D&D 5E Tracking without "tracking" feature, tripping without "trip"

[Fanaelialae]

I think that was the intent as well. My beef is that tracking is a pretty common activity in games. Right now, if a character wants to track, the only rules that cover that activity are in the Classes pdf, as a class feature for a single class.

Since the word "tracking" is not mentioned anywhere else, the implication is that only rangers can track. Under literal RAW, neither the Bounty Hunter ("You track down and capture fugitives...") nor the Guide ("leading others along rarely used tracks and paths.") can even attempt to track, unless they're also a Ranger. No more than a Fighter can attempt to Channel Divinity.

Or unless the DM and player use their own initiative, and create their own subsystem for a Wisdom or Int ability check. But that subsystem will either A) vary from the Tracking rules listed in the Ranger feature, or B) match the Ranger feature's rules, which dilutes the value of that feature / essentially means the Ranger doesn't get a 1st level class feature.

Experienced DMs and players will get past this in an instant. "Let's see, let's go with a DC 15 to track somebody, and -2 to the DC for each additional person or favorable condition, and +2 to the DC for each inclement situation like time, weather, terrain, or whatnot. Make a Wis or Int check."

But new players? Players who have never played a tabletop RPG? The rules should be written with them in mind. Or at least, organized in such a way that a newbie can easily figure things out.



My wish would be for the "Tracking" feature to be renamed "Expert Tracker", and then reference how that feature interacts with a the general Tracking rules--which would be located in How to Play or Backgrounds and Skills.

It's mostly an organizational/conceptual issue.

I agree. I also find it a bit strange that neither the Search nor Survival skill (either of which could be justified for Tracking) is mentioned in the Ranger entry.

 

[Dragongrief]

Under literal RAW, neither the Bounty Hunter ("You track down and capture fugitives...") nor the Guide ("leading others along rarely used tracks and paths.") can even attempt to track, unless they're also a Ranger. No more than a Fighter can attempt to Channel Divinity.

I do agree they could have been clearer on how non-Rangers track, but I don't see it being left off makes the RAW read that no one else can.

If something can reasonably be done by the above average person, it should be covered by skills (the Ranger's tracking is a special ability resulting from extreme focus).

Simple logic path:
*What are you doing? - looking for evidence of something passing through the area.
*What ability governs it? - Wisdom or Intelligence (we'll use Wis since it's mentioned in the Tracking CF)
*What skills could enhance your ability? - Perception (or some tool you're proficient with)
= Wisdom (Perception) check to find and follow a trail.

 

[Li Shenron]

I'd like to see some Optional Guidelines/Suggestions in the DMG for Degress of success and failure for D20 checks. I know Lore checks in 4th, and possibly 3rd had varying levels of success on information passed back to the party based on the number rolled. I want to see something similar for skill/ability checks.

There are rules for "hazards" which work like a degree of failure.

More levels of success might be interesting, but they will be probably skill-specific, not general rules, because some skills are very different from others. For instance, most athletic checks probably have not much room for "better success" other than maybe taking less time.

 

[Zaruthustran]

If something can reasonably be done by the above average person, it should be covered by skills (the Ranger's tracking is a special ability resulting from extreme focus).

Simple logic path:
*What are you doing? - looking for evidence of something passing through the area.
*What ability governs it? - Wisdom or Intelligence (we'll use Wis since it's mentioned in the Tracking CF)
*What skills could enhance your ability? - Perception (or some tool you're proficient with)
= Wisdom (Perception) check to find and follow a trail.

Sure, that's reasonable, and an intuitive resolution path for an experienced roleplayer. I don't think a novice would do that, though.

Also, if Joe's Cleric character takes this method to track, it makes Bob's Ranger character's first level ability obsolete. Bob's Ranger gets Tracking as his one and only Class feature at first level. Now Joe's Cleric can just make a Wisdom check? And, since that Cleric will almost certainly have a higher Wisdom, he'll be better at that check than the Ranger? That's a problem.

The problem can be solved by simply putting general rules for tracking in How to Play or Backgrounds and Skills, and then having the first level Ranger ability reference those rules and give a significant bonus. This way, all players and DMs will know how to handle tracking, and Rangers will be exceptional at it.

In other words: treat it like the Rogue's Expertise ability. One of the things I like about 5e is that any character can attempt to pick locks, or disable traps, or any of the other traditional tasks that were Rogue-only (or rather, thief-only) in previous editions. It's just that Rogues are better at it. Would like to see Tracking handled in the same way.

 

[Kobold Stew]

The problem can be solved by simply putting general rules for tracking in How to Play or Backgrounds and Skills, ...

...and tripping and disarming...

 

[Squidmaster]

I think this is an important thread to have going, but that we also have to remember that we are not seeing an awful lot of all sorts of content. The development team is cranking stuff out and showing it to us pretty quickly, when there are bound to be (likely unintentional) omissions.

I would not be surprised to see things like tripping and disarming make a return as skill check based attack substitutes for characters without the specific warrior ability. That would make them more costly and possibly less successful, which seems fair.

As has already been said, the addition of expertise to the game makes a change to the tracking rules pretty simple, if not a lock.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Good point -- They've removed disarming since the last pack, and I have no doubt it will return in some form.

 

[Aloïsius]

I think the "track" feature should just give a big flat bonus to survival (track) check or something. And the track DC should use all the range, from 5 to 35 or more. I mean, I never tracked anything in my life, and yet, when I stumbled upon the track of a wounded wild-boar in the forest, it was ridiculously easy to follow. Not only could you use your eyes to spot the blood stains, but each blood stain was advertised by a noisy swarm of flies. I was able to follow it until the place where the beast had probably been finally caught by the dogs and picked-up by the hunters, more than one kilometer away.
But what if the beast had not been wounded ? I would probably not even realized that there was a track to follow, while any Aragorn-like ranger could not only spot it, but tell if it was a male or a female and if it was followed by it piglets.

Some task are so easy that you can accomplish them even without training, while some other, closely similar or related task need a special training to even have a small chance of success.

Likewise, tripping an old human merchant running after a child thief should be very easy even for a someone non trained in combat, while tripping a bull walking peacefully should be nearly impossible, even for a high level judoka.

 

[Zaruthustran]

Good point about the packet being focused primarily on mechanics, and that significant rounds of layout and editing are in store. those rounds may resolve my complaint.

Also, it just occurred to me that they can preserve the "rulings, not rules" vibe by simply stating the ranger's bonus to tracking rolls (whether that's advantage, expertise, or something else.) There's no need for hard rules to exist elsewhere. All the rules need to say is that when the ranger tracks, he's better at it than others--the DM can figure out the base DCs using the DM guidelines, and the player can add his class bonus.

Personally, I'd prefer some hard rule guidelines, such as the DCs laid out in the class feature (just in the general rules, not in the class feature). But I can see how such rules (and hard rules for tripping, disarm, grapple, and so on) may be against the vibe of 5e. That stuff is definitely more of a 3e, "a rule for every situation", sort of game.

 

[Tanaka Chris]

Well, I'd have a problem with classes such as a Druid being unable to track animals and beasts really.
When we were trying to track someone and our Ranger was away, when the DM said no one had the specialty to track it seemed a bit out of place, surely a Druid can see traces of where a creature has run through the forest?

Anyway, we circumvented that by the Druid going in Wolf form where it specifically says, "has advantage on Perception check relating to Smell" and tracked the people that way.