Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8477480" data-attributes="member: 6779196">Yep, this logic is all sound. My contention is not that skills aren’t game elements or that they can’t form exceptions to other rules. My contention is that nothing in the rules for skills contradicts the rules for determining whether or not an action should be resolved via an ability check - in fact, the rules in the Using Ability Scores section - the very same rules which define skills as proficiency in a subset of ability checks, reiterate that uncertainty is necessary in order for an ability check to be called for.Again, I’ve been referencing D&D beyond, which doesn’t have page numbers, but I’m assuming you’re referring to this rule:[excerpt]<h4>Specific Beats General</h4>This book contains rules, especially in parts 2 and 3, that govern how the game plays. That said, many racial traits, class features, spells, magic items, monster abilities, and other game elements break the general rules in some way, creating an exception to how the rest of the game works. Remember this: If a specific rule contradicts a general rule, the specific rule wins.Exceptions to the rules are often minor. For instance, many adventurers don’t have proficiency with longbows, but every wood elf does because of a racial trait. That trait creates a minor exception in the game. Other examples of rule-breaking are more conspicuous. For instance, an adventurer can’t normally pass through walls, but some spells make that possible. Magic accounts for most of the major exceptions to the rules.[/excerpt]You know where the Using Ability Scores section I’ve been quoting is? Part 2. The part that this passage says the rules that govern how the game is played, which many class features, spells, magic items, monster abilities, and other game elements break in some way, are especially found.I dare say, this quote even provides us with the guidance others have been asking for to determine which rules are more general than others. Is it a rule that governs how the game is played, such as those found in sections 2 and 3? Probably a general rule. Is it a racial trait, class feature, spell, magic item, or monster ability? Probably a specific rule. The addition of the criteria “game element” does make this distinction fuzzier, but skills are a part of the rules for using ability scores, which are general rules of the game found in chapter 2. Moreover, they do not in any way contradict the rules for how to determine if an ability check is called for. They only determine if proficiency bonus can be added to an ability check.Nothing. This line of attack doesn’t even work against my argument because it relies on a conflict between the specific rules for skills and the general rules for ability checks, which does not exist.Am I to assume you’re taking text like “Make a Dexterity (Stealth) check when you attempt to conceal yourself from enemies, slink past guards, slip away without being noticed, or sneak up on someone without being seen or heard” as authorization for the DM to call for such a check, regardless of whether the character’s attempt to conceal themselves from their enemies, skink past guards, slip away without being noticed, or sneak up on someone without being seen or heard can fail and is uncertain? This doesn’t work because a Dexterity (Stealth) check is simply a Dexterity check (which is subject to the rules for making ability checks, including the provision that the action requires a chance of failure and uncertainty), to which the player or DM can add the character’s or monster’s proficiency bonus if the character or monster is proficient in the Stealth skill. In other words, what this text is authorizing is not the DM to call for a check, but the player to add their proficiency bonus to a check if the DM calls for one to resolve the action in question.</blockquote>

Verification