A question for all DMs out there. So, part of the fun of D&D derives from the randomness of the dice, and to interpret their results in a sensible way -even within the broad boundaries of a make-believe world- is the DM's main job. The party's wizard may roll horribly on an history check to remember the deeds of the past, but the dumb barbarian may roll so improbably high that, to make peace with his limited relevant skill, the DM could rule that "he remembers that exact anecdote heard during the pub brawl he had the previous night" or such. You could follow the same reasoning from pretty much every other skill: despite having low core stats, one could clumsily dodge, unexpectedly resist, unforeseeably find/solve, incredibly remember/understand, weirdly convince. After all randomness does happen in real life, and it can very well happen under the tyranny of the RNG. But what about strength checks? Try as I might, I have a hard time imagine how a mage with -1 strength could overpower the +6 orc in arm wrestling without the intervention of external forces if the former beat the latter dice-wise. I guess the orc could be distracted or just let the spellcaster win, but these all seem pretty weak ways to force a result considering that strength is such an objective value. I don't think it's random that its flat value is linked to fixed capabilities like the height and length of one's jumps or one's carrying capacity: a strong character may be tired or ill, but he'll always be able to accomplish physical endeavors that a weak character simply couldn't match without aid. How would you rule on an unlikely strength check without breaking the players' suspension of disbelief?
144k 36 36 gold badges 475 475 silver badges 765 765 bronze badges asked May 10, 2021 at 13:16 OmniVictor OmniVictor 685 7 7 silver badges 14 14 bronze badges Commented May 10, 2021 at 14:12\$\begingroup\$ Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. \$\endgroup\$
Commented May 12, 2021 at 21:06Let's see what the rules say about ability checks (emphasis mine):
The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results.
You said you have a hard time imagining how the mage could possibly win in arm wrestling against the orc. That sounds to me like you already determined that the outcome is certain. If the outcome is certain (and it's not an attack), don't ask for a roll.
The DM decides when dice are rolled, not the players. If your players say they want to arm wrestle, and you feel that roleplay-wise there is no way PC 1 could win over PC 2, you simply tell them the outcome.
If you can figure out a way to RP either outcome, then go ahead and ask for the roll! But that's a determination you need to make before you ask for the roll. Don't ask for the roll, and then despair at not being able to narrate the outcome.
. and your players' tastes. Some players will enjoy a laugh about "The orc choked on a fly", others will roll their eyes at it. You have to feel that out. Also don't neglect your own preferences, since the game should be enjoyable for you too.
answered May 10, 2021 at 14:05 2,300 10 10 silver badges 29 29 bronze badges\$\begingroup\$ I would add to this - use the character's background as well as their class and abilities. A barbarian with the sage background should get a chance to roll the history check; a barbarian outlander probably no chance. \$\endgroup\$
Commented May 11, 2021 at 2:10\$\begingroup\$ @GreenstoneWalker Ch7 disagrees with you. you can try any ability check, but if you don't have proficiency you'll have a lower chance of success, and you may have to roll with disadvantage if the DM sees a factor that lowers success chances. \$\endgroup\$
Commented May 11, 2021 at 14:41\$\begingroup\$ @KorvinStarmast I am not aware of any rules stating a GM must provide a static DC for ability checks, only that "the DM decides. the difficulty of the task" (Ch7). Were there any additional rulings that said this decision must be character agnostic? \$\endgroup\$
Commented May 11, 2021 at 16:19\$\begingroup\$ @KorvinStarmast I misunderstood your comment. When you said, "[Y]ou can try any ability check . " I disagreed because it sounded like you were disagreeing with RHS's main point, "If failure/success doesn't make sense, don't let them roll in the first place." I see now you were replying to a comment about backgrounds. \$\endgroup\$
Commented May 12, 2021 at 2:30 \$\begingroup\$ @ChrisBouchard we seem to be in violent agreement. 🤣 \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 12, 2021 at 2:31 \$\begingroup\$From a rules perspective, it is abundantly clear that a contested Strength (Athletics) check is called for here:
Sometimes one character's or monster's efforts are directly opposed to another's. This can occur when both of them are trying to do the same thing and only one can succeed, such as attempting to snatch up a magic ring that has fallen on the floor. This situation also applies when one of them is trying to prevent the other one from accomplishing a goal — for example, when a monster tries to force open a door that an adventurer is holding closed. In situations like these, the outcome is determined by a special form of ability check, called a contest.
