Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8482597" data-attributes="member: 6779196">Right, so my problem is that this is not, as I understand it, the correct order of operations in 5e. As per PHB 6, it ought to be:1. The DM describes the environment2. The players describe how their characters act3a. DM determines, based on the above, whether the action(s) described can succeed or fail and have stakes.3b. If all three are true, the DM calls for an ability check to determine whether the action succeeds fails.3c. The DM describes the results of the action, as determined in 3a and possibly 3b.4. The processes repeats from 1.If an action would remove a player’s volition to decide how their character thinks, speaks, or acts, the DM would determine in step 3a that it does not have a possibility of success, and so should proceed directly to 3c without calling for an ability check.Some racial traits, class features, spells, monster abilities, and other game elements might describe specific exceptions to the above. The Swashbuckler feature Panache is a good example of such a game element. It specifically says that, as an action, the player can can make a Charisma (Persuasion) check contested by a creature's Wisdom (Insight) check, which contradicts the general order of operations, directing the player to make an ability check without having to pass through steps 3a and 3b.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 8482597, member: 6779196"] Right, so my problem is that this is not, as I understand it, the correct order of operations in 5e. As per PHB 6, it ought to be: 1. The DM describes the environment 2. The players describe how their characters act 3a. DM determines, based on the above, whether the action(s) described can succeed or fail and have stakes. 3b. If all three are true, the DM calls for an ability check to determine whether the action succeeds fails. 3c. The DM describes the results of the action, as determined in 3a and possibly 3b. 4. The processes repeats from 1. If an action would remove a player’s volition to decide how their character thinks, speaks, or acts, the DM would determine in step 3a that it does not have a possibility of success, and so should proceed directly to 3c without calling for an ability check. Some racial traits, class features, spells, monster abilities, and other game elements might describe specific exceptions to the above. The Swashbuckler feature Panache is a good example of such a game element. It specifically says that, as an action, the player can can make a Charisma (Persuasion) check contested by a creature's Wisdom (Insight) check, which contradicts the general order of operations, directing the player to make an ability check without having to pass through steps 3a and 3b. [/QUOTE]

Verification