D&D 5E What are your biggest immersion breakers, rules wise?

[Tony Vargas]

That isn’t generally how the fiction is matching the mechanics.
Instead, the one roll represents how well you did overall over the course of however much time you spent trying. It doesn’t represent a single attempt.

On that theory, I'd expect the player to declare how long they're going to work on it before they give up, with some sort of modifier to the DC for rushing/taking your time - and a degree of success to determine how long it actually took.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

On that theory, I'd expect the player to declare how long they're going to work on it before they give up, with some sort of modifier to the DC for rushing/taking your time - and a degree of success to determine how long it actually took.

That’s much more granular than I’d be willing to mess with, but if it works for you, go for it!

 

[DammitVictor]

In my games if a lock can be picked and there is no time pressure I'll normally just hand wave it. If there is some time pressure but no imminent threat I may ask for a single roll just to see how long it takes you; roll a 1 and it takes several minutes roll a 20 and you get it the first try.

Okay, so one? That's a house rule.

Two, the house rule you're describing is simply a more reasonable and practical way of abstracting the "immersion-breaking" rule of allowing people to retry until they succeed. This is not a counter-argument to anything I've said about the realism of being able to retry some skill checks indefinitely... it's just a more streamlined way of accomplishing the exact same thing I'm saying.

You seem entirely unwilling to even try to actually grasp what I’m telling you, but I’ll try one last time.

A single die roll does not necessarily equate to a single distinct attempt at something. If someone is going to spend an hour doing something, and I determine that there is a reasonable chance that they will fail to accomplish it within that hour, their die roll represents all their effort over that hour.

I understand what you're saying perfectly, but it's still absolute nonsense.

If you set the DC for picking a lock according to how long the PC spends making the attempt-- which is reasonable-- there's still no logical reason that a PC cannot make another attempt in the immediate future, taking more time or even taking less time, and not have the exact same chance at success that they did on the "first attempt" you keep dismissing.

"... their die roll represents all their effort over that hour."

So what happens when they spend an hour on the lock, fail at the given DC, and then decide to take a break and come back fresh?

There's nothing wrong with abstracting multiple attempts to open a lock with a single die roll with Advantage or reduced DC... but that's just abstracting the same process people are complaining is unrealistic-- "trying until you succeed"-- while I'm trying to argue that no, that's how exactly how that works.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So what happens when they spend an hour on the lock, fail at the given DC, and then decide to take a break and come back fresh?

Depends on the situation. If they have more time right then and there, why wasn’t that included in the roll I already asked for? If they said, “I’m only going to try for about an hour”, I’m going to probably hold them to that. We agreed on a resolution model, and they aren’t going to game it just because they failed a check. Next time, we can use a different model, if they didn't like how this one played out.

Now, if they go do something else that they were planning on doing anyway, and still have time to go back to the lock, say that evening, I’ll let them decide how long they spend working on it this time, and ask for a new roll. Depending on the task, I may even apply advantage on this check, because they’ve cleared their head and they know the task better than they did before. IRL, I often find such “after a break and completing some other task” attempts to inexplicably be trivially easy compared to the first attempt.

I’m not any other poster. I don’t insist on any sort of strict “must use a new approach” stuff.

There's nothing wrong with abstracting multiple attempts to open a lock with a single die roll with Advantage or reduced DC... but that's just abstracting the same process people are complaining is unrealistic-- "trying until you succeed"-- while I'm trying to argue that no, that's how exactly how that works.

Every skill check abstracts that same thing.

 

[5ekyu]

Okay, so one? That's a house rule.

Two, the house rule you're describing is simply a more reasonable and practical way of abstracting the "immersion-breaking" rule of allowing people to retry until they succeed. This is not a counter-argument to anything I've said about the realism of being able to retry some skill checks indefinitely... it's just a more streamlined way of accomplishing the exact same thing I'm saying.



I understand what you're saying perfectly, but it's still absolute nonsense.

If you set the DC for picking a lock according to how long the PC spends making the attempt-- which is reasonable-- there's still no logical reason that a PC cannot make another attempt in the immediate future, taking more time or even taking less time, and not have the exact same chance at success that they did on the "first attempt" you keep dismissing.

"... their die roll represents all their effort over that hour."

So what happens when they spend an hour on the lock, fail at the given DC, and then decide to take a break and come back fresh?

There's nothing wrong with abstracting multiple attempts to open a lock with a single die roll with Advantage or reduced DC... but that's just abstracting the same process people are complaining is unrealistic-- "trying until you succeed"-- while I'm trying to argue that no, that's how exactly how that works.

One thing to keep in mind is that in 5e ability checks like pickingnlocks are not binary by default - there are three cases described in the base core rule for these checks - success, failure to make progress and some progress with setback. So, it's never required to allow multiple retries.

The DMG comment on retries varies but one vote case is the x10 rule which says if retries til success is appropriate, have it take 10x normal and no roll.

Same time, they recommend considering that fails on social checks often wont be helped by retries.

For ne, the "with setback" option tends to help with many retry efforts. So, for example, depending on scdne, if it's appropriate, I might describe the first failure as revealing the lock is damaged, so picking is tough (disad on subsequent retries or realization DC is higher) but that for the same reason forcing it will be easier than expected. This provides for a chsnfe of approach to gain a pretty with different elements in play.

I think its way too often the illusion of 5e being about binary choices seems to be at the root of many "pronlems" folks imagine are there.

