One of the most important things in any role-playing game is
WHEN should a die be rolled. Controlling this is one of the DMs most coveted
tools because it can set the tone for a game. In general rolls can be done in
one of three places, before the fiction, during the fiction, and after the
fiction. When a roll is called for and used determines a lot. If we are
discussing D&D (and its clones) the older we go the less skills there tends
to be. So, when should you roll a Find Traps roll with a PC? Does the PC have
to say they are using the skill? Should the PC roll it or should the DM? How
detailed should the PC be about what they are doing? These are some of the
questions that DMs face when running a game. I am sure that some people will
claim to have the “right” answer to this question. I personally feel there is
no “right” answer, just the answer that works for me. This is how I use skills
in my game and some of my rationale for why I use them that way.
To ruin
some of my “old-school credibility” I play in a semi-monthly 5e game with my
friend who I started D&D with in 1990. One thing that I hated with the 5e
system (that many, but not all people do) was the idea that if my character does
something directly it triggers a roll, not a solution. Example: My dwarf
examines a treasure chest, I specifically state that I am looking in the
keyhole for a needle or device. I even stick a knife blade into it to spring a possible
trap if one is there. I am told to roll a Perception check with advantage, I
still roll poorly. My character decides to open the chest and I am stabbed with
a poison needle. If I were running this in my games, the PC would have seen the
trap without a roll, because they were looking in the right place. If the player
does a thing and, in the fiction, it makes sense they would see a thing, then
they do. I assume competency on the part of the PC characters. I see DMs report
running this style of game all the time. One in which the PCs must be EXTREMELY
specific in what they do to figure out traps and the like. You might believe
this is abundantly correct, but then the issue comes up, what is the Find a
Trap skill used for exactly? If I need to be specific about what I am doing,
and I don’t specifically mention I look in that keyhole should I roll? Should I
automatically get hit with the trap? How much detail does a PC need to go into to
gain a benefit? More importantly, what is more fun?
This is
how I run it, I am not claiming this is the only or best way to do it, just how
I run it for my games. First off, if the PC does an action, they do an action. If
they state they are searching the throne for buttons that activate a pit and there
is one, they find it. Second, I use the 1-in-6 type rolls often as a passive
alert. If the PCs are moving at “Dungeon Speed” the idea is that they are
mapping, trying to be quiet, and looking for things out of the ordinary. I will
roll for them to find a trap even if they are not specifically looking for it.
If they approach a door and they should be able to hear a ruckus party going on
in the other side of the door, they hear it. If there is a possibility of
hearing it, I will roll for them, many times without them even knowing. I allow
these skills to be used as shorthand too, to speed up game play. If we went
into EXTREME detail for every room the PCs come into with their searching, we
would possibly clear three rooms a night. I allow them to say “We search the
room for X.” I will then make the appropriate rolls. I will often telegraph in
rooms with interesting things (secret doors, hidden treasure, etc) with details
so they can zoom in on that. If they want to tell me specifically what they are
searching, I will then decide accordingly. I do not think this was the intended
way to handle these situations, but I think it is fair and efficient.
Demi-Humans often must pay a
premium (in XP) to get bonuses to these skills, so let them be skilled in it. I
often roll the player(s) with the highest in each skill first, to see if they
notice, then everyone else. Once one player achieves the roll, I usually stop.
I let that character shine. You will notice that the Elf in my game often hears
things and finds hidden doors and no one else does. Because I tend to roll him
first and he then gets to take his moment in the spotlight. Making sure that
everyone feels their character adds something to the party is important. Even
the filthy Demi-Humans.
I also tend to use Ability Checks
which can be controversial in the Old-School community. I do not think I overuse
them, because of assumed competency, but they are still used. I try to keep in
mind that Magic-Users know magical stuff, Clerics know religious stuff, Dwarves
know dwarven stuff, etc. I generally give them automatic information based on
their realm of expertise. Ability checks come in to adjudicate things that fall
outside the common in those realms, they fill in the gaps so to speak. I also
admit that I do far more INT and CON Ability Checks then others because I think
the stats are under used compared to the others. This means having a higher INT
and CON has some more useful benefits. I generally see Ability Checks as the
opposite of Saving Throws. Saving Throws happen when something is done to the
PC, Ability Checks are when the PC does something to something else. I can see
a game going on just fine without them and the DM just coming up with a X-in-6
chance of everything, but I enjoy them and will keep using them.
Overall, the thing I like about
older systems is that they do not have a robust skill system. To me this was
something that kind of spoiled AD&D and D&D beyond that. Second Edition’s
proficiency system was too limiting in that they had TONS of skills, but you
got so few you felt your character was inept. Third Edition you could do any
skill and skills stacked with skills and had bonuses from class and feats and synchronicity
and what phase the moon was in and the list goes on. It was too much. I like
the way that OSE/BX keeps things simple, and it is a big reason I continue to
use it.
