ltm3x6;18959391 wrote:
If it's something that really bothers you, make a house rule. You must be trained in Thievery to pick locks. Simple.
In practice, the rogue will crack harder locks faster, and the type of challenges will scale with level - it will always be a difficult challenge for a barbarian to pick a lock, and the rogue will always be better at it than the barbarian.
The purpose of everyone having a chance to contribute is so that everyone has a chance to contribute.
In practice, the rogue will crack harder locks faster, and the type of challenges will scale with level - it will always be a difficult challenge for a barbarian to pick a lock, and the rogue will always be better at it than the barbarian.
the best way to pick a lock (and this makes little sense) is to have the rogue do it and the 4 other people in the party "aid another". Given your example of 10th level characters, the people doing "aid another" need a 10 to give the rogue a +2 so at 1/2 level is a +5 that means on a 5 or better on a d20 it works. So the rogue gets an additional +8 on the attempt even though the other 4 people in the group may have never picked a lock before
the best way to pick a lock is to have the rogue do it and the 4 other people in the party "aid another".
Wizard: Hey, Twitchy. I think you need to put the flat pick at the top and the round one on the bottom.
Fighter: That won't work. It looks like they installed this lock upside down.
Cleric: Don't break the pick in the lock. Then we'll never get in!
Barbarian: Have you checked under the mat for a key?
Wizard: Hey, Twitchy. I think you need to put the flat pick at the top and the round one on the bottom.
Fighter: That won't work. It looks like they installed this lock upside down.
Cleric: Don't break the pick in the lock. Then we'll never get in!
Barbarian: Have you checked under the mat for a key?
That is a lot better (or more humorous at least) than what I saw in my mind - the party all standing their, intently watching the rogue at work on the lock.
Wizard consulting a small book of common lock types to see if there are some useful tips listed.
Cleric making Rogue a cup of tea just in case he gets frustrated.
Barbarian holding the light in the best spot to illuminate the lock without getting in Rogue's eyes.
Fighter handing over tools like a mechanic's aid.
For example, the group I DM apparently has some aversion to melee and martial classes, so they never have anyone trained in Thievery. If I house ruled you couldn't pick locks or disarm traps w/out training, they'd still be stuck in a dungeon.
They also need to allow everyone a chance b/c there's a very strong possibility a party may not have anyone trained in Thievery. If I remember correctly, only Rogues and Monks have it as a class skill, meaning any other class would have to take a background or feat to get training.
Yeah, our level 1 party had to get the ranger to train her swan in Theivery at level 2 because we didn't have anyone with the skill and the swan had the highest Dex. Until then it was just a mess getting through locks and traps and without the untrained checks we'd just have told the GM "we find a new adventure, this one's for some other group."
The DM is free to limit the Aid Another action as he sees fit. If it doesn't make sense, then tell them no. People always seem to forget this when talking about how easy it is to beat a skill DC.
For example none of my groups allow people to use aid another on a lockpicking attempt unless they are adjacent to the lock.
You must be trained in Thievery to pick locks. Simple.
To be honest, this isn't even a house rule. To quote the phb:
The DM might decide that some uses of this skill are so specialized that you are required to be trained in it to have a chance of succeeding.
So per RAW, it's at the DM's discretion wheather a player can lockpick or not when untrained.
If literally having to resort to door-bashing because no one is trained in a particular skill - then more power to you. Barbarian's actually have a level 2 Utility that gives you a +5 bonus to Strength checks to break things, and lets you deal double damage against inanimate objects - mine has repeatedly made new doors in some stone walls (usually takes two turns for stone because I am not damage optimized).
But... you make that change, keep in mind that you are likely just making Sorcerers in general and Wizards with a high int/wis build and cloud of daggers into the best door openers in the party.
Some things to keep in mind about making Thievery require training to pick a lock:
1 - Break DC: Wooden Door has a 16 break DC. Let's say only one character can aid, and that your strongest part character has an 18 strength - so you basically in a situation where the part has been affected by a door is in the way (save ends) sort of situation.
2 - Object HP: Wooden door has 20 (30 if reinforced). Let's say you have a 2nd level Sorcerer with a pair of 18s in their primary stats, and a staff of ruin and another implement +1 - So they can attack for 1d10+11 with acid orb (12-21 gives an average of 16) at-will... meaning they can simply take 2 turns or so and say bye-bye to the door.
so yeah... not letting them pick the lock isn't really saying "you should learn to pick locks" it is saying "time to go with plan B: break everything."
Preventing untrained use of thievery for lock picking will only result in one thing: You needing to figure out how many HP that door has.
If literally having to resort to door-bashing because no one is trained in a particular skill - then more power to you. Barbarian's actually have a level 2 Utility that gives you a +5 bonus to Strength checks to break things, and lets you deal double damage against inanimate objects - mine has repeatedly made new doors in some stone walls (usually takes two turns for stone because I am not damage optimized).
But... you make that change, keep in mind that you are likely just making Sorcerers in general and Wizards with a high int/wis build and cloud of daggers into the best door openers in the party.
Some things to keep in mind about making Thievery require training to pick a lock:
1 - Break DC: Wooden Door has a 16 break DC. Let's say only one character can aid, and that your strongest part character has an 18 strength - so you basically in a situation where the part has been affected by a door is in the way (save ends) sort of situation.
2 - Object HP: Wooden door has 20 (30 if reinforced). Let's say you have a 2nd level Sorcerer with a pair of 18s in their primary stats, and a staff of ruin and another implement +1 - So they can attack for 1d10+11 with acid orb (12-21 gives an average of 16) at-will... meaning they can simply take 2 turns or so and say bye-bye to the door.
so yeah... not letting them pick the lock isn't really saying "you should learn to pick locks" it is saying "time to go with plan B: break everything."
brilliant! cloud of daggers for the win! But, thunderwave would really make a statement
Wizard: Hey, Twitchy. I think you need to put the flat pick at the top and the round one on the bottom.
Fighter: That won't work. It looks like they installed this lock upside down.
Cleric: Don't break the pick in the lock. Then we'll never get in!
Barbarian: Have you checked under the mat for a key?
I like this a lot. However, it will take some work to get my players to start doing this. Hmmm...
E.g.
4th level Human Barbarian with 16 Dex has a +5 on Thievery.
4th level Halfling Rogue with 18 Dex has a +13 on Thievery.
Set the DC to 26. Since a natural 20 for the Barbarian (25) is not an automatic success, he can't open it. The rogue still has a 40% chance to pick it (that's without using tools or having Burglar's Gloves).
Something else I thought of: If your party has a Rogue why is the Barbarian even trying to pick the lock? Shouldn't there be a Rogue in the way picking the lock with his much higher bonus?
because the thief rolled a 1 and failed, so someone else stepped up to give it a shot. Or in 4E can you just keep trying, in which case why even roll?
because the thief rolled a 1 and failed, so someone else stepped up to give it a shot. Or in 4E can you just keep trying, in which case why even roll?
You don't, that's why take 10 and take 20 was invented in 3E.
Lets all admit it, Lockpick rolls are only fun if it's some kind of tension involved there, such as
-trying to open or jam a door shut between you and a serious enemy threat.
-trying to open a locked door that leads out to safety from a room filled with deadly traps
-trying to stealthily get through a dungeon. If you smash the door, everything you worked for is lost. If you roll repeatedly bad, chance is that a patrol or something notices you. That's fun because it's intense.
I have a simple question regarding skill checking...
lets say that we have a lvl 10 rogue and a level 10 barbarian in a situation where they have to pick a lock to get to a desired area.
OK, this is a decent situation.
in 3.5 only a rogue can pick a lock by defult because he is traind (its a class skill) and the barbarian probably dosnt even know what a lock is, and wouldnt know a lock mechanics to pick it.
None of this is true. First of all, Rogues aren't the only characters with Open Lock as a class skill. Ninjas, Scouts (post errata) and Spellthieves all have Open Lock as a class skill. Second, any character can take Open Lock as a cross class skill and still be able to pick locks with some proficiency, provided they continued to train the skill and they had a decent dexterity. In fact, a Swashbuckler or Archer Ranger who takes Open Lock is only going to be 2 points behind a full trained Rogue, assuming the Rogue is trained in Open Lock in the first place, as he is not required to take the skill. Third, I find it's rather presumptuous a barbarian would not know what a lock is.
by 4.0 rules the barbarian can pick the lock if he has a little luck with the die giving his 1/2level bonus, and the rogue can fail with dissluck with the die. in otherwords every class can use every skill.
Dr. Nick pointed out that the 4e Player's Handbook explicitly says the DM may rule that the Thievery skill is only usable to those who train in the skill, so the DM may, by the rules as written, say only those trained in Thievery may use the skill, and thus, are the only people who can pick locks. Since Rogues, Artificers and Warlocks are the only classes in the game who get Thievery as a class skill, they're the only people who may pick locks without taking a feat to become trained in the skill. So, just like 3.5, Rogues are one of the few classes that can be trained in opening locks without spending additional resources.
why?
Because it's arbitrary and stupid to restrict picking locks to a single class. Rogues are, typically, supposed to represent the thief archetype, yes, but they're not the only people in D&D who do that, nor are they only ones who do it well. Bards have traditionally filled the "magical thief" archetype, indeed, they were capable of picking locks in second edition. Further, Warlocks, Wizards and Sorcerers can also easily fall into the concept of a magical thief, as can a Cleric of a Roguish deity.
Further, the Rogue is not the only character class that would have the background that would take up lock picking. Fighters, Rangers, some Paladins, and even Barbarians could all have the background of a kid living on the streets before they got their training, easily justifying why they can pick locks. Hell, spellcasters like Sorcerers and Warlocks could easily have the exact same background. Some classes could even justify it as part of their training, such Artificers (who do have the skill as a class skill), Avengers (since they're assassins and all) and Wizards (complex puzzle solving to build intelligence).
Its also quite interesting you'd pick Barbarians as your class that shouldn't be able to pick locks in your example. Conan is something of the quintessential barbarian in terms of background and appearance (although its debatable whether he's a barbarian mechanically), and the ability to pick locks is actually one of his skills.
Further, in real life, thieves aren't the only people who can pick locks. My friends and I are learning to do so as a hobby and none of us would probably be considered a Rogue, or even have PC stats.
isnt there any restriction which class ca use which skills at will, or is it entirely up to the dm?
Yes, as I pointed out, the Thievery skill may be restricted to those who train in it. Of course, much like 3.x, anyone may still train in any skill.
because the thief rolled a 1 and failed, so someone else stepped up to give it a shot. Or in 4E can you just keep trying, in which case why even roll?
I am still a huge advocate that the only reason there should be locked doors is if there is a reason for the party to be slowed down. In which case rolling multiple times would have an adverse effect.
A couple of examples;
The room is filling with water, the door needs to be opened before the room is too full and the door won't open due to the difference in pressure, and the party dies of drowning.
On the opposite side of the door is a half-asleep group of guards playing cards with their swords put away. The door must be unlocked quickly if the group wants to get a jump on the guards.
A gelatinous ooze is creeping ever closer...
Other than some tense situation having a locked door is just a good reason for the game to get bogged down and there be a slump. If you want to show the realism of doors being locked with nothing behind it, and go through the trouble of any character breaking the door down to find nothing on the other side, you may as well take the time to tell the group they havn't gone to the bathroom in a while. Or explain that the sleep in the inn was uneventful, and nothing is happening that day, and then not have anything eventful happen.
Dungeons and Dragons is not a simulation game where you live the life of someone in the medieval times. It is a high fantasy game where you get to do cool stuff All the time. Any moments of rest are put there to give suspense or tension to exciting moments.
So in my mind it doesn't matter that the barbarian started to learn how to pick a lock from the parties rogue through 6 months of arduous adventure and now knows how to open a diary, or simple deadbolt. Because the only time anyone should have to open a lock is when it really really matters, and in that case no one will care about the barbarian. The rogue better do his job.
Wizards (complex puzzle solving to build intelligence).
Pah, we all know he really just learned it to pull pranks on the other apprentices.
because the thief rolled a 1 and failed, so someone else stepped up to give it a shot. Or in 4E can you just keep trying, in which case why even roll?
