unsatisfying to me. If the target number is equal to or less than my modifier +20, then a roll where I did not meet or exceed the target number is a very poor approximation of infinite rolls.

Seems like you ignored or missed the part where I was talking about necessary modifications.

 

[cmad1977]

I don't know, man. I felt like I suffered 3d6 psychic damage every time I tried to decipher the 1e DMG, and now I'm wary of even touching 5e's.


Can you honestly promise me it's not the Necronomicon?

Clearly you weren’t chanting Gygaxs name backwards.

 

[Charlaquin]

Seems like you ignored or missed the part where I was talking about necessary modifications.

Yes, I think I missed it. Or didn’t understand it? I’m not sure what you’re getting at.

 

[Charlaquin]

Can you share your "something happens" table?

I can’t speak for Bawylie, but I use a similar approach, and I have a different “something happens” table for each adventure location. It’s basically a random encounter table, but with a name that doesn’t come with as much baggage. Sometimes it’s not even really a table, so much as a list of things that might go wrong in this adventure location if the adventurers take too long or attract too much attention.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

…PCs can just keep trying the skill check over and over until they succeed.

I sometimes ask for a single skill roll and use the result to say how long it took.

For example, picking a lock. If the player rolls a 22, maybe it took the character 1 minute. If they rolled a 7, it took 10 minutes.

Most of the time, I just do exactly as you say. "OK, you open the lock, what do you do now?"

 

[Blue]

The issue: When not in combat or not in a time sensitive scenario, PCs can just keep trying the skill check over and over until they succeed. Which kinda strips away the dramatic tension from the game, and you might as well just narrate it.

"Solutions": in previous editions, you were only allowed one try. While that kinda fixes the issue, it ruins the verisimilitude for me because you can always keep trying. How many of us succeeded the first time on something?

Other solutions were a variant on that. One try per day. Or long rest. Or short rest.

The solution I'm leaning towards is a cumulative penalty for each try. A -2 penalty going to -4 the third try, etc. I think this is a fine balance between being able to keep trying, and eventually the task is just too hard for you. It also addresses some of the working together issues. For a real world example, I can help someone try to cook a nice meal. The first time it might go well with my instruction. But if they fail, then they start getting frustrated and more mistakes start happening. Eventually the task is just too hard and they need to stop.


Your ideas or houserules you've implemented, if any? Or do you just narrate until they get the auto success?

Why not use the natural consequences of the action? If you fail to cook a good meal, you've wasted an hour or so and used up some ingredients. In the real world if you try it again, it's probably with a bonus (not a penalty) because you have a list of mistakes to avoid.

Fail to make a navigation check, get lost. Sure you can try again, but your character won't know you've failed for some period to try it again and you'll be going off course for that whole time. And if you're the type of person who double checks your homework so you make another check immediately - well, that's a successful tactic in real life as well. Congrats, you now have two different answers. Pick one (maybe the wrong one), or do it a third time.

Want to buy a horse but not spend to much (ie hit a DC to buy it cheaper) - well, there may only be one opportunity a day, so failed rolls take time. On the other hand, fail that check to pick out the best from the herd and you may end up paying for a spavined horse - natural repercussion of the failed roll.