Post/Author/DateTime	Post
addictive 08-13-07, 06:53 PM	Can PCs without any skill in lockpicking open locks? just curious
queenfange 08-13-07, 07:13 PM	Not technically. Open Lock is a trained only skill, so you cannot open a lock without ranks. That said, if you can break it, melt it, or magically open it, who needs Open Lock, right? :D
DaidojiTaidoru 08-13-07, 07:13 PM	OPEN LOCK (DEX; TRAINED ONLY) So officially no. I admittedly combined Open Lock with Disable Device and don't really care if my players try that untrained. Locks aren't for keeping adventurers out. They're there to slow them down a bit.
PenderGrass 08-13-07, 08:14 PM	Locks aren't for keeping adventurers out. They're there to slow them down a bit. That would be an interesting selling point for your merchants. "LOCKS! Get Your Locks! They Don't Keep People Out - But They Do Slow Them Down - Just A Bit!" /chuckle :dragon: ****
shadzar 08-13-07, 09:03 PM	yes someone untrained in lockpicking can open locks....provided they have the key.
runestar 08-13-07, 09:28 PM	There are some feats which let you make untrained skill checks, and you can always take20...:P
Novabomb 08-13-07, 09:59 PM	Yes, its called an adamantine dagger.
The_Gimp 08-13-07, 10:05 PM	Yeah baby, or a flask of acid!
Thubby 08-13-07, 11:31 PM	yes, with large, blunt objects
Armsman 08-14-07, 12:13 AM	Just yesterday I locked myself out of my apartment. I was able to get back in, and I'm not exactly trained in lockpicking. So, by the rules, I couldn't do what I did. Plus, all I needed was a butter knife, definitely an improvised tool, so I was working at a -2 penalty. I don't know what my Dex is, but there's no way it's higher than 14. So, the best I'm working at is a +0. That means that my DM must have been nice, and decided a DC 20 or lower lock can be picked untrained. I think I have a new houserule for my games. Ah, the wide variety of larcenous knowledge I picked up in college.
CroBob 08-14-07, 12:23 AM	It doesn't make sense that lock-picking is a trained only skill. How do street urchins learn it? Do they all have teachers?
Shadow Imp 08-14-07, 12:30 AM	Was it a normal butter knife or a masterwork butter knife? :D The PH says Open Locks allows a player to pick padlocks, finesse combination locks, and solve puzzle locks. I guess a normal door lock is simple enough to pick by the average player (at least attempt). Take 20 and you'll get through.
runestar 08-14-07, 12:58 AM	It doesn't make sense that lock-picking is a trained only skill. How do street urchins learn it? Do they all have teachers? They could always purchase ranks in it as cross-class skill, if they do not have lvs in classes like rogue or expert. They don't need to be taught - it is possible that they somehow picked it up themselves.
CroBob 08-14-07, 01:02 AM	They could always purchase ranks in it as cross-class skill, if they do not have lvs in classes like rogue or expert. They don't need to be taught - it is possible that they somehow picked it up themselves. Then why can't experienced adventurers pick it up? How do they gain a rank in the skill before actually succeeding in picking a lock? How did they learn to do it if they cannot do it until they know how?
Shadow Imp 08-14-07, 01:14 AM	Probably background story. Training... reading a book. Studying locks by taking them apart and seeing how they work. Practicing on a lock in their spare time. Then when they buy a rank in Open Locks their training pays off.
CroBob 08-14-07, 01:21 AM	But that doesn't explain why it's impossible until then. I never studied locks, yet I've picked them. I learned how to do it by doing it.
Thubby 08-14-07, 01:49 AM	But that doesn't explain why it's impossible until then. I never studied locks, yet I've picked them. I learned how to do it by doing it. simple, the "encounter" of attempting to open the lock gave you enough xp to gain a level, you simultaneously got the skill rank and succeeded on your check. your "study" was al the time you weren't actually succeeding :D and to the guy who used a butterknife, get a new lock, that is a sign of an old or just crapy lock.
CroBob 08-14-07, 01:55 AM	Ah... One of those classic, tricky, "impossible", level up to get what you need to win what gave you the level plays!
CCS 08-14-07, 02:02 AM	The technical answer, RAW, has to be "No". But if you think about it, the OBVIOUS answer to questions regarding using any "trained only" skills with out having ranks in them is "Yes". Because otherwise how'd the 1st guy with ranks ever gain them? So obviously an untrained person CAN learn these things on their own given enough time.... In the end this is a discussion best had with your DM.
Armsman 08-14-07, 02:09 AM	Was it a normal butter knife or a masterwork butter knife? :DI'm not sure. It was plain enough, but incredibly well balanced. I felt like I could lay down a paper thin layer of butter with that thing.
heffroncm 08-14-07, 02:36 AM	The technical answer, RAW, has to be "No". But if you think about it, the OBVIOUS answer to questions regarding using any "trained only" skills with out having ranks in them is "Yes". Because otherwise how'd the 1st guy with ranks ever gain them? So obviously an untrained person CAN learn these things on their own given enough time.... In the end this is a discussion best had with your DM. Yeah, real-world logic doesn't really apply to game rules. Does it make any sense? No, but it doesn't have to, that's the way the game is designed to work.
shadzar 08-14-07, 02:41 AM	Yeah, real-world logic doesn't really apply to game rules. Does it make any sense? No, but it doesn't have to, that's the way the game is designed to work. sounds like poor game design to me. :(
Arcane Guyver 08-14-07, 02:45 AM	Yeah, real-world logic doesn't really apply to game rules. Does it make any sense? No, but it doesn't have to, that's the way the game is designed to work. Thank you. D&D isn't a fantasy world simulation, it's a friggin game. Until you've had a little bit of practice (a skill rank), you can't feasibly attempt to open a lock without a key, magic spell/item, or by just destroying it.