Skill challenges include things like needing 8 successes before 3 failures. With that in mind, do you want the Barbarian with his 5 trying? Or do you want the rogue with his 13 making all the rolls? Sure, once in a while the Barb will outdo the rogue. But every failure hurts the whole party. If it is a one-off situation, that's different. But build it into a skill challenge and things change.
Even one-off, why not have the barbarian help instead? As has been mentioned.
Skill challenges include things like needing 8 successes before 3 failures. With that in mind, do you want the Barbarian with his 5 trying? Or do you want the rogue with his 13 making all the rolls? Sure, once in a while the Barb will outdo the rogue. But every failure hurts the whole party. If it is a one-off situation, that's different. But build it into a skill challenge and things change.
Even one-off, why not have the barbarian help instead? As has been mentioned.
what?
what?
The questions had been asked if you can just reroll an infinite number of times what is the point of making them roll. Presumably this is because they'll eventually roll a 20. I pointed out that in 4E there are two circumstances where rolls come up:
1. a one-off situation where the DM says "locked door someone pick it" hopefully in a more engaging and fun way.
2. a skill challenge.
In Situation #1 sure have everyone try, why not? doesn't hurt anything unlesss the door is trapped or it costs some resource, etc. As was already pointed out, it is often more useful to "aid another" rather than have everyone try to take a turn.
In situation #2 the number of attempts matters. If you are in a skill challenge the party as a whole needs to achieve a certain number of successes before a certain number of failures (IIRC always 3) depending on complexity. Might be 3 successes before 3 failures for something simple, and could be 12 success before 3 failures for something truly hard. In this situation, you DO NOT want to let people with lower scores try a roll on their own. Aid another certainly, but if the whole party rolls, you are looking at an instant fail for the encounter.
So even though your character doesn't need to be trained to make the roll, there are reasons why you don't want your character to try "just because he can and the rogue already failed once."
The questions had been asked if you can just reroll an infinite number of times what is the point of making them roll. Presumably this is because they'll eventually roll a 20. I pointed out that in 4E there are two circumstances where rolls come up:
1. a one-off situation where the DM says "locked door someone pick it" hopefully in a more engaging and fun way.
2. a skill challenge.
In Situation #1 sure have everyone try, why not? doesn't hurt anything unlesss the door is trapped or it costs some resource, etc. As was already pointed out, it is often more useful to "aid another" rather than have everyone try to take a turn.
In situation #2 the number of attempts matters. If you are in a skill challenge the party as a whole needs to achieve a certain number of successes before a certain number of failures (IIRC always 3) depending on complexity. Might be 3 successes before 3 failures for something simple, and could be 12 success before 3 failures for something truly hard. In this situation, you DO NOT want to let people with lower scores try a roll on their own. Aid another certainly, but if the whole party rolls, you are looking at an instant fail for the encounter.
So even though your character doesn't need to be trained to make the roll, there are reasons why you don't want your character to try "just because he can and the rogue already failed once."
ok, i guess i understand it now, but opening a single door/lock would not really be a skill challenge would it? My understanding of what skill challenges are is a group of activities requiring multiple skills...but i have to admit i have never used them.
You don't, that's why take 10 and take 20 was invented in 3E.
Lets all admit it, Lockpick rolls are only fun if it's some kind of tension involved there, such as
-trying to open or jam a door shut between you and a serious enemy threat.
-trying to open a locked door that leads out to safety from a room filled with deadly traps
-trying to stealthily get through a dungeon. If you smash the door, everything you worked for is lost. If you roll repeatedly bad, chance is that a patrol or something notices you. That's fun because it's intense.
That's true for ANY skill, actually. Jump checks are no fun if failing the roll simply lands you in a pool of water that you can climb out of and start over again.
There should never be a skill check designed that you can keep rolling and failing with no ill effect. That is the definition of a boring skill check.
Although, a DM has to be careful of putting in a check that has too high of a price for failure, as well. If a failed check from bad luck gets your players killed or something similar, that is also a bad skill check.
ok, i guess i understand it now, but opening a single door/lock would not really be a skill challenge would it? My understanding of what skill challenges are is a group of activities requiring multiple skills...but i have to admit i have never used them.
