"Looting the Corpse? Roll Investigation"

[Trustypeaches]

In the year or so I've been playing D&D, every DM I've played with has had players roll Investigation almost every time they search a corpse for loot. 90% of the time it has made no sense to me why such a roll was called for.

There were no time constraints on performing the action, no hidden pockets in their armor, no items that appear outwardly mundane that require a careful to recognize their value. It's just roll well or, and I've heard this phrase countless times, "you find nothing of value", despite how illogical such an outcome might be. Perhaps this is just me, but searching a body doesn't strike me as an action that commonly requires deductive reasoning, and yet this kind of roll is very common in my experience.

Do others see Investigation rolls used like this, or call for such rolls themselves? I'd love some insight into why this is so common.

[JackPhoenix]

May be just your group. Haven't encountered anything like that myself.

[Sigreid]

I've never once had someone, had a DM require me to roll to search a body unless there was something like a secret compartment in the heel of a boot or something.

[Damon_Tor]

I ask for dummy rolls all the time to obscure real rolls. Often searching a body can lead to deductions about what's happening: a stain under the fingernails implies someone was working with a particular herb, a particular scar of a certain age implies the npc had been fought orcs 15 years ago and is thus likely a veteran of a certain military campaign, or there are signs the dead person had been a werewolf.

But if I only asked for investigation rolls when there was something to find, my players would know whenever there's something to find. So I frequently ask for an investigation check even if there's nothing there.

It has nothing to do with loot.

[MaxWilson]

In the year or so I've been playing D&D, every DM I've played with has had players roll Investigation almost every time they search a corpse for loot. 90% of the time it has made no sense to me why such a roll was called for.

I've never seen it done. When I saw this thread title, my first thought was, "Interesting idea." I thought this was going to be a thread about planting extra information on corpses about the goals/motivation/organization/etc. of whatever organization the dead enemy came from. Something like:

Player: I examine the body. Is Int (Investigation) applicable?

DM: Sure. [thinks] DC 12 to gain minimal info, and there's some extra info at DC 18.

Player: [rolls] 17.

DM: You can tell from the condition of these men's boots and clothing that they haven't travelled very far today, and they must have a hideout nearby, probably less than a mile.

I don't see any value in using Investigation for normal looting though. It's not like PCs are likely to overlook any actual valuables, so unless you're looting the body of a spy with secret compartments in his clothing, Sherlock Holmes doesn't see anything Joe the Plumber doesn't, and Investigation doesn't apply.


But if I only asked for investigation rolls when there was something to find, my players would know whenever there's something to find. So I frequently ask for an investigation check even if there's nothing there.

It has nothing to do with loot.

Another way to do this is for the DM to just roll Investigation on the PC's behalf, when appropriate, and tell them what they find. You don't need to tell the players why you're rolling dice.

[Damon_Tor]

Another way to do this is for the DM to just roll Investigation on the PC's behalf, when appropriate, and tell them what they find. You don't need to tell the players why you're rolling dice.

Yeah, but they've got their own sheet in front of them so they know which modifiers to add and whatnot. I've got enough I have to keep track of and roll for without having to keep the PCs various modifiers in front of me at the same time.

[moonfly7]

Personally, I've seen this before, I've asked the DM and he said it just 'felt right', but sometimes I've had DM's actually have hidden loot we need to roll for. The issue is you never now which is happening

[moonfly7]

I've never seen it done. When I saw this thread title, my first thought was, "Interesting idea." I thought this was going to be a thread about planting extra information on corpses about the goals/motivation/organization/etc. of whatever organization the dead enemy came from. Something like:

Player: I examine the body. Is Int (Investigation) applicable?

DM: Sure. [thinks] DC 12 to gain minimal info, and there's some extra info at DC 18.

Player: [rolls] 17.

DM: You can tell from the condition of these men's boots and clothing that they haven't travelled very far today, and they must have a hideout nearby, probably less than a mile.

I don't see any value in using Investigation for normal looting though. It's not like PCs are likely to overlook any actual valuables, so unless you're looting the body of a spy with secret compartments in his clothing, Sherlock Holmes doesn't see anything Joe the Plumber doesn't, and Investigation doesn't apply.



Another way to do this is for the DM to just roll Investigation on the PC's behalf, when appropriate, and tell them what they find. You don't need to tell the players why you're rolling dice.
An easier way to handle investigations is to use the PHB's suggested passive investigation score, just like passive perception, add 10 to the skill, and then keep record of the players passive score and never say anything. Perfect solution.

[Laserlight]

If there was a time constraint: "uh oh, guards are coming. Alaric, check the high priest's body for any papers or stuff that looks significant. Barb, empty as much of that desk into a bag as you can in, uh, ten seconds. Then we're doing the bug out boogie." Or if there was something not obvious: the high priest has a copper ring, only if you look inside do you notice the engraving.
Otherwise, if you loot the body, you get the loot. No roll required.