runestar 08-14-07, 02:49 AM	Because otherwise how'd the 1st guy with ranks ever gain them? So obviously an untrained person CAN learn these things on their own given enough time.... Practice obviously. When he managed to pick his first lock, that was represented by him gaining that first few ranks in open lock, and rolling a high enough check. And anyways, this is dnd mechanics, not real life, so I see little need to correlate the 2.:)
Nom 08-14-07, 03:06 AM	Note that "trained" doesn't require a "trainer" or formal training, merely that you have ranks. Non-trained-only skills represent specialisation in common knowledge or abilities. It's something anyone can do, but you can do it well. Trained-only skills represent specialisation in unique knowledge or abilities. If you haven't specialised at all, then you don't know how to even start. Note that you only need 1 rank to count as "trained", which is a pretty small investment even cross-class if you desperately want to make the attempt. Not that your attempt will be worth much with only 1 rank.
shadzar 08-14-07, 03:07 AM	Practice obviously. When he managed to pick his first lock, that was represented by him gaining that first few ranks in open lock, and rolling a high enough check. And anyways, this is dnd mechanics, not real life, so I see little need to correlate the 2.:) of course because something so ridiculous as common sense never makes something seem more believable by the observer.
Kouk 08-14-07, 03:13 AM	Well, I see no problem with allowing Open Lock (or even Disable Device) to be used untrained, but I would say you can't beat a DC 10 if you have no Ranks. The lowest typical sort of lock, "Very Simple", starts at DC 20, which means for most purposes, it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference whether the skill could be used untrained or not. If someone with no training or experience/time spent on locks was able to break into his own house with a butterknife (improvised tools, take a -2 penalty), then his lock must have been extraordinarily crummy or it just happened to break.
DCAnderson 08-14-07, 03:54 AM	sounds like poor game design to me. :( Hey, in 2nd edition, you had to be a Rogue to open the lock. Now even the fighter can learn to do it if he's so inclined. Though it's a waste of skill points. Though technically I think it's a waste even for the rogue, when you can just have the Barbarian smash the damn thing ;)
runestar 08-14-07, 04:44 AM	of course because something so ridiculous as common sense never makes something seem more believable by the observer. Probably because common sense has little bearing in dnd, and may actually end up hindering the game.
T_Stalker 08-14-07, 08:20 AM	First level Bard spell: Improvisation I never actually felt like filling in my NPC Bard/Cleric's skillpoints. This spell gives a +10 in an untrained skill check, right? (I hope so anyway, otherwise I'm playing him wrong) (Coincidentally, if we weren't playing gestalt, would the cleric with INT 6 actually never get any skillpoints at all, or just the 2? What if his INT was even lower, would he gain negative skillpoints, growing dumber by the level?)
Kouk 08-14-07, 09:25 AM	(Coincidentally, if we weren't playing gestalt, would the cleric with INT 6 actually never get any skillpoints at all, or just the 2? What if his INT was even lower, would he gain negative skillpoints, growing dumber by the level?) As long as you have an INT score, there is a minimum of 1 Skill Point per level, regardless of how dumb you are. Hit Points also have a minimum of 1 per level, regardless of CON penalties, unless you take a certain Flaw.
CroBob 08-14-07, 10:03 AM	Note that "trained" doesn't require a "trainer" or formal training, merely that you have ranks. Non-trained-only skills represent specialisation in common knowledge or abilities. It's something anyone can do, but you can do it well. Trained-only skills represent specialisation in unique knowledge or abilities. If you haven't specialised at all, then you don't know how to even start. Note that you only need 1 rank to count as "trained", which is a pretty small investment even cross-class if you desperately want to make the attempt. Not that your attempt will be worth much with only 1 rank. You do not need "unique" knowledge to open a lock. You need to play with a poky thing inside it until you did "something" that made the lock able to be opened. You don't need to know how the mechanism works to do it! I would rule, however, that anyone can accomplish such a task when there is no strain on time, nothing at risk. Getting into your own house, for example, you have minutes upon minutes to work. Even if you're running late for work because you locked your keys inside, you're not going anywhere without them anyway, and so can just go to it until it works. I'd say the training is what allows people to do it so fast. The difference is that trained professionals do it quickly and efficiently. A novice does it slowly and clumsily. Trained only skills; Handle Animal, Knowledges, Profession, Spellcraft, Use Magic Device, and Speak Language all make obvious sense. They all necessitate a specialized form of knowledge. It's pretty much what makes them what they are. You cannot know something if you don't know it. Having a rank represents having that knowledge, knowledge you cannot know without specialized learning. Tumble makes sense because it's certainly not easy, in fact it's exceptionally difficult, to actually do. To do successfully. I know few people who can hold themselves above the ground with only their arms, let alone toss themselves every which way head over heels, flipping and maneuvering the whole time. Disable device would need ranks because you're simply disabling the device, not breaking it. You must have some form of specialized knowledge such that you make it stop working without actually damaging it. Decipher Script goes along with Open locks, for me. It's simply a matter of being able to do it quickly and efficiently, not to mention accurately. Anyone could decipher a script if given years, but one page a minute? That takes skill. Sleight of Hand... This one isn't so much something that you need trained. I really don't see why you'd need to be trained to do it. The DCs are already fairly high for the difficult tasks. Anyone can, with the right timing, palm something without being noticed. Again, anyone can take something from someone else's pocket or bag without being noticed, given the pocket isn't tightly drawn. It might be difficult, but it's not a special trick. Then again, perhaps I have ranks in the skill, and simply cannot see my character sheet to know that others would naturally find it impossible.
Someone 08-14-07, 01:19 PM	Well, obviously you didn't actually pick the lock, you just forced the door open by creative, non-destructive means. :D But I'd say that we modern people are a lot better at skills if only because we saw someone do it on TV. I believe there's a feat that does something to that effect, just can't recall the name...
Onikani 08-14-07, 01:44 PM	i agree. you didn't go into the keyhole and manipluate the lock mechanism so that it open. you simply slid the butterknife between the door and the doorjam so that it moved the latch. Technically you didn't pick the lock. But you did manage to open a door. So, in dnd terms, anyone can try to find a way to open a locked door without actually 'picking' the lock. Based on the door construction the dm should decide what kind of roll (if any) is necessary and what the dc is. problem solved.
Kursk 08-14-07, 02:49 PM	Yes, its called an adamantine dagger. Yes, I can see it now. 2 hours later, "I cut through it!"
DaidojiTaidoru 08-14-07, 03:27 PM	That would be an interesting selling point for your merchants. "LOCKS! Get Your Locks! They Don't Keep People Out - But They Do Slow Them Down - Just A Bit!" /chuckle Now now. I didn't say "people." I said "adventurers." ;) When the pack of murdering Hobos hits your pad you can bet the only thing that keeps them from taking everything is for them to be killed by the traps or to not find it in the first place. I still think Open Lock is redundant since the skill set has Disable Device anyway.
Jexil 08-14-07, 08:09 PM	Well, obviously you didn't actually pick the lock, you just forced the door open by creative, non-destructive means. :D But I'd say that we modern people are a lot better at skills if only because we saw someone do it on TV. I believe there's a feat that does something to that effect, just can't recall the name... Perhaps you're thinking of Jack of All Trades? It gives you a 1/2 skill point in every skill, which automatically makes you trained in all skills.
MrCustomer 08-14-07, 10:27 PM	A Lock is a complex mechanism designed to keep something shut unless a specific key patern is used. Without specific training, then picking anything but the simplest lock is beyond most, In fact there is a stron likelihood of an untrained person using tools on a lock to break either the tools or the lock, or both. Basically you are jamming a small metal stick into the lock and wiggling it around randomly. This persumes that the lock isn't a crude, or excedingly simple device. A simple latch, if accessable, is probably within even an untrained persons abilities, say a fence gate latch that you could poke something small into an opening in the fence and wiggle the latch. It would be safe to say that any lock with a DC of 10 or less could be opened without training, but this would really not even be considered a lock (simplist is DC 20) more of a latch or just a privacy mechanism (like your bathroom door lock which is designed to be easily picked for safety) Anything with a degree of complexity would require training. A Very Simple Lock is DC 20 and requires tools which is not an easy task even with training. Remember that Locks are designed to be difficult to open without the right key. You can open the lock by other means though, a crowbar, melting the insides with a spell, forcing the door with a good stiff kick. Most Locked doors are sturdier then unlocked doors. (ie outside door is solid, inside doors are thin, hollow frames.)
MrCustomer 08-14-07, 11:14 PM	Now now. I didn't say "people." I said "adventurers." ;) When the pack of murdering Hobos hits your pad you can bet the only thing that keeps them from taking everything is for them to be killed by the traps or to not find it in the first place. I still think Open Lock is redundant since the skill set has Disable Device anyway. You can't open a lock with Disable Device. Consider that picking a lock is as much touch and feel as it is any training, that is why Open Lock is Dexterity based, you need to make precise movements requiring delicate balance and exact force. Diasable Device on the other hand is Inteligence based, knowledge of the mechanics and workings of the device in question. You could use Disable Device to Jam the lock, or once opened, if you can take the lock apart you could rekey it. You could also bypass the lock if possible, for example removing the hinges of the chest, using a prybar just so to lift a locked window from it's frame are clever ways of using disable device.
CroBob 08-15-07, 12:02 AM	A Lock is a complex mechanism designed to keep something shut unless a specific key patern is used. Without specific training, then picking anything but the simplest lock is beyond most, In fact there is a stron likelihood of an untrained person using tools on a lock to break either the tools or the lock, or both. Basically you are jamming a small metal stick into the lock and wiggling it around randomly. This persumes that the lock isn't a crude, or excedingly simple device. A simple latch, if accessable, is probably within even an untrained persons abilities, say a fence gate latch that you could poke something small into an opening in the fence and wiggle the latch. It would be safe to say that any lock with a DC of 10 or less could be opened without training, but this would really not even be considered a lock (simplist is DC 20) more of a latch or just a privacy mechanism (like your bathroom door lock which is designed to be easily picked for safety) Anything with a degree of complexity would require training. A Very Simple Lock is DC 20 and requires tools which is not an easy task even with training. Remember that Locks are designed to be difficult to open without the right key. You can open the lock by other means though, a crowbar, melting the insides with a spell, forcing the door with a good stiff kick. Most Locked doors are sturdier then unlocked doors. (ie outside door is solid, inside doors are thin, hollow frames.) Complex? Most locks have something like four or five tumblers, right? Any old thin tool could turn the lock a bit, and any poky metal object could pick the tumblers. I dunno, maybe knowing the basics about how a lock actually works is considered specialized knowledge, in D&D, instead of obvious as it is in modern times.
Armsman 08-15-07, 12:35 AM	and to the guy who used a butterknife, get a new lock, that is a sign of an old or just crapy lock.I know, but I have to have my landlords' permission to make any changes to the apartment. But it took some very specific knowledge of my lock to know how to open it.
Confusion567 08-15-07, 12:43 AM	Officially, no. That said, I allowed a pair of my players (Cleric and Sorceror, so not exactly their specialty) to go to the local thieves guild to ask for lockpicking training (their idea). After a day of it, they gained one rank. When they level up, they can set aside skill points for use in Open Lock, then when they get training at the guild the points apply.
