Tools make sense! Locks, not so much.

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

DemoMonkey

Jul 03, 2014 18:32:41

Reading the basic rules I had an epiphany about how they are supposed to work. Tools are not "tools" for a task. They are absolute PREREQUISITES for a task.

 

"A tool helps you to do something you couldn’t otherwise do, such as craft or repair an item, forge a document, or pick a lock. Your race, class, background, or feats give you proficiency with certain tools."

 

Proficiency with the tool is NOT required to use the tool to do it's function. Someone with no proficiency with Thieves tools could use a set of them to pick a lock with a Dex check. Someone in the same situation who was proficient with the tools would add their proficiency bonus; that's all. And someone with Expertise, would add their proficiency bonus twice.

 

"Proficiency with a tool allows you to add your proficiency bonus to any ability check you make using that tool. Tool use is not tied to a single ability, since proficiency with a tool represents broader knowledge of its use. For example, the DM might ask you to make a Dexterity check to carve a fine detail with your woodcarver’s tools, or a Strength check to make something out of particularly hard wood."

 

Someone with NO tools could not pick the lock at all, period, full stop, the end, even if they had 20 levels of Rogue. You may disagree with that (passionately!) and have house rules already planned to change it, but as near as I can tell that is what they intend.

 

Agree with it or not, it's a very clear system of defining the difference between tools and skills. Finally, it made sense to me. A design win.

 

And then they wrote the equipment list entry for locks and ruined the whole theory.

 

"Lock: A key is provided with the lock. Without the key, a creature proficient with thieves’ tools can pick this lock with a successful DC 15 Dexterity check. Your DM may decide that better locks are available for higher price."

 

AAAAAGGGHH! SO CLOSE!

 

 

#2

Oxlar

Jul 03, 2014 18:37:03

I think the whole 'tools' proficiency system is lame.  Its ambiguous in therory.  It would have been much more clear to just make a real proficiency system.

#3

ChrisCarlson

Jul 03, 2014 18:51:05

Oxlar wrote:
#4

Shadow_Frog

Jul 03, 2014 18:54:03

Simply delete the word "proficient" from the Locks entry and your golden and everything makes sense.

#5

souldoubt

Jul 03, 2014 18:56:30

I think I would allow someone to try and pick a lock with "improvised tools" at a disadvantage.

 

As to the language in the lock description, my guess is it's a mistake that needs to be cleaned up.

#6

DemoMonkey

Jul 03, 2014 18:58:50

Shadow_Frog

 

True, but my concern is that my whole theory about what the RAI are is called into question by that one little clause. I may just be completely wrong.

 

 

 

...

Wait, this is the internet. Am I allowed to admit I might be wrong? I need to read my handbook.

#7

pukunui

Jul 03, 2014 19:06:20

I think it works. As a general rule, you needn't be proficient with a toolkit to make use of it. However, specific uses of certain toolkits do require proficiency.

 

You need to be proficient with an herbalism kit in order to use it to craft antitoxin and healing potions. You don't need to be proficient with an herbalism kit to make some other (unspecified) herbal concoction.

 

You need to be proficient with thieves' tools in order to use them to pick locks. You don't need to be proficient with thieves' tools in order to use them to disable a device.

 

 

It could have been worded better perhaps, but I think it all makes sense.

#8

ChrisCarlson

Jul 03, 2014 19:07:35

pukunui wrote:
#9

DemoMonkey

Jul 03, 2014 19:09:44

If my theory is wrong, and we have to start from scratch, it gets messy.

 

What can be done by a PC in the following situations, when faced with a dungeon lock or trap:

 

1) Proficient with TT, does not have any. ?

 

2) Proficient with TT, has them: Assumed answer, can open locks/disarm traps with a Dex check + proficiency bonus

 

3) NOT proficient with TT, does not have any: Assumed answer, can't do anything.

 

4) NOT proficient with TT, has them: ?

#10

trebor_rjf

Jul 03, 2014 19:10:07

as someone who picks locks in real life, i can say that requiring proficiency to use the tools makes sense from a realism perspective. i could hand you a set of lockpicks and a padlock and you would never pick it without knowing what to do.

#11

sleypy

Jul 03, 2014 19:15:58

DemoMonkey wrote: