If, for example, the players encounter a room that has a boulder blocking an entrance, they might decide to see if they can push it out of the way.
So, am I correct in saying that I might, as DM, ask the pushing character to make a Strength roll to see if they are successful in pushing it. So I might think 'Well, it's a pretty heavy boulder, so I will set it as a DC15.' So they roll a d20 and add their Strength modifier. However, they fail (scoring less than 15).
Firstly, do I have everything correct so far?
Secondly, if they fail, what is there to prevent them trying again and again until they succeed? Is the intention that there always be some sort of penalty in the event of failure?
If, for example, the players encounter a room that has a boulder blocking an entrance, they might decide to see if they can push it out of the way.
So, am I correct in saying that I might, as DM, ask the pushing character to make a Strength roll to see if they are successful in pushing it. So I might think 'Well, it's a pretty heavy boulder, so I will set it as a DC15.' So they roll a d20 and add their Strength modifier. However, they fail (scoring less than 15).
Firstly, do I have everything correct so far?
Yes. I mean, DC15 is considered a medium challenge, so maybe that is appropriate for what you consider "pretty heavy", but just wanted to point that out. How it works is correct.
Secondly, if they fail, what is there to prevent them trying again and again until they succeed?
Is the intention that there always be some sort of penalty in the event of failure?
That's up to you as DM. I don't believe there is a RAW answer to this, but here are some suggestions:
Each attempt takes a certain amount of time, say 10 minutes. Your checks determine how long it takes to move it. This could manifest as delaying the completion of a time sensitive quest, or a wandering monster could wander right into them.
There are consequences to failing - this is controversial, but if they roll a 1, they could hurt themselves with the strain.
You only allow a single check which represents their entire attempt. If they fail, that's it.
You only allow one check per person.
Personally, I do a mixture. A check will take a certain amount of time (as appropriate to the nature of the check). If they get a 1, then they get some kind of negative consequence - nothing crippling, but enough to make them consider being judicious in how many checks they make as opposed to using resource-using methods. For example, if they're really low level, they might get Disadvantage on a different check or attack roll, a little higher level and they might take a few HP damage, things like that. They only get to redo a check if they can provide a rational reason for it. Failed to move a boulder? Sure. Rolled low on their perception? Sorry, you didn't realise that you were inattentive, so you wouldn't check again.
However, that's all up to you. I don't think there is any RAW consequences to failing a check (beyond not.getting the reward), but you definitely want to discourage check spams.
Also, try not to hide vital stuff behind dice rolls. The last thing you want is for the party to break their last lockpick trying to get through a locked door behind which is the BBEG. Trust me, Murphy's Law is very much alive and kicking in the Forgotten Realms. I was doing Sunless Citadel as a player, and found a door that was locked. Tried picking it and failed three times. I decided that it was a boring door and probably wasn't worth the effort and so left to find another more accessible route through. Unfortunately, that door had a vital ally behind it, so the DM had to invent another room for me to "find" and get through to find that ally just so the adventure could continue. Don't block doors you really want the party to get through - or at least, make it obvious that you want the party to get through it.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi
I am brand new to D&D.
If, for example, the players encounter a room that has a boulder blocking an entrance, they might decide to see if they can push it out of the way.
So, am I correct in saying that I might, as DM, ask the pushing character to make a Strength roll to see if they are successful in pushing it. So I might think 'Well, it's a pretty heavy boulder, so I will set it as a DC15.' So they roll a d20 and add their Strength modifier. However, they fail (scoring less than 15).
Firstly, do I have everything correct so far?
Secondly, if they fail, what is there to prevent them trying again and again until they succeed? Is the intention that there always be some sort of penalty in the event of failure?
Thanks in advance!
Paul
Yes. I mean, DC15 is considered a medium challenge, so maybe that is appropriate for what you consider "pretty heavy", but just wanted to point that out. How it works is correct.
That's up to you as DM. I don't believe there is a RAW answer to this, but here are some suggestions:
Personally, I do a mixture. A check will take a certain amount of time (as appropriate to the nature of the check). If they get a 1, then they get some kind of negative consequence - nothing crippling, but enough to make them consider being judicious in how many checks they make as opposed to using resource-using methods. For example, if they're really low level, they might get Disadvantage on a different check or attack roll, a little higher level and they might take a few HP damage, things like that. They only get to redo a check if they can provide a rational reason for it. Failed to move a boulder? Sure. Rolled low on their perception? Sorry, you didn't realise that you were inattentive, so you wouldn't check again.
However, that's all up to you. I don't think there is any RAW consequences to failing a check (beyond not.getting the reward), but you definitely want to discourage check spams.
Also, try not to hide vital stuff behind dice rolls. The last thing you want is for the party to break their last lockpick trying to get through a locked door behind which is the BBEG. Trust me, Murphy's Law is very much alive and kicking in the Forgotten Realms. I was doing Sunless Citadel as a player, and found a door that was locked. Tried picking it and failed three times. I decided that it was a boring door and probably wasn't worth the effort and so left to find another more accessible route through. Unfortunately, that door had a vital ally behind it, so the DM had to invent another room for me to "find" and get through to find that ally just so the adventure could continue. Don't block doors you really want the party to get through - or at least, make it obvious that you want the party to get through it.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.