MrCustomer 08-15-07, 12:52 AM	Complex? Most locks have something like four or five tumblers, right? Any old thin tool could turn the lock a bit, and any poky metal object could pick the tumblers. I dunno, maybe knowing the basics about how a lock actually works is considered specialized knowledge, in D&D, instead of obvious as it is in modern times. Locks in D&D are complex enough that it requires a 20 to even do a very simple lock while using tools, so it is not an easy task by any means. Knowing the principle of how it is done is different then actually doing it. A standard car door lock has 6 Tumblers for instance, now take a thin pointy metal stick, jam it into that lock and pick it. Actually don't do this as you will damage the lock. Knowing how far to move the Tumblers, how to move all the tumblers all at once and to precisely the right distance and having the dexterity to unlock the door is a whole different ballgame and in the modern world requires Training and the right tools, you can't pick a door lock with a hairpin, despite what you see on TV, unless you are a very talented individual. Manipulating those tumblers is difficult and requires skill and training.
shadzar 08-15-07, 12:58 AM	Hey, in 2nd edition, you had to be a Rogue to open the lock. Now even the fighter can learn to do it if he's so inclined. Though it's a waste of skill points. Though technically I think it's a waste even for the rogue, when you can just have the Barbarian smash the damn thing ;) no. thanks to SSI and the multitude of games they produced anyone could try to bash open a lock. i didn't/don't adibe by the total lack of common sense that these "game designers" seem to have.
MrCustomer 08-15-07, 01:19 AM	no. thanks to SSI and the multitude of games they produced anyone could try to bash open a lock. i didn't/don't adibe by the total lack of common sense that these "game designers" seem to have. Well considering how simple it is to bash something, it's not suprizing that anyone can bash a lock open. Picking a lock takes rather complex skills. Since the game designers want to keep Rogues as a useful class that has a role in a group, Open Lock, Disable Device etc are Rogue skills, others can Cross Class the skill. A level 7 Fighter for example could have 5 points in Open Lock, combined with his +2 dex bonus and Masterwork tools, he would roll d20+9 to open a lock and has a fair chance of success. He could use Skill Focus and Nimble Fingers feats to gain a further +5 to his Open Lock is he was particularly fanatical about not being locked out with a d20+14 to Open Lock.
CroBob 08-15-07, 01:36 AM	Locks in D&D are complex enough that it requires a 20 to even do a very simple lock while using tools, so it is not an easy task by any means. Knowing the principle of how it is done is different then actually doing it. A standard car door lock has 6 Tumblers for instance, now take a thin pointy metal stick, jam it into that lock and pick it. Actually don't do this as you will damage the lock. Knowing how far to move the Tumblers, how to move all the tumblers all at once and to precisely the right distance and having the dexterity to unlock the door is a whole different ballgame and in the modern world requires Training and the right tools, you can't pick a door lock with a hairpin, despite what you see on TV, unless you are a very talented individual. Manipulating those tumblers is difficult and requires skill and training. But you don't have to move all the tumblers all at once! That's why you turn the cylinder with some wide, pointy object before inserting the pick itself! Keep it turned and notice the click per tumbler!
Nom 08-15-07, 09:32 AM	You do not need "unique" knowledge to open a lock.What I need is completely irrelevant. What a D&D character needs is some sort of tool and at least one rank in Open Lock. Or a key. Or a knock spell. Or a spare ogre.
wrecan 08-15-07, 09:40 AM	Then why can't experienced adventurers pick it up? They can. By putting ranks in the Skill. How do they gain a rank in the skill before actually succeeding in picking a lock? How did they learn to do it if they cannot do it until they know how? :rolleyes: How does a druid learn to wildshape before he gains the ability? How does a wizard learn to cast a second level spell before he succeeds in it? You're overanalyzing the process of learning in D&D.
runestar 08-15-07, 10:16 AM	i didn't/don't adibe by the total lack of common sense that these "game designers" seem to have. That may or may not be a loaded statement, since it implicitly assumes that the game designers do indeed lack common sense. Perhaps they do, perhaps they don't. Either way, the burden still falls on you to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.:)
MrCustomer 08-15-07, 11:13 AM	But you don't have to move all the tumblers all at once! That's why you turn the cylinder with some wide, pointy object before inserting the pick itself! Keep it turned and notice the click per tumbler! Easier said then done. Most people understand that principle but would be unable to actually apply it to successfully pick a lock, even given all the time in the world. In point of fact most people are more likely to damage the lock then actually succeed in unlocking it, even if they know the principle. You just mentioned some of the unique information needed to pick a lock, you need to have presure on the cylinder. Most people don't know that unless they have some training and would be jamming the pick into the lock, most people would end up bending or breaking the pick. It may be simple but some training is still required, even a half rank. For instance, I know how to open nearly any car door with a slim jim (for perfectly honest reasons). The principle is extremely easy you just move the rods inside the door. You could say any idiot could do it, but from expereince of watching others try to do this, most untrained people will only succeed in damaging their door, bending the rods, breaking the glass, scratching their paint etc. and not get the door open. It's not that Open Lock is a difficult thing to learn, but that some knowledge and training is required or else you are just jamming a pointy stick into the lock and wiggling it. Even a half point in it from cross training is all that is needed to be trained. You know to put presure on the cylinder and to push the tumbler until you feel it click into place and which tool to use, 10 minutes of training, or an hour of examining the insides of a lock and a half rank in Open Lock is all the training you need to get started (mind you won't be very good, but you can do it) Taking 10 can be done while opening locks, but with the DC being 20 for a very simple lock, chances are you need to roll unless you have a high rank in Open Lock, if you had even a half rank cross trained in it you could take 20 and succeed given adequate time, that is on a very simple lock. Complex locks are persumably designed to foil being picked easily so may need an expert.