[KorvinStarmast]

If there was a time constraint: "uh oh, guards are coming. Alaric, check the high priest's body for any papers or stuff that looks significant. Barb, empty as much of that desk into a bag as you can in, uh, ten seconds. Then we're doing the bug out boogie."
{snip}
Otherwise, if you loot the body, you get the loot. No roll required.This looks like how I do it, mostly.

[Keravath]

I've never seen it done. When I saw this thread title, my first thought was, "Interesting idea." I thought this was going to be a thread about planting extra information on corpses about the goals/motivation/organization/etc. of whatever organization the dead enemy came from. Something like:

Player: I examine the body. Is Int (Investigation) applicable?

DM: Sure. [thinks] DC 12 to gain minimal info, and there's some extra info at DC 18.

Player: [rolls] 17.

DM: You can tell from the condition of these men's boots and clothing that they haven't travelled very far today, and they must have a hideout nearby, probably less than a mile.

I don't see any value in using Investigation for normal looting though. It's not like PCs are likely to overlook any actual valuables, so unless you're looting the body of a spy with secret compartments in his clothing, Sherlock Holmes doesn't see anything Joe the Plumber doesn't, and Investigation doesn't apply.



Another way to do this is for the DM to just roll Investigation on the PC's behalf, when appropriate, and tell them what they find. You don't need to tell the players why you're rolling dice.

This is actually a good case for using a player's passive investigation to avoid them making rolls and revealing that there might be something to be found. Passive perception works this way for traps and secret doors so there is no reason for passive investigation to work any differently IF you are performing the appropriate action (i.e. searching the body/room whatever) to which investigation would be applied.

On the other hand, if you don't search the body, you can't find anything no matter what your passive or active skill might be.

P.S. If you just loot the body, you should get anything they are wearing or which is contained in pockets and other obvious containers. A thorough search would involve removing all the clothing, checking for hidden and concealed pockets as well as hidden compartments in footwear and other containers. Most of the time, in my experience, the players don't want to spend the 10 to 20 minutes/body to conduct a thorough search ... thus there may be a skill check (either passive or active) required to see if they stumble across something hidden while performing a normal search.

[moonfly7]

completely agree with you there

[Draconi Redfir]

i could see it being used as a sort of "bonus loot" system. For example maybe the NPC was designed with nothing of value on them to be looted, but if you roll a 20 while investigating, then you find a diamond or something, Rewarding good rolls while not necessarily punishing bad ones.

[Dr. Cliché]

I've seen DM's pull this crap all the time. It seems that every enemy, on the moment of their death, shoves their loot into every available orifice to make it that much more difficult to find.

Personally, I'd only ever ask for an Investigation check if there was something carefully concealed on the corpse in question.

Otherwise, I assume that the players are competent enough to find anything a deceased person was carrying without the need to roll.

[Yunru]

Hire a wagon and just take the corpses with you.

[MaxWilson]

Hire a wagon and just take the corpses with you.

Recruit a necromancer and have the corpses take themselves with you, and fight for you. :-P

[Keravath]

Hire a wagon and just take the corpses with you.

It's called having a portable hole. Dump in the corpses and loot at your leisure. :)

[GreyBlack]

In the year or so I've been playing D&D, every DM I've played with has had players roll Investigation almost every time they search a corpse for loot. 90% of the time it has made no sense to me why such a roll was called for.

There were no time constraints on performing the action, no hidden pockets in their armor, no items that appear outwardly mundane that require a careful to recognize their value. It's just roll well or, and I've heard this phrase countless times, "you find nothing of value", despite how illogical such an outcome might be. Perhaps this is just me, but searching a body doesn't strike me as an action that commonly requires deductive reasoning, and yet this kind of roll is very common in my experience.

Do others see Investigation rolls used like this, or call for such rolls themselves? I'd love some insight into why this is so common.

No hidden compartments that you know of. XD

Personally, I like using random tables in my player looting. The result of their investigation check normally informs what table I roll on for what they find. An exceptional roll results in exceptional treasure.

Other times, I use their result to inform how much money they find; their result is how much copper/silver/electrum they find.

[Ventruenox]

I feel like the solution ought to be malicious compliance. Let the players loot corpses, then give them things that they won't like to find.

Start simple with things like a pile of threatening debtor notes along with a sketch of the corpse's family.

Step it up to rodents found in uncomfortable places. (Y'know like the back of a Volkswagen.)

When they finally find bits of biological functions and bloodborne pathogens, the PCs may end up dialing back on the looting.

[Chronos]

Investigation might reveal things like interesting scars or residue under fingernails or whatever, but players will only find that if they're investigating the body itself (which my group has done on occasion, and sometimes found useful clues). If they're just looting the body, though, they might notice something unusual about the clothing or other items on the body, but they're not going to notice anything about the body itself, because that's not what they're looking for.

