House rule of the day: stealthy monsters
These days, I find I ask for less and less perception checks. I decide if something is detectable based on what the characters do. If there's an ambush, I consider if the monsters are good at sneaking, and I let the fiction unfold.
If a player asks the right questions, they might detect the ambush. Look up and see a grey slime about to drop, be quiet and realise the birds are suddenly silent, cast detect magic and spot the invisible stalker. All the same thing to me.
If needed, I roll for the monsters (I make up a stat and do a d20 check). I reckon this goes contrary to the players-roll-for-everything principle in The Black Hack, which some people expect MM to be following. Does it strike you as a contradiction?
No, but I'm not orthodox about the only players roll rule. I think this sounds like a good way of doing it.
ReplyDeleteI'm agree with Tore Nielsen (I'm always agree with men with a big beard) so I'm agree with you too !
ReplyDeleteI think it could be the same for secret places or hidden treasures... Ask the good question, it's a automatic success... Maybe player can ask for a roll, sometime the character is more clever or competent than the player...
And for me, it's really not a problem if the refeeree rolls some dice sometime... I'm sorry Eric Nieudan, I already did it (shame on me !).
I prefer only players rolling, but I don't expect MM to inherently follow that.
ReplyDeleteCan you go into more detail about what the monsters roll for?
Tore Nielsen I'm not orthodox either, just lazy ;)
ReplyDeleteguillaume jentey That's exactly where I'm going. It should be as easy as secret doors and traps. I don't like characters rolling to see if they are cleverer than their player. We don't ask a smart player who sees a trap to roll to see if their INT 4 barbarian is going to fall in it after all...
Aaron Griffin Depends on the situation. Could be DEX when just being sneaky, or INT if they're trying to set up an ambush. Giving adv/disadv to these checks could also make sense.
Cédric Plante Both methods work really (have the players roll with disadvantage if the monster is good at sneaking). My bias comes from the fact that I like a world that is entirely open for interaction. You poke it, and see if it pokes back, and your luck with the d20 has nothing to do with it.
For me, sometime I like referee's rolls because it's "secret" (specially when you play with hang out...)... When you ask the players to make a roll, they think "oh shit, there must be sometime there", when you roll by yourself they don't know the score and sometime don't know that you roll something...
ReplyDeleteO my explaination is terriblely not understable !
No it isn't =)
ReplyDeleteThat's part of my reasoning as well, thanks for helping me refining my thoughts. In an old school game where life is at stake all the time, I don't want players to be tempted to metagame to much.
I don't think this is what it is. In my mind, it's just a way of deciding what happens when I'm not sure.
ReplyDeleteCan the kobolds creep up the trees and drop nets on the characters while they're sleeping? Not all the time, but they're good at it, so I'll just roll their stealth.
Whatever the result is, the players will deal with the situation with their choices. If the kobolds make noise, the players can attack or run away. If they're stealthy, then it depends if they say they're looking up, or putting a lookout in the low branches...
ReplyDeleteIt's a way to put a part of unexpected or hazard without bothering players with rolls...
ReplyDeleteI don't know if it's something like this for Eric Nieudan but I try to play like this as referee.
guillaume jentey It's a way for me to decide how dangerous is a danger =)
ReplyDelete