CroBob 08-15-07, 02:54 PM	They can. By putting ranks in the Skill. Right, but anyone can pick a lock. Most people who actually pick locks (excluding smiths) learn through actually doing it. I think my problem is that I presume everyone knows the mechanisms of how locks actually function. Most people do not. Even though it's pretty obvious to me. I concede the argument. :rolleyes: How does a druid learn to wildshape before he gains the ability? How does a wizard learn to cast a second level spell before he succeeds in it? You're overanalyzing the process of learning in D&D. The druid learns to wild-shape through a mystical connection with nature. The knowledge and ability simply grows intuitively as the connection with nature increases in intensity. A druid can wildshape not because he's learned it, but because it has been allowed to, and he's aware of it through the intuitive connection he has with nature. Just like you "learn" how to run. It's simply something your body can do, and you pick up on it. But magical. The wizard is like an engineer, though. He designs a thing based on rules and mechanisms he already knows knows. A certain combination should have a certain result. Actually writing down that second level spell means he figured out how certain rules and effects work together, finally, and he has designed a new spell. There's no guarantee it'll work, but to simplify the problem it simply cannot be memorized until it actually does work. Kind of like how an engineer cannot use a device he's designed until it's actually built. Perhaps I am.
wrecan 08-15-07, 03:26 PM	I concede the argument. Well, never mind then, if you're going to be all reasonable and polite! :P
MrCustomer 08-15-07, 03:39 PM	Right, but anyone can pick a lock. Most people who actually pick locks (excluding smiths) learn through actually doing it. I think my problem is that I presume everyone knows the mechanisms of how locks actually function. Most people do not. Even though it's pretty obvious to me. I concede the argument. Well take into account as well that Open Lock and Disable Device are there to give classes like the Rogue a role to play in the group. If anyone could do his job, then he wouldn't have a job, his skills could be split among the party. However if the party had no rogue in it, and the DM was insistant on having alot of Locked Doors anyways, and the story had no real need for a rogue otherwise, he could probably get away with making Open Locks available to all as a class skill. Similairly in a group with no Clerics or healers then making Heal available as a class skill to all is a good idea. The point being here is that skills are often used to give specific classes a roll in an adventure, much like adding in Undead to give the Paladin a roll with his Turn Undead and Smite Evil so be careful on how they are distributed among other classes, the cross class skill system works for most groups except in unusual situations where it would be otherwise unavailable to the group or widely needed in the game world (a Wilderness heavy adventure making Survival a class skill for everyone for example)
Jexil 08-15-07, 03:41 PM	I think the terms "trained" and "untrained" with regard to skills in D&D are guilty of creating some confusion. Being "trained" in a skill simply means you have at least one rank (or technically, at least 1/2 a rank) in that skill; being "untrained" merely means you have no ranks in that skill. No where does it indicate that skill ranks must be derived from actual training. A fighter who puts skill points into swim, for example, doesn't have to consult with his swimming coach first. Skill ranks can represent anything from actual training to self-taught abilities (or self-trained, if you will) to even a natural aptitude or "kanck" for a certain skill. So really, if something can't be attempted untrained, it just means that you have no hope of success without having at least a little competence in that skill. I think making open locks a trained-only skill is fairly realistic. Anyone can learn it, but not everyone can do it. I for one cannot pick a lock. I have tried numerous times but have failed utterly, even though I have seen others do it with pocket knives, credit cards, wires, and other simple tools. In D&D terms, I am someone with 0 ranks in open lock. Those of you who say you have managed to pick locks would, in my opinion, have the equivalent of at least a few ranks in open locks. Even though you may never have been formally trained in the skill, you are, in D&D terms, "trained" in the skill by virtue of having a competence (or skill ranks) that set you apart from people like me. How you got that competence is immaterial and doesn't make you any less "trained" as the term is defined in D&D.
shadzar 08-15-07, 05:41 PM	They can. By putting ranks in the Skill. :rolleyes: How does a druid learn to wildshape before he gains the ability? How does a wizard learn to cast a second level spell before he succeeds in it? You're overanalyzing the process of learning in D&D. i will take it you don't use any sort of training requirements in order to gain levels or anything in your games.
shadzar 08-15-07, 05:44 PM	Well considering how simple it is to bash something, it's not suprizing that anyone can bash a lock open. Picking a lock takes rather complex skills. Can PCs without any skill in lockpicking open locks? i see no where it says you are required to pick the lock in the initial question. just asking are there other ways to open locks without picking.
shadzar 08-15-07, 05:48 PM	That may or may not be a loaded statement, since it implicitly assumes that the game designers do indeed lack common sense. Perhaps they do, perhaps they don't. Either way, the burden still falls on you to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.:) loaded, aimed, and fired on target. 4 seconds until impact. to think anyone thinks you have to pick a lock as the only way to open it defies common sense. there are so many more ways to open a lock or ocked object it just depends on the preferred outcome. lock intact, object intact etc after the lock has been opened. and why is it everyone is talking in respect to pin tumbler locks?
DaidojiTaidoru 08-15-07, 05:58 PM	You can't open a lock with Disable Device. Consider that picking a lock is as much touch and feel as it is any training, that is why Open Lock is Dexterity based, you need to make precise movements requiring delicate balance and exact force. Diasable Device on the other hand is Inteligence based, knowledge of the mechanics and workings of the device in question. And then you have to have the manual Dexterity to perform the action of disabling. Disable Device covers everything from subtly setting a clock to break exactly when it strikes 3:33, to prying the nails off a wagon wheel. The clockwork one probably requires some steady hands, in fact more steady then picking a bad archaic lock. Int is used as the basis because multi attribute skills are a pain to manage. You could use Disable Device to Jam the lock, or once opened, if you can take the lock apart you could rekey it. You could also bypass the lock if possible, for example removing the hinges of the chest, using a prybar just so to lift a locked window from it's frame are clever ways of using disable device. Which is why Open Lock really should just be removed as a skill. It's far too narrow an area to justify its existence, and far to easily made obsolete by intelligent skill / item / magic use. As a side note: Old Medieval locks are total trash. You can actually see the tumblers. D&D of course is far beyond medieval in many tech levels so their good locks should be hard to pick, but 'simple' locks should probably be bypass able by anyone who knows what a tumbler is and has a few small sticks. The designers of course didn't allow this for a variety of reasons, some good, some bad.
