Talk:Dungeon Location Investigation (5e Variant Rule)

I guess if the players all fail their Perception checks, they don't get to go in the dungeon? Or do they repeat the checks until they find it? I think most parties would rather be getting on with the adventure than repeatedly rolling perception checks. Marasmusine (talk) 12:33, 23 July 2017 (MDT)

You roll Perception once in an area, and then would roll Investigation. When you move to the next area if you don't find enough clues, you would just have the party reroll investigation. This is more geared towards story-heavy campaigns, not hack n' slash, and is completely optional and should only be used if it fits the theme or is being used to advance story elements. I'm using this in my campaign, and plan on using it to reinforce the theme because then I get new areas to describe to my players and can use it to drop hints about the nature of the dungeon or area before they enter. I'm also using it to give players a choice on going into a dungeon then or going later. --Ghostpage (talk) 12:50, 23 July 2017 (MDT)

Did you ever play 4e? This might work nicely if presented like a 4e-style skill challenge. It can bring together skills as secondary/support checks, and even a failed challenge would have an interesting result. Marasmusine (talk) 13:27, 23 July 2017 (MDT)

I did not, and this is admittedly my first time DMing - I have a couple veteran players at my table who I've been getting advice from, though, and thought posting here might be nice for getting feedback as well. How would it change if it was more along the lines of 4e? --Ghostpage (talk) 13:56, 23 July 2017 (MDT)

The basis of a skill challenge was that the party make skill checks until they get either a number successes or 3 fails. An easy challenge might need 3 successes; a harder one might need 5. Ultimately they have to find the dungeon, and this should happen regardless of success or failure: but success might get you some advantage like finding the secret entrance; and/or a failure would give you some disadvantage, like the monsters become aware you are coming and set up an ambush.

Some skill checks are primary: that is, passing it gives you one success. Some skills are secondary in that they give a bonus (well, an "advantage" in 5e) to a primary roll, or gives some clue as to what to do, or open up new possibilities.

The goal is to have the players make hard choices or become invested narratively rather than dryly rerolling Perception checks until they find what they want.

There's lots of advice out there. For example:

• DM Tips: How to Run a Skill Challenge (D&D 4e)
• 4E Skill Challenges made easy

I did make a few, I can't say if they are good or bad examples, but here they are anyway: Chaos at the Wall (4e Skill Challenge), Throat Leech (4e Skill Challenge)

I haven't tried making one for 5e yet, since they aren't codified in the core books, but in principle they would work the same way. Marasmusine (talk) 14:27, 23 July 2017 (MDT)

I mean, you're partially the way there with your "clue" system. Marasmusine (talk) 14:29, 23 July 2017 (MDT)

Oh, I don't plan on making it dry - I'm literally using it so I have more time to flesh out the landscape and provide hints about the main quest and themes, as the "clues" aren't all strictly only about the dungeon at hand. I intend to use it as a vehicle for worldbuilding. Another campaign I'm in suffers from dryness, and I want to use this as a way to enrich the story and lore more than just a pointless check. Sure, if used without this intention it'd be dry as all hell, but that's on the DM in question who wishes to utilize it more than the system itself, no? Just inserting a rule with no rhyme or reason is never a good idea. --Ghostpage (talk) 18:50, 23 July 2017 (MDT)