My DM did an auto-fail rule on me for using a hammer and iron spike to chip around an icon/symbol of a god that was on a stone wall. I am a crafter/forger who works an anvil every day, and he said that since I'm not a mason there's ZERO chance that I could chip the stone wall carefully to remove the piece of stone that is bearing the icon.
Any thoughts? It created a lot of tension at the table when I thought it was simply silly that I couldn't chip the stone surface off an he basically ruled that I would need a "different" tool and that I would "need to be a mason" to be able to do this.
Thanks!
You were trying to remove the facade of a stone face without damaging it? That does indeed sound very very difficult. How did you intend to carve away the stone behind the icon without damaging it?
Honestly, I don't know how one would accomplish this IRL. It would probably take several hours to carve the stone precisely enough that you wouldn't be shattering it.
Still, he should have allowed you to make an untrained Craft (masonry) check (I'd peg the DC around 20 or 25, but that's just a guess) to give it a try. I'd say it takes 1d4 hours, and if you failed, the icon would be destroyed.
You were trying to remove the facade of a stone face without damaging it? That does indeed sound very very difficult. How did you intend to carve away the stone behind the icon without damaging it?
Honestly, I don't know how one would accomplish this IRL. It would probably take several hours to carve the stone precisely enough that you wouldn't be shattering it.
Still, he should have allowed you to make an untrained Craft (masonry) check (I'd peg the DC around 20 or 25, but that's just a guess) to give it a try. I'd say it takes 1d4 hours, and if you failed, the icon would be destroyed.
Thank you! Now, what I said to him was that I have a Craft Arms and Armor profession, not Masonry, so with an Intelligence of 14 I have a +2 and untrained I rolled a DC 22. What caused me to get so upset with the ruling was that he ruled "you won't be able to succeed" or other sentences like "you can't do that" and then told me to make a masonry check which untrained (although I hit an anvil every day with a hammer) I rolled a 22 totally. And he said instantly, "You fail."
So, he DID let you make a check. It was just impossible for you to succeed, because the DC was higher than 22 (which, IMO, seems reasonable, although I know zero about masonry.)
" and then told me to make a masonry check which untrained (although I hit an anvil every day with a hammer) I rolled a 22 totally. And he said instantly, "You fail."Keep in mind that anvil work and masonry have virtually nothing in common.
Would a man who works an anvil every day have a better chance at chipping at stone than a bookish illusionist?
No. Neither know the exact level of force needed, nor the sort of angle. However, the bookish wizard would probably be able to guess better.
Would a man who works an anvil every day have a better chance at chipping at stone than a bookish illusionist?" and then told me to make a masonry check which untrained (although I hit an anvil every day with a hammer) I rolled a 22 totally. And he said instantly, "You fail."Keep in mind that anvil work and masonry have virtually nothing in common.
Honestly? Both would have such a low chance that it would hardly matter. This is really, really delicate and difficult work.
Would a man who works an anvil every day have a better chance at chipping at stone than a bookish illusionist?
Chipping at stone? Yes. That's a strength check.
Chipping at stone without destroying the facade? No. Forging steel requires lots of powerful hammering at a very strong material, whereas chiseling the facade off a stone wall is extremely delicate work with a brittle material. The skills aren't really transferable, at all. As was mentioned, the illusionist is probably better able to guess the right way to do it without breaking anything.
|
Some example of a crafting check with a Dc of 20+.
Antitoxin, sunrod, tanglefoot bag, or thunderstone Alchemy 25
Composite longbow or composite shortbow with high strength rating Bows 15 + (2 × rating)
Complex or superior item (lock) Varies 20
Honestly, removing a icon from a wall is something that I can do, untrained, with a good chance of success. You simply should start kipping the stone very far from the surface you want to save.
It is hard to damage a 1' icon if you cut the stone 2' away from its.You had improvised tools so a -2 to the check result.
Total check = 20.
With that result you could make a superior lock. I doubt that making a superior lock is more difficult than cutting away a slab of stone.
As a GM I would have selected a DC of 15 and required 3 successful checks, each one requiring a lot of time. 1 failure by 5 or more would have damaged the icon, 2 destroyed it.
- * -
You have a companion with mending?
He could probably repair the damage.
- * -
Also you need to understand that the hammer you were using is a sledge hammer while the hammers stone masons use are tiny and as for the iron spike is the same comparison when you look at the chisels that stone masons use I hate to break it to you guy but you were in the wrong on this one and it sounds like you and your GM need to talk it out
I hope you are joking. You don't use sledgehammers when working at a forge unless you are pounding the metal to remove impurities.
Sledgehammers are used mostly to destroy masonry or break stone.|
|
sledgehammer Head from 2.2 to 6 lbs, plus the handle.