wrecan 08-15-07, 06:02 PM	i will take it you don't use any sort of training requirements in order to gain levels or anything in your games. Maybe I do and maybe I don't. We're discussing games in the abstract though. Training isn't a requirement.
shadzar 08-15-07, 06:46 PM	Maybe I do and maybe I don't. We're discussing games in the abstract though. Training isn't a requirement. then common sense must dictate. any ranks you have are worthless and only experience at doing so matters. and experience comes form training. you can't walk unless you can stand. training gives those ranks i would say, not the other way around. while you can skip it in order to get through thigns quicker...not everyone cuts that out of games and training is implied somewhere.
wrecan 08-15-07, 07:05 PM	any ranks you have are worthless and only experience at doing so matters. and experience comes form training. Not in D&D, where a thief magically gets better at disarming traps after going through a dungeon chock full of monsters that he killed by flanking, and he never once had to disarm a trap. training gives those ranks i would say, not the other way around. Unless you play with training rules, there is no such thing as "training" in D&D. Rather, it is assumed you were working on the skills in the "off-time" until you got the new level that lets you put ranks in the skill. Putting that 1/2-rank in Open Lock represents the fact that you just figured out how to open a lock. And then you confirm you figured it out by actually opening a lock. You get the knowledge. The knowledge is represented by skill points. The open lock comes from a result of that knowledge. not everyone cuts that out of games and training is implied somewhere. I'm not advocating that you don't play with training. I'm not actually sure at this point what you are saying about games that don't use the optional training rules.
shadzar 08-15-07, 08:59 PM	Not in D&D, where a thief magically gets better at disarming traps after going through a dungeon chock full of monsters that he killed by flanking, and he never once had to disarm a trap. Unless you play with training rules, there is no such thing as "training" in D&D. Rather, it is assumed you were working on the skills in the "off-time" until you got the new level that lets you put ranks in the skill. Putting that 1/2-rank in Open Lock represents the fact that you just figured out how to open a lock. And then you confirm you figured it out by actually opening a lock. You get the knowledge. The knowledge is represented by skill points. The open lock comes from a result of that knowledge. I'm not advocating that you don't play with training. I'm not actually sure at this point what you are saying about games that don't use the optional training rules. again i feel you do not use any sort of training in your games. damn the rules and think for yourself. my games people must train new levels, and this is what gives them the new abilities. or at least the understanding of the abilities they have been doing all along to where they can actually use them once they have the understanding of them. a major flaw in the game is its video game style. you can't do it if it isn't in the rules. how does one multiclass form a single class? a fighter with not obvious magical talent all of a sudden becomes a wizard also. makes no sense. he has to be taught by someone. even if that is simply watching another wizard in the party to get the ideas of spellcasting basics, and then learning how to implement what he has learned. thus even non wizards can use magic items so they stand to chacne that they could do magic themselves without the appliance in which is letting them cast the spells. XP is not magical and neither are the benefits gained form it. training is the concept of practing something before you are capable of doing it constantly. anyone can do anything without training. the training and thus the D&D ranks in a skill just mean how long they have practiced at it and what they have gained from practicing. not that anyone can't just do something because the rules say so. take fire-building. what sesne did it make to say in older editions that a character without this skill was unable to make a fire. none. therefore the rules cannot override common sense. anybody can attempt anything within the game. the DM decides whatever bonuses or penalties to the attempted action are applied. aying someone cannot open a lock because they aren't a rogue is stupid no matter what eddiotn. as menitoned acid works good on opening locks so long as you dont require the lock to function again after it has been opened. and i would think wizards know a bit about acids,as well as poison users, and even clerics. fighters may know enough about acids once they see it used once to tell what it does. see the D&D: Wrath of the Dragon God, where the theif had everyone turn around so they wouldn't see his highly honed and ancient technique for opening that dor...all of moving a lever. they still don't know what he did because they did not witness it. had they seen it they may have tried it themselves sometime. how many fighters do you ban from using levers in a game since they don't have ranks in open locks skill?