Both participants in a contest make ability checks appropriate to their efforts. They apply all appropriate bonuses and penalties, but instead of comparing the total to a DC, they compare the totals of their two checks. The participant with the higher check total wins the contest. That character or monster either succeeds at the action or prevents the other one from succeeding.
But, sometimes, it can help to rationalize an application of the rules to satisfy our desire for simulation in the game.
Weird flex, but I can deadlift 375 pounds. Sometimes. On any given day, there is no guarantee that I can actually deadlift 375 pounds that day. There is a long list of variables that contribute to my ability to perform this specific feat of strength, including, but not limited to:
All of these things affect my ability to perform any feat of strength, including arm wrestling. There are so many confounding variables baked into the bonuses and dice roll. It is entirely conceivable for a character with a strength of 8 to still beat a character with a strength of 20 in an arm wrestle, even if it is unlikely.
19.7k 13 13 gold badges 82 82 silver badges 139 139 bronze badges answered May 10, 2021 at 14:35 Thomas Markov Thomas Markov 153k 30 30 gold badges 856 856 silver badges 1.2k 1.2k bronze badges \$\begingroup\$ Are there any cases where you would fail to deadlift 50 pounds? \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 10, 2021 at 22:14\$\begingroup\$ @Harper-ReinstateMonica Funny you should ask, when I was first trying out a different starting position on my deadlift, it wasn’t quite right and I fell backwards lifting 65 pounds. Besides that, there have been times where I worked so hard that I aggravated an old injury that prevented me from doing even really light deadlifts. In my mind, these things are baked into the die roll and bonuses. \$\endgroup\$
Commented May 10, 2021 at 22:29\$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov thanks for your contribution, expert insight is always welcome and from now on I'd feel less uncomfortable ruling that the orc is struck by a cramp, slips on the table or feels a sudden torpor. I guess it's hard to imagine abstractly, but even expert athletes can slip om the fundamentals every once in a while \$\endgroup\$
Commented May 11, 2021 at 10:59\$\begingroup\$ I like this answer, and it works both ways. The orc had a bad day, and the wizard had a good day plus a lucky intuition of leverage. This was an opposed roll. With two dice rolled, you get two stories that lead to the given outcome. \$\endgroup\$
Commented May 11, 2021 at 21:21\$\begingroup\$ I can attest to old wounds. In my teens I twisted my knee playing softball. Many decades later, I can still feel a twinge of pain just walking down the street. Just apply that to the orc. Some flex surfaced an old axe wound that made them wince and lose the wrestling match. \$\endgroup\$
Commented May 13, 2021 at 5:47 \$\begingroup\$As a GM, I generally try to put the onus on my players to explain why something worked.
The wizard might explain that they realized that the surface of the table was uneven, so they picked a spot where they knew the orc wouldn't have a stable place to put their elbow. The wizard might have turned their hand and squeezed their thumb to hit nerve endings in the orc's hand that caused them to have a lapse in concentration. Maybe he summoned up memories of a time when he got beaten and stripped by a half-orc bully in his childhood and his surge of adrenalin got him to surge into a win.
Given the disparity in values, the odds are that it wouldn't happen a second time, but this time it did, and the player explaining why it worked might give you new story hooks to work with (if the wizard won by a "trick", it might generate ill will. If he won by sheer anger over past events, you have a bit of backstory and maybe the orc respects them for managing to make use of their innate savagery).
The key trick I've found is, when the player provides an explanation of why they might have won that time, to not let that become a reason they will win the next time without checking, although you might let them have a +2 circumstance bonus the next time for clever tactics, as long as it's not against the same opponent.
2,300 10 10 silver badges 29 29 bronze badges answered May 10, 2021 at 14:41 Sean Duggan Sean Duggan 10.9k 3 3 gold badges 27 27 silver badges 64 64 bronze badges\$\begingroup\$ Nice answer. However, a "+2 circumstance bonus" does not sound very 5e-like. Granting advantage seems more natural to me (even though statistically it corresponds to a higher bonus). \$\endgroup\$
Commented May 11, 2021 at 19:26 \$\begingroup\$ @MarsPlastic You're right. :) Prior system biases in effect. \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 11, 2021 at 19:32 \$\begingroup\$This greatly amplifies a statistical advantage, making the final odds of winning the round much more in favour of the stronger (and proficient-in-Athletics) contestant.
