Is it possible for a player to force skill checks on an NPC? for spells like Web. 5e

[Shock]

I know the DM can make the skill checks but I am trying to create a button to do it so they don't have to. It is very convenient to be able to force save rolls but it would be nice to be able to do checks too. I've checked the wiki but was unable to find a way to do this.

Rule set 5E. FGC

[Zacchaeus]

No, there is no mechanism for making skill checks automatically.

[GavinRuneblade]

I tell the pc to roll a d20 for the NPC. I know their bonus, and we both know the DC. It is the same speed as having a button, makes the player feel like they have agency, and it's one less thing for me to worry about.

[Three of Swords]

disregard, I realized my idea was unfeasible

[Shock]

I tell the pc to roll a d20 for the NPC. I know their bonus, and we both know the DC. It is the same speed as having a button, makes the player feel like they have agency, and it's one less thing for me to worry about.

not sure that counts as agency but ok

[GavinRuneblade]

I said "feel like they have agency". I asked them if they want me to roll or if they want to roll. they like rolling themselves because they feel it is more like making an attack and they think it changes their luck and is them resolving the action. Note again, "they feel".

[Three of Swords]

I said "feel like they have agency". I asked them if they want me to roll or if they want to roll. they like rolling themselves because they feel it is more like making an attack and they think it changes their luck and is them resolving the action. Note again, "they feel".

I agree. Many players prefer to roll to see what happens, not have the DM do it.

I really wish D&D was player-facing on all rolls. Your spells 'attack' the target, not the DM rolls a save. The PCs roll a Defense roll against a static attack value rather than the DM rolls to attack against a static armor class. Things like that.

Sure, the DMG offers it as a variant (their values are incorrect, btw). But since it's not Core rules, VTTs don't offer it.

[Shock]

I agree. Many players prefer to roll to see what happens, not have the DM do it.

I really wish D&D was player-facing on all rolls. Your spells 'attack' the target, not the DM rolls a save. The PCs roll a Defense roll against a static attack value rather than the DM rolls to attack against a static armor class. Things like that.

Sure, the DMG offers it as a variant (their values are incorrect, btw). But since it's not Core rules, VTTs don't offer it.

what difference does it make? chance is chance, it doesn't matter who starts the random number generator unless you believe in magic in the real world

[Three of Swords]

what difference does it make? chance is chance, it doesn't matter who starts the random number generator unless you believe in magic in the real world

You are correct. Statistically it should not matter. But to the players, it feels like it does.

Reasons:


Keeps players more engaged when it's not their turn.
Makes the players feel like it's their bad luck rather than the DM's good luck when they get hit or crit.
The DM can tell several players to make defense rolls at once w/o needing to assign or remember that certain colored dice are against certain PCs.
Allows the DM to focus on the narrative rather than worrying about dice.


The one serious negative of it is that DMs can't fudge rolls. But I never fudge anyway. I want the players to know that they succeeded when it looked like they were doomed because of skill and luck, not DM fiat.

[GavinRuneblade]

Three of Swords hit it. It is not about math, it is about the experience. Having the player roll makes the player's experience better in their own words. Three's players and mine at least, your mileage may vary, of course. I strongly recommend you give it a shot though and see if your group enjoys it or doesn't care.

[Shock]

The one serious negative of it is that DMs can't fudge rolls.

Sounds like a benefit to me.

[Three of Swords]

Sounds like a benefit to me.

I agree. But not all DMs do. ;)