Picking a lock should not be a skill challenge all by itself, but it can easily be included in a skill challenge, and as such failing it would count against you. For example, you could setup a skill challenge based on the cliche'd in a sealed room with spiked walls closing in on you. Some Str or Athletics checks to slow the walls down (max 2 successes), some perception or theivery (max 2 success) to find ways to wedge something into the base of the walls to slow them down further, an arcana check (max 1 success) to break a minor magical ward, some theivery (max 1 success) to disarm a trap, and opening two locks to get the portcullis and the door open in time before you're all perforated.
Too many failures and the walls close in and kill you. Let the rogue do it. If the Barb wants to help, he can aid another or put that Str to work holding back the walls.
That's just one example of how it could turn up in a skill challenge.
Picking a lock should not be a skill challenge all by itself, but it can easily be included in a skill challenge, and as such failing it would count against you. For example, you could setup a skill challenge based on the cliche'd in a sealed room with spiked walls closing in on you. Some Str or Athletics checks to slow the walls down (max 2 successes), some perception or theivery (max 2 success) to find ways to wedge something into the base of the walls to slow them down further, an arcana check (max 1 success) to break a minor magical ward, some theivery (max 1 success) to disarm a trap, and opening two locks to get the portcullis and the door open in time before you're all perforated.
Too many failures and the walls close in and kill you. Let the rogue do it. If the Barb wants to help, he can aid another or put that Str to work holding back the walls.
That's just one example of how it could turn up in a skill challenge.
OK so if the rogue fails to pick the lock on the first attempt, he can just try again?
Unless the lock explodes on a failed attempt or anything, but they don't usually do that.
As long as the basic situation doesn't change, you can just keep trying.
the funny part is that my 4E players have never tried to "retry" a lock pick once there is a failure the wizards just "thunderwaves the door down"
You could always retry checks, assuming that you didn't change the situation.(That is, you cannot retry Diplomacy after you just insulted the guy because you rolled a 1, or retry your climb check for the last 20ft of the mountain if you just drop all the way back to the base of it)
It's not new to 4th edition.
Just explain to your group that if they don't break anything, they can just keep trying. (You generally only roll for picking locks if there's time pressure, otherwise just take 20)
The very concept of 'taking 20' is just 'keep on trying until it works', actually
(That is, you cannot retry Diplomacy after you just insulted the guy because you rolled a 1, or retry your climb check for the last 20ft of the mountain if you just drop all the way back to the base of it)
It's not new to 4th edition.
Just explain to your group that if they don't break anything, they can just keep trying. (You generally only roll for picking locks if there's time pressure, otherwise just take 20)
guess i never really thought about it, oh well not a big deal
thanks
just a question, in prior editions there was a once you fail you cannot just keep trying,
You're probably thinking of certain, select applications of specific skills / thief abilities.
IIRC, in 2E, a thief who failed to pick a lock could not retry it until he improved his lockpicking skill.
Similarly, in 3.5E, if you fail a knowledge check, you can't retry it; you can't retry Decipher Script; if you're attempting to learn a spell, and botch the Spellcraft check, you can't retry that until you add at least 1 rank; etc.
You're probably thinking of certain, select applications of specific skills / thief abilities.
IIRC, in 2E, a thief who failed to pick a lock could not retry it until he improved his lockpicking skill.
Similarly, in 3.5E, if you fail a knowledge check, you can't retry it; you can't retry Decipher Script; if you're attempting to learn a spell, and botch the Spellcraft check, you can't retry that until you add at least 1 rank; etc.
In the player's handbook there is a section on each skill that talks about how the skill handles retries. If I recall, knowledge skills do not allow retries, but most "actions" do. You can try to jump over the pit as often as you like. Provide you keep surviving the failures and manage to climb back out again. You can try to climb the wall over and over, provided you survive the falls. But if you don't recognize the heraldry on the wall, you don't recognize it. Similarly, if the guard spots you while sneaking, you need to get out of line of sight before you can hide again (unless you're a gnome, in which case all you need is concealment and an initiative check).