Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Viking Bastard" data-source="post: 6044935" data-attributes="member: 509">That's not a flaw; that's sementics. I called them Skill Checks to differentiate them from Saves. Both are Ability Checks, as are Attack Rolls-- each is a different type of Ability Check. Skills don't impact Attack Rolls (even though some may want them to), so I see no reason why they should impact Saves, especially since Saves already get their own bonuses.Y'know, mechanically speaking.Yeah. Of course it will. This is D&D and it does not and never has had a proper universal mechanic. It has always compartmentalized resolution, even if you always roll a d20+Mods. Until D&D takes that step towards mechanical unification, I think compartment-hopping should be kept to a minimum.I did say PC instead of player on purpose. A roll doesn't need to be iniated by the player, it needs to be iniated by the character. I just cited "disbelief" because it had been brought up. Sense Motive is always a Skill Check, independent of who called for it (player or DM). I can't really think of an example of "disbelief" as a Save in D&D terms, although I'm sure others can.To me, passive checks assume a certain active awareness. They're not reactive in the manner that Saves are. They're mechanics meant to streamline endless dice rolling. If the character was asleep (or in other ways not "passively" listening), I'd call for a Save.</blockquote>