Having the math odds be very unlikely opens the door to weirder narrative explanations, like a fluke muscle cramp, on top of brilliant technique by the weaker arm wrestler. You can say that multiple factors conspired to produce the result.
Some contests, like shot put, involve significant technique so there's room for having a good vs. bad throw, i.e. chance. (Although if this isn't the Olympics, and the trained shot-putter knows they only have to beat a puny mage, not try to come out on top of their peers, their consistent throw may be farther than the mage's best possible throw.)
Other contests, like a foot race or arm wrestling, are almost always going to be won by the stronger contestant. i.e. a significant difference in ability will swing the outcome statistics very strongly in one direction. (Some games of mental skill are like that, too, notably chess where a grand master can simultaneously beat a room full of amateur opponents.)
A single roll in 5e's bounded-accuracy design doesn't model the latter kind of contest at all well. This is what creates the disconnect between what you'd estimate the -1 Wizard's chances would be against the +6 Orc: we can't rule out the wizard winning, but we know it's very unlikely.
@RHS calculated the chances of a -1 vs. +6 contested check at 22.75%. (I didn't check the math, but seems reasonable). That's far too high a chance for the wizard to win an arm-wrestling contest.
On Critical Role, Matt Mercer has run arm wrestling as a series of opposed Athletics checks, moving the arm position by one step (or two with a big success margin or a nat 20). The starting point is like Deuce in tennis, with the first win creating "game point", within one more success of overall victory. Or returning from that point to neutral. This appears to work well for creating fun, if the DM and players can get into the spirit of excitement over the give and take of the contest. (CR 2x17 "Harvest Close", from 1:22:10 through about 1:38:38 shows this in action, including the whole party getting really into cheering on one player in an exciting match.)
Mathematically, the chance of the mage winning two or three consecutive rolls is quite a lot lower, low enough to not be totally silly. In fact, 0.2275 squared is 0.052; about 5% or 1 in 20. (I'm ignoring the chance of coming back to even, then eventually winning. I think that's not a huge problem for lopsided contests, but 0.5 squared = 0.25 is obviously not right for an evenly-matched contest. That's just your chance of winning without any setbacks.)
Doing something outrageous with the same odds as a nat-20 sounds just about right for D&D. If you model it as even more small steps, odds swing even more strongly towards the side with even a minor advantage. (But that's not fun to roll; in most games there's a win-by-2 condition, like tennis's deuce / advantage.)
Of course, don't allow a roll at all when there's no plausible narrative explanation. It's up to the table where you draw the line; some groups like outrageous things to be possible when someone rolls a natural 20. But picking up a boulder 10 times your own weight isn't something you should get to roll for at all. It's harder to justify not allowing a role for a contested check, but if you limit yourself to modelling it as only deuce / advantage (win by 2) then the odds may still be too high if a weak human wants to arm-wrestle an ogre.
Food for thought: perhaps in the world of 5e, long jump is the most popular event, because everyone's success is linearly correlated with their Strength score, no randomness involved.
You cover a number of feet up to your Strength score if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump.
(with a DC10 Strength (Athletics) check to clear a low obstacle on the way, so that part is random.)
Does that mean you shouldn't roll contested anything for long-jump competitions? Well, what it really means is that 5e is not a sports simulator; if you want to focus more attention on contests, you'll have to put some work into modeling them (i.e. turning them into a fun dice game).
I don't know if arm wrestling is really an example of a contest that's almost always won by the same person, if two people have multiple matches.
Other sports certainly are like that, though, especially racing.
For example, in short track speed skating, a personal best of 47 seconds over 500m is a lot better than say 52 seconds. A skater with a personal best multiple seconds faster will win almost every time over that distance, even if they don't win the start and do have to set up a pass on one of the straightaways. (OTOH, it takes a lot more effort to go a bit faster; air drag is approximately quadratic with speed. Similarly for foot race sprints. Still, in 5e terms, someone that much faster might have Str and Con 16 vs. 12, only a +2 difference. And maybe Expertise in Athletics or that specific event for a technique sport, for maybe another +2 or 3 advantage. So in 5e terms, things might only work out if you model each lap as a separate roll where you can gain some separation or close the gap some.)