runestar 08-15-07, 09:30 PM	again i feel you do not use any sort of training in your games. It is not so much a matter of whether training is used or not, but your definition of what training entails. There is no rule which states that trained only skills can only have ranks after you have been trained in it, much less being trained by someone else. The definition of "trained-only" in dnd simply means that you are not entitled to a check unless you have at least 1/2 a rank in the skill. Training is one way of rationalizing how you got those ranks, but it is definitely not the only way (assuming you can justify it properly). damn the rules and think for yourself. my games people must train new levels, and this is what gives them the new abilities. or at least the understanding of the abilities they have been doing all along to where they can actually use them once they have the understanding of them. Yes, and like you said, this is in your game, not ours. What is a stop a "child prodigy" of sorts of simply starting off with a few ranks in some "trained only" skills to represent his flair/talent in those areas? I just think that you are roleplaying yourself into a corner by stipulating that you "must" have training as the only way of improving your skills. Spellcraft could be intuitive for a sorc. At each lv, he just somehow realizes that he knew more than before (could be rp'ed as him unlocking the latent draconic power within him and accessing more memories/abilities). In game terms, he still spends the appropriate skill points to boost his skills. Flavourwise, he has not undergone any ""training". What difference does it make? therefore the rules cannot override common sense. They can and they have. Live with it.;)
shadzar 08-15-07, 09:55 PM	It is not so much a matter of whether training is used or not, but your definition of what training entails. There is no rule which states that trained only skills can only have ranks after you have been trained in it, much less being trained by someone else. The definition of "trained-only" in dnd simply means that you are not entitled to a check unless you have at least 1/2 a rank in the skill. Training is one way of rationalizing how you got those ranks, but it is definitely not the only way (assuming you can justify it properly). Yes, and like you said, this is in your game, not ours. What is a stop a "child prodigy" of sorts of simply starting off with a few ranks in some "trained only" skills to represent his flair/talent in those areas? I just think that you are roleplaying yourself into a corner by stipulating that you "must" have training as the only way of improving your skills. Spellcraft could be intuitive for a sorc. At each lv, he just somehow realizes that he knew more than before (could be rp'ed as him unlocking the latent draconic power within him and accessing more memories/abilities). In game terms, he still spends the appropriate skill points to boost his skills. Flavourwise, he has not undergone any ""training". What difference does it make? They can and they have. Live with it.;) no rules can't override common sense. otherwise you are playing a game in which it makes people dumber, and i will jump on the bandwagon of people to ban D&D entirely for such a thing. i think you are roleplaying yourself into a corner when you say that only someone who has ranks in something can attempt to do it. the is an inherent flaw that many fail to see about these skill systems that have been created. D&D isn't a video game. stop playing it like one. you don't need a flag set to say you earned something before the program will allow you to try something. D&D has a DM that should be able to mediate a resolution based on common sense when the rules make none. in other words with a DM you should be able to try anything, unlike a video game where you are limited by the scope of the program. D&D is NOT a board game, or a video game, or a sport that have clearly defined rules for playing within the confines of the "playing field". D&D is in your imagination and even if your is stiffled so that you cannot think outside the rules as written you should not attempt to do so to your players. you must adapt to the "playing field" of the collective players meaning you must expand beyond what limits you can understand and imagine and meet those capabilities of the rest of the players as well. otherwise only play with a group with as limited as imagination as your own. and even in imagination you need common ground on explaining why things work as they do. common sense is real easy to base thing on like openning locks without special training in order to get these "ranks".
runestar 08-15-07, 10:26 PM	i think you are roleplaying yourself into a corner when you say that only someone who has ranks in something can attempt to do it. No, I never said that only a person with ranks in a skill can attempt to try something, just that in game terms, he is the only one who can actually succeed. A fighter without any ranks in spellcraft can certainly attempt to identify the spell the wizard is casting, the DM can accommodate his request by making some meaningless rolls behind his screen, but at the end of the day, the fighter cannot succeed, nor should he. D&D has a DM that should be able to mediate a resolution based on common sense when the rules make none. in other words with a DM you should be able to try anything, unlike a video game where you are limited by the scope of the program. Which brings us outside the boundaries established by the rules. I am not debating about the merit of house-rules here. If you wish to use them to modify your game, by all means - go ahead and be my guest. It is your game. But at the same time, bear in mind that it is not my game, and I see no need to be bound by the same artificial rules that you have imposed in yours. Nor do I see the need to act so smug just because I can implement a house-rule, and start putting down others who, for whatever reason is their own, wish to continue using those original rules. "OMG! I am finally free of the tyrannical wotc gods who wish us to play according to their rules and nothing else. I have free will! Unlike you worthless brainwashed sycophants!" D&D is NOT a board game, or a video game, or a sport that have clearly defined rules for playing within the confines of the "playing field". D&D is in your imagination and even if your is stiffled so that you cannot think outside the rules as written you should not attempt to do so to your players. For me at least, it is not so much a matter of whether I find myself confined, but whether I see a need to break out of this box or not. Yes, I certainly can change aspects of the game. I could make all skills usable untrained, and revise any other number of rules which you all may find fault with. But do I need to? Must I, on the pain of death? I am perfectly fine with running the game the way it is now (with minimal changes, but none related to this discussion). I might change the rules if I find them wanting or simply to better fit my game, but certainly not to prove that I am "stifled and uncreative". otherwise only play with a group with as limited as imagination as your own. Apperently, I do. And apparently, we are doing just fine. Thank you very much.:) and even in imagination you need common ground on explaining why things work as they do. common sense is real easy to base thing on like openning locks without special training in order to get these "ranks". And my point is, and has always been, that you don't need training to get those ranks. Thus, someone can attempt to open a lock and succeed even without official training. But this is represented in the game not by open lock being an untrained skill, but the person in question having placed ranks in open lock somehow. Different route, same resolution.
JustinA 08-15-07, 10:38 PM	That would be an interesting selling point for your merchants. "LOCKS! Get Your Locks! They Don't Keep People Out - But They Do Slow Them Down - Just A Bit!" I used to work at Public Storage. We would sell padlocks to people. I would tell them quite truthfully, "Look, if someone wants to get into your storage space, then there isn't a lock in the world that will stop them from doing it. The best a lock can do is slow them down for a bit. What you want is the lock that will slow them down more than the lock right next to yours, so that -- if all of our other security measures fail -- they're going to grab somebody else's stuff and not yours." For the record, you want to buy a disc lock. And make sure you don't buy it from Wal-Mart: Wal-Mart wanted 'em cheap, so they contracted with a Chinese supplier who made them out of aluminum instead of steel. Completely useless. But a good, solid steel disc lock was our bane whenever we needed to cut open a lock (because someone was being evicted or, more rarely, had lost their key). We hated those things. Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net
shadzar 08-15-07, 10:48 PM	No, I never said that only a person with ranks in a skill can attempt to try something, just that in game terms, he is the only one who can actually succeed. And my point is, and has always been, that you don't need training to get those ranks. Thus, someone can attempt to open a lock and succeed even without official training. But this is represented in the game not by open lock being an untrained skill, but the person in question having placed ranks in open lock somehow. Different route, same resolution. then you give unlimited ranks to people in things based on common sense rather the the predefined number of ranks allowed at certain levels or whatever? that way a player can have his character open enough to be able to try anything. or do you say. o i am sorry you can tryo to open a lock because you didn't buy ranks in it. no i don't care what you want to try to do. your character sheet does not have any ranks of open locks on it therefore you cant try it. even if you just want to smash the thing you are nnot allow to try to strike the lock with your warhammer or battle axe. sorry. yu just can't do it. it isn't a monster so you can't try to attack the lock. yeah i find it real logical to say you can attack a moving target much more effectively than a stationary one. i am sure many player will think so also. common sense says its easier to hit something that isnt moving. i answered based on what was asked. can a PC open lock without the lockpicking skill? yes they can. you are trying to answer your own made up question. can a PC pick a lock without lockpipcking skill? sadly the answer is still yes. they can try and possibly succeed. it just happens that the one with your precious "ranks" will have a much better chance at success.