Equipment list:
Hammer 5 sp 2 lbs.
Stonemanson hammers From 3 to 6 lbs.
|
My DM did an auto-fail rule on me for using a hammer and iron spike to chip around an icon/symbol of a god that was on a stone wall. I am a crafter/forger who works an anvil every day, and he said that since I'm not a mason there's ZERO chance that I could chip the stone wall carefully to remove the piece of stone that is bearing the icon.
Any thoughts? It created a lot of tension at the table when I thought it was simply silly that I couldn't chip the stone surface off an he basically ruled that I would need a "different" tool and that I would "need to be a mason" to be able to do this.
Thanks!
I'm gonna side with your GM on this one. Just because you think it's natural that proficiency with forge tools should carry over to stonework doesn't meant it is either A) true, or B) natural in your GM's opinion.
The GM didn't buy your argument that your skill was "close enough". Argument made, he apparently listened before shooting it down, it should be over for you.
For what it's worth, if I were your GM I'd probably have said the same thing on the grounds of believing (through my experience in metalshop in junior high and the one time I demolished and rebuilt a brick wall) that the two skillsets are different enough to not be substituteable. I *might* have allowed a +2 bonus for masterwork tools that could carry over sufficiently to masonry duties, but I totally wouldn't have given you your skill ranks or other bonuses for blacksmithing (or whatever your forge-based craft or profession skill was).
All that said, there's also the possibility of context. You said it was some holy symbol. Maybe he simply fiated your failure, and that's the vibe you've caught? It'd be awkward and clunky Gm-craft to come up with excuses to prevent you from bringing the icon out because he simply didn't want you to, but perhaps there are campaign reasons in play that mess with his plot if you're able to warn people that God X has worshippers in play.
|
|
Then if he is using a regular hammer the question becomes can he defeat the hardness of the stone with breaking the hammers handle after so much use
A weight of 2 lbs is normal for a geologist hammer, and that is made to break stones for a long time. Rule wise our equipment never get damaged or suffer wear and tear for using it.
A skill check wit a final result of 20 is pretty impressive.
with an Intelligence of 14 I have a +2 and untrained I rolled a DC 22
Let's compare his result with a typical level 1 expert stonemason.
Class skill +3, +1 skill, +1 for int 13 (normal range of 10-11 + race bonus), +3 skill focus Craft (stonemason), +2 masterwork tools = +10
This guy, that has seriously invested in his craft, can automatically make a DC 20 check taking 10.
Change the masterwork tools to normal tools (masterwork tools cost 55 gp against 5 gp for a normal set) or remove skill focus and he will have to roll to achieve that DC.
Removing a stone symbol from a wall without damaging it is something that people do in real life. It sound strange to prohibit it to adventurers.
- * -
All that said, there's also the possibility of context. You said it was some holy symbol. Maybe he simply fiated your failure, and that's the vibe you've caught? It'd be awkward and clunky Gm-craft to come up with excuses to prevent you from bringing the icon out because he simply didn't want you to, but perhaps there are campaign reasons in play that mess with his plot if you're able to warn people that God X has worshippers in play.
It is too constrictive for my tastes. If the PC have found a way to thwart your planes as a GM with some clever move you smile and let them get their victory.
Then you use the tools at your disposition to put them again on track, without showing your guiding hand too much.Saying you fail if the PC do something unsuspected is only a way to frustrate them.
My DM did an auto-fail rule on me for using a hammer and iron spike to chip around an icon/symbol of a god that was on a stone wall. I am a crafter/forger who works an anvil every day, and he said that since I'm not a mason there's ZERO chance that I could chip the stone wall carefully to remove the piece of stone that is bearing the icon.
Any thoughts? It created a lot of tension at the table when I thought it was simply silly that I couldn't chip the stone surface off an he basically ruled that I would need a "different" tool and that I would "need to be a mason" to be able to do this.
Thanks!
I'm gonna side with your GM on this one. Just because you think it's natural that proficiency with forge tools should carry over to stonework doesn't meant it is either A) true, or B) natural in your GM's opinion.
The GM didn't buy your argument that your skill was "close enough". Argument made, he apparently listened before shooting it down, it should be over for you.
For what it's worth, if I were your GM I'd probably have said the same thing on the grounds of believing (through my experience in metalshop in junior high and the one time I demolished and rebuilt a brick wall) that the two skillsets are different enough to not be substituteable. I *might* have allowed a +2 bonus for masterwork tools that could carry over sufficiently to masonry duties, but I totally wouldn't have given you your skill ranks or other bonuses for blacksmithing (or whatever your forge-based craft or profession skill was).
