Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bacon Bits" data-source="post: 8178004" data-attributes="member: 6777737">For the first example, I think it's okay for a player to expand on how they're trying to accomplish a goal. Say the player describes that they're going to take some physical action like jumping from one heaving deck of a ship to another, and you call for an Acrobatics check. It's alright for the player to say, "No, I'm trying to do this with main strength. I don't care if I'm elegant or balanced in doing it or if I land on my feet. I just want to throw myself and get over there. I want to try to do it with Athletics instead of Acrobatics." Then the DM can consider if that's reasonable, and either accept it or instead explain that what they're describing isn't possible. It's definitely going to affect the outcome, but it's perfectly acceptable play. Here, a player could say, "No, I'm not trying to be nice and convince them I'm right. I'm trying to threaten them and convince them it'll be more trouble to disagree than it's worth."For the second example, I think if I were DM I would not allow it. I would say, "That's not how that works." Grappling is a martial action, not a skillful action. I might be convinced to allow it with disadvantage, but it would have to be pretty unusual circumstances or a particularly good idea.For the third example, it would depend entirely on whether or not the subject of the knowledge check could reasonably be associated with their study. I think it's reasonable if they PC has an established background of studying magic in the context of worshipping a god of magic, but it doesn't seem very likely and wouldn't cover all possible Religion checks. I would be much more likely to allow a Religion check in exchange for an Arcana check if you worshipped the god of magic. Even then, however, it wouldn't be a universal substitution.For the final example, I don't see why not. Making a rope by lashing and entwining vines is fairly reasonable, and the only tool required to do so would be something to secure the end of the rope to.In some cases the DC may be adjusted, or I might apply advantage or disadvantage. The idea of a skill check is to decide the most appropriate thing to use based on the description the player makes of what their character is doing or based on the background of the character. If the player thinks the DM's understanding is wrong, there's no reason the player shouldn't communicate that and the DM should be open to adjustments.</blockquote>

Verification