wrecan 08-15-07, 11:19 PM	again i feel you do not use any sort of training in your games. And I feel like you really really want to personalize this argument. Once again, I'm not discussing my games, but the rules in general. damn the rules and think for yourself. By which you mean, agree with you unthinkingly. No thanks. I do think fr myself. And I think you are advocating for a house rule based on your peculiar decision of what common sense is. a major flaw in the game is its video game style. Ummm... is this a non sequitur? Are you just shooting the breeze with me? he has to be taught by someone. So how did the first person ever pick a lock? Who taught him? Obviously, people can be self-taught and even the training rules accommmodate that idea. Why, one mght almost call that... common sense. anyone can do anything without training. Whaaa? So wait? Do you play with training or not? Are you being sarcastic? Isn't this what I was saying? how many fighters do you ban from using levers in a game since they don't have ranks in open locks skill? What? Since when does the open locks skill have anything to do with levers? Are do you think Open Locks is talking about locks found in a nineteenth century canal?
shadzar 08-15-07, 11:36 PM	i'm just saying the skill system is flawed by demanding putting "ranks" in it in order to attempt with any chance of success. as minute a chance as may be untrained/unranked skills may succeed.
runestar 08-16-07, 12:02 AM	sorry. yu just can't do it. it isn't a monster so you can't try to attack the lock. The rules do allow you to attack a lock, but that is clearly not the same as picking it. If you wish to make an argument, at least know the rules. that way a player can have his character open enough to be able to try anything. Must he? or do you say. o i am sorry you can tryo to open a lock because you didn't buy ranks in it. no i don't care what you want to try to do. your character sheet does not have any ranks of open locks on it therefore you cant try it. Like I said, you can try it, just that you will never succeed at your open lock attempt. He can try to bash it, but that is another thing altogether. you are trying to answer your own made up question. can a PC pick a lock without lockpipcking skill? Now you are just playing with words. You know jolly well that was what the OP was trying to drive at, and now you are trying to reword the original argument in your favour.:rolleyes:
shadzar 08-16-07, 12:27 AM	Now you are just playing with words. You know jolly well that was what the OP was trying to drive at, and now you are trying to reword the original argument in your favour.:rolleyes: no i don't. sorry i answer what is asked. i don't make up my own questions to answer. you however can do what you want. but until the time comes where it is asked can you pick a lock without having lockpicking i will answer the question can you OPEN a lock without lockpicking. i don't know the thread creator, nor have any information on him/her or their playstyle. if you do, then please ask them to return to the forumand clearify their question if they asked the wrong question.
Thubby 08-16-07, 02:35 AM	i'm just saying the skill system is flawed by demanding putting "ranks" in it in order to attempt with any chance of success. as minute a chance as may be untrained/unranked skills may succeed. short version, your assumed to be training in some manner in all that undiscussed down time that isn't spent fighting eating and sleeping. when you finaly get the rank, its like you finaly "get it", figure out that little trick that makes it all come together, be it skill, feat, or spell.
runestar 08-16-07, 03:10 AM	no i don't. sorry i answer what is asked. i don't make up my own questions to answer. you however can do what you want. but until the time comes where it is asked can you pick a lock without having lockpicking i will answer the question can you OPEN a lock without lockpicking. For someone who was simply "answering a simple question with a simple answer", you sure took a lot of effort to take on my debate of whether open lock should be a trained-only skill. From then on, apparently, you proceeded to surmise that just because I run it as such in my games, I suddenly lack creativity and the like. Somehow, this expands to include the assumption that my fighter cannot bash a lock, or use acid or have the wizard cast a knock spell, even when I never even made such statements in the first place. That is so blatant an attempt in trying to discredit me here, simply because I disagree with your points. Who are you trying to kid here?:confused:
shadzar 08-16-07, 03:34 AM	short version, your assumed to be training in some manner in all that undiscussed down time that isn't spent fighting eating and sleeping. when you finaly get the rank, its like you finaly "get it", figure out that little trick that makes it all come together, be it skill, feat, or spell. but doesn't deny you any success because you don't fully have that first rank yet. like the fighter who tries opening a lock just to try it before the rogue does and miraculously gets it right that one time. still possible, but much harder without those higher developed sense of the skill.
lastknightleft 08-16-07, 11:37 AM	I want to say something but the arguing needlessly and the severe tone made me completely loose track of what I had intended to say
Jexil 08-16-07, 12:34 PM	or do you say. o i am sorry you can tryo to open a lock because you didn't buy ranks in it. no i don't care what you want to try to do. your character sheet does not have any ranks of open locks on it therefore you cant try it. even if you just want to smash the thing you are nnot allow to try to strike the lock with your warhammer or battle axe. The open lock skill refers to the ability to circumvent a lock via lockpicking. I have never heard it suggested that you need to have ranks in open lock in order to smash a lock with a weapon. That's something else altogether, and I'm pretty sure that's not what the OP was asking about.
Pegasos989 08-16-07, 12:36 PM	Trolly troll is trolly. :( People not noticing it make the donkey sad. http://www.kuvaton.com/kuvei/you_make_donkey_sad.jpg