 

[5ekyu]

Depends on the situation. If they have more time right then and there, why wasn’t that included in the roll I already asked for? If they said, “I’m only going to try for about an hour”, I’m going to probably hold them to that. We agreed on a resolution model, and they aren’t going to game it just because they failed a check. Next time, we can use a different model, if they didn't like how this one played out.

Now, if they go do something else that they were planning on doing anyway, and still have time to go back to the lock, say that evening, I’ll let them decide how long they spend working on it this time, and ask for a new roll. Depending on the task, I may even apply advantage on this check, because they’ve cleared their head and they know the task better than they did before. IRL, I often find such “after a break and completing some other task” attempts to inexplicably be trivially easy compared to the first attempt.

I’m not any other poster. I don’t insist on any sort of strict “must use a new approach” stuff.



Every skill check abstracts that same thing.

That is certainly an option. I can see its merits.

To me tho, it's so very removed from the way it feels in character it's not the choice I prefer. The character sets down to pick the lock, not spending an hour on the lock.

For ne, in my games, intake any task that is expected to take more than a minute and resolve it as an extended check, race to three, with each check comihg at 1/4 the expected time. Get it in three - got done quicker. Get it barely after five - took longer. But the effort csn pass or fail overall.

In these cases, each failure does carry a negative setback, that gives disad but also a clue to different approaches. It's by no means necessary the same skill-score is required by default. The gstger knowledge might useintelligrnce investigation in research, but charisma persuasion inninterviews etc.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

That is certainly an option. I can see its merits.

To me tho, it's so very removed from the way it feels in character it's not the choice I prefer. The character sets down to pick the lock, not spending an hour on the lock.

For ne, in my games, intake any task that is expected to take more than a minute and resolve it as an extended check, race to three, with each check comihg at 1/4 the expected time. Get it in three - got done quicker. Get it barely after five - took longer. But the effort csn pass or fail overall.

In these cases, each failure does carry a negative setback, that gives disad but also a clue to different approaches. It's by no means necessary the same skill-score is required by default. The gstger knowledge might useintelligrnce investigation in research, but charisma persuasion inninterviews etc.

Also more complicated than works for me, but I’m glad you have an approach that works for you.

I do use a similar approach in complex challenges. But when it’s just something that has one real approach in fiction, and is just one person trying to figure something out, it’s usually 1 roll.

 

[Tony Vargas]

In my games if a lock can be picked and there is no time pressure I'll normally just hand wave it.

Okay, so one? That's a house rule.

Actually, in 5e, it's just part of the "play loop." The DM's responsibilities include determining uncertainty and calling for a check to resolve it. All he's doing is determining that there is no uncertainty, and narrating success. Fully within the DM's significant latitude in 5e.

If you set the DC for picking a lock according to how long the PC spends making the attempt-- which is reasonable-- there's still no logical reason that a PC cannot make another attempt in the immediate future

True, but it's a stake. "How long are you going to try before you give up" "Oh, an hour" "Then what? If you don't succeed, what's next?" "Er, well, I, guess I'd try again?" "Then it's more than an hour, isn't it? How long, really?" "Fine! Just until I succeed, because there's nothing to do on this fine railroad until I get the fine door open! OK!?!"
::rattle::rattle:: "1 hr 42 minutes later, you're attacked by a wandering monster"

So what happens when they spend an hour on the lock, fail at the given DC, and then decide to take a break and come back fresh?

Wandering Monsters! The DM's hammer when everything the PC pull starts to look like a nail.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Since the original thread has been 100% derailed into a discussion about how and when you should get to re-roll for picking a lock...

Does anyone in this thread see these two scenarios as being different and would one but not the other occur at your table?

Scenario 1
P1: I want to pick the lock.
GM: OK, give me a Lockpick roll.
P1: I got a 7.
GM: The lock doesn't budge.
P1: I try again. I got an 18.
GM: OK, now its open.

Scenario 2
P1: I want to know if his religion is tied to Tiamat.
GM: OK, give me a Religion roll.
P1: I got a 7
GM: You don't remember anything like that.
P1: I try again. I got an 18.
GM: Yes it is.

 

[Oofta]

Okay, so one? That's a house rule.

Two, the house rule you're describing is simply a more reasonable and practical way of abstracting the "immersion-breaking" rule of allowing people to retry until they succeed. This is not a counter-argument to anything I've said about the realism of being able to retry some skill checks indefinitely... it's just a more streamlined way of accomplishing the exact same thing I'm saying.



I understand what you're saying perfectly, but it's still absolute nonsense.

If you set the DC for picking a lock according to how long the PC spends making the attempt-- which is reasonable-- there's still no logical reason that a PC cannot make another attempt in the immediate future, taking more time or even taking less time, and not have the exact same chance at success that they did on the "first attempt" you keep dismissing.

"... their die roll represents all their effort over that hour."

So what happens when they spend an hour on the lock, fail at the given DC, and then decide to take a break and come back fresh?

There's nothing wrong with abstracting multiple attempts to open a lock with a single die roll with Advantage or reduced DC... but that's just abstracting the same process people are complaining is unrealistic-- "trying until you succeed"-- while I'm trying to argue that no, that's how exactly how that works.

It's up to the DM to set DC and determine how to resolve challenges. When there's uncertainty we use dice to resolve that uncertainty. In my example, it's not uncertain that the PC will pick the lock. I've decided they will and that they are skillful enough that there's no risk of jamming the lock.

The question is how long it takes to pick that lock*, which is uncertain. That's not a house rule ... not that it matters one way or another.

*Or search the library for a specific book, or any number of activities that will take an indeterminate amount of time.