Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="azmodean" data-source="post: 1906242" data-attributes="member: 26590">Overachiving skill checksConcerning the idea that a successful search check would trigger a sight-triggered symbol:I would interpret a successful (beating the check DC) search as either "noticing" the symbol or some effect of the symbol before looking at the symbol in a way that would trigger it, or "sensing" the symbol without even looking at it.  In general I would never rule a skill check as being "too good", some examples:Attempting to intimidate a prisoner:  Some would say an excessively successfull check would frighten the prisoner into madness or make them try to kill themselves, I would interpret it as the character using the exact amount of intimidation to get the prisoner to do what they want.  (intimidation is often more about restraint than just scaring the target, this is why you don't use str to modify it, but that's another thread <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue    :P"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" />)Jumping onto a platform:  Say you are trying to jump onto a 5'x5' platform over a gap.  If you roll 20 higher than what you need, you don't go too far and miss the platform, you can limit the distance to exactly what you need.So in short, I never penalize players for being "too good" at one of their skills.And regarding FireLance's interpretation, can't put my finger on it, but I think it's a bit over-generaous to the rogue to let them take 20 on this particular check.  Sorry for the lack of clarity.</blockquote>

Verification