All that said, there's also the possibility of context. You said it was some holy symbol. Maybe he simply fiated your failure, and that's the vibe you've caught? It'd be awkward and clunky Gm-craft to come up with excuses to prevent you from bringing the icon out because he simply didn't want you to, but perhaps there are campaign reasons in play that mess with his plot if you're able to warn people that God X has worshippers in play.
l that said, there's also the possibility of context. You said it was some holy symbol.
EXACTLY. Context. Not sure if everyone here understands that what Im' saying is in D&D/Pathfinder a core tenant is "Go ahead and roll, let's see." I roll. He makes a check, even if it's fiated behind the screen, he says to me "Sorry, couldn't do it." He said to me immediately after I suggested the idea, "You can't do it."
Just not right- not in the spirit of the game. And thank all of you- one of you above gave the DC 15 with 3 checks. I would have done the same but made it DC 20. BUt at least you use the skills and rules and let the player do it.
Well, he was basically correct that you can't do it. The DC was up to him to decide, and it was apparently higher than 22. Even on your nat 20, you still couldn't hit the DC. So yes, he probably should have just let you roll to begin with, but he was correct in saying that "you can't do it", because, without buffs or training, you couldn't do it. If a nat 20 is a fail, you're just not capable of doing it.
Well, he was basically correct that you can't do it. The DC was up to him to decide, and it was apparently higher than 22. Even on your nat 20, you still couldn't hit the DC. So yes, he probably should have just let you roll to begin with, but he was correct in saying that "you can't do it", because, without buffs or training, you couldn't do it. If a nat 20 is a fail, you're just not capable of doing it.
Not surrrrrre you are quite getting it. It's the approach and the fact that D&D is suspension of disbelief.
If your question is, "Was the GM appropriate in telling me 'You can't do that' before I rolled?" then the answer is "No, he should let you roll."
If your question is, "Was it possible for my character to do this thing with his stats?" then the answer is also "No."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If your question is, "Was the GM appropriate in telling me 'You can't do that' before I rolled?" then the answer is "No, he should let you roll."
If your question is, "Was it possible for my character to do this thing with his stats?" then the answer is also "No."
Boom, exactly. Thanks. My GM is amazing, actually. Tremendously talented but the challenge is on me - I think since I've been DMing for so long (25 years) it will test all of us to have me in the game that we are in. That's outside of this particular situation but undeniably interlinked. It is hard for me to step back from the DM mentality (I'm of the pro-player school, enabling players a lot of freedom to create, expand upon etc. the existing character concepts). But from a basic rules standpoint as well, I would never tell a player "No" - I would say, "Well, let's see," and then I would give a chance. There's always a chance in my mind. That's where I disagree. I always give at the very least a 1% chance. Because it rewards the player for conceiving something interesting like a paladin who is religious and wants to chip away a symbol to show his church. And for me a DC 25 is more than enough. But I missed it with a 22, so then I as DM in roles reversed would roll percentage dice. If it came up 99-100. He's got it anyhow. "Amazingly, you pull something that should not even be possible off!"
|
|
GMs can be challenging players in the same way that Doctors are said to make the worst patients.
It sounds like you and your GM have different styles. If you want him to adopt your style, I'd suggest contemplating why that is. And whether the problem is his, or actually yours.
I'm not critiquing your style, btw. Sounds perfectly reasonable, in fact. But not everyone has the same style. Personally, I'm quite fine with a DC that can't be hit even on a nat 20 being simply impossible under the circumstances. In my style of GMing, I wouldn't allow a 1% chance to succeed anyway to reward creativity. I'd reward creativity by stressing that they need to think of ways to improve their chances. Come up with a justification for me to grant bigger circumstantial bonuses, to put it in rules speak.
My way isn't better than yours, and to be honest your way isn't better than your GM's. Of course, neither is his way better than yours. But it's his table, his rules so long as he's the GM.
|
|
A weight of 2 lbs is normal for a geologist hammer, and that is made to break stones for a long time. Rule wise our equipment never get damaged or suffer wear and tear for using it.
Sorry I am unsure as to how to place a quite so I just copy and pasted
Anyway I have to ask what kinda of rule is that so what we are saying is "ok guys your weapons and armor will break and become useless to you if you don't take care of it but at least you still have your hammer" look I'm still learning all the finer details of this game and I'm just now coming into my own as a GM but it seems to me that it doesn't make a lick of sense to say that a hammer can't be broken from wear and tear or that your thieves tools wont break if you mess up to badly that's what tools do they break and get worn out otherwise it would be better to just where a pot on your head as a helmet sense it can never be sundered and use a really big hammer as your weapon because it will never break oh wait they have that its called a earthbreaker and guess what it can be broken just saying
Sunder is very different from wear and tear from normal use.
sunder happen when with a weapon I intentionally target some of your equipment (and that can include your hammer) not when I attack you and your armor increase your AC.