[Tanarii]

An easier way to handle investigations is to use the PHB's suggested passive investigation score, just like passive perception, add 10 to the skill, and then keep record of the players passive score and never say anything. Perfect solution.
Given the result of the check almost certainly need to be kept secret from the player, it definitely should be passive. That's one of two things passive checks are for, the other being eliminating repetitive dice rolls.

Or better yet, if there's no time constraint, use the DMG automatic success rule. PCs take the time needed to find whatever can be found. Done and done. A (passive) check should only be needed if there's a time constraint, or the players are otherwise unwilling to have the PCs take their time.

[Pex]

I have a DM who does it. To be generous I think it's done for the randomness. It's not that there's loot already there and the PC can miss it, but rather there's loot only if the player rolls a DC the DM is thinking of. If there's a vital clue to continue the plot the party will find it.

[MaxWilson]

Given the result of the check almost certainly need to be kept secret from the player, it definitely should be passive.

Unnecessary. The DM can do the rolling.

[Mordaedil]

I always ask for investigation checks, not because there is necessarily anything special to find, but to establish a set pattern that there is a potential for something at some point.

It becomes a contract of matter of like showing a passport at a border, and also so the players don't become paranoid when I know the person has hidden something on his body. It's a matter of driving up player paranoia and mystery without necessarily there being one.

[Tanarii]

Unnecessary. The DM can do the rolling.
Unnecessary. Passive checks are there so the DM doesnt need to waste time rolling.

Not to mention many players find DMs making hidden rolls unacceptable, because so many use that as an excuse to cheat (aka 'fudging')

Similarly many players find DMs rolling dice on their behalf unacceptable, often because of reasons related to whose luck or dice is involved. (I don't believe in that kind of thing, but many players do.)

[farrenj]

I ran into this from the first time this week. We had defeated some bandits, there was no pressing time concerns, and we had to roll investigation for every single body to find things like gold coins and daggers. At one point three characters were searching the leader at the same point because no one could roll well. It was infuriating and not the way post battle loot should be handled.

[LibraryOgre]

Not for looting, though I could see using a passive investigation check for hidden objects (i.e. hollow heel in the shoe)

[Boci]

From a purely realism standpoint I can see why the DM is doing this. Think about the following scenario:

PC: I search the guard
DM: You find 5 silver and a resin stained cloth

Let's visualize that. How is the PC searching the guard? Probably not undressing the corpse to check each item of clothing for pockets, its likely just a patdown, which will not automatically find 5 silver on a person, and a ability check is often how such things are handled. Ofcourse most players and DMs, me included, will likely feel this is not worth the time, but sometimes DMs have a pet project they like to have in their games. I have several.

[DMThac0]

I've never understood passive Investigation, I always felt it was a silly thing to have on a sheet. However, there are some very valid points in this thread that make a passive Investigation make sense. It's a very nuanced passive in my opinion, but the idea that the passive Investigation could let a player find a scar on a bandit's wrist which, in fact, covers a tattoo of a secret cult sounds like a strong case for it.

As to rolling Investigation on a "loot the body" thing, I think it should be used sparingly. Most of the time it's pointless, there's nothing hiding on a dead goblin's corpse, they're generally not crafty enough to make secret pockets, a chimera doesn't have a secret compartment in it's talon, etc. However, tossing the random Investigation out when looting bandits, cultists, or what not could insinuate that there's something beneath the surface. It's generally not helpful, but if you can tie it into the theme of the adventure, maybe it can work.

[Aquillion]

I would call for an Investigation roll (or use passive investigation) in a several situations:

1. You're searching under time pressure.

2. You're searching the corpse for information that might reasonably be overlooked, ie. a murder investigation, or trying to figure out who sent an assassin.

3. There's something intentionally concealed on their person, or they're carrying something whose value isn't immediately obvious (in some cases a knowledge check might be needed.)

I wouldn't call for it just to turn out their pockets, go over their jewelry, empty their bags, check to see if their equipment is worth taking and so on.

In the latter two cases, I'd usually expect the entire party to examine the bodies, in which case I'd take the highest passive investigation result and tell them what they find, plus any knowledge rolls to eg. recognize that that strange flower only grows in the far east or that it's actually a rare and valuable poison.


I've never understood passive Investigation, I always felt it was a silly thing to have on a sheet. However, there are some very valid points in this thread that make a passive Investigation make sense.
Mostly it just makes the game run faster. All the DM needs to do most of the time is note down the highest passive Investigation in the party and use that to determine if the group finds stuff while casually exploring, without having to bog things down with rolls.

Rolls should be used for moments of actual excitement and pressure, not for "I glance over the cellar and see if I spot anything interesting."

[Gryndle]

I've never once had someone, had a DM require me to roll to search a body unless there was something like a secret compartment in the heel of a boot or something.

That or there may some sort of clue that wouldn't be obvious in a casual search.

And I could see calling for some sort of roll (not, necessarily Investigate, maybe sleight of hand or just a Dex check) if you are having to do it in a rush before you are discovered, or while taking fire or something stressful and demanding.

But if the enemy is defeated and there isn't any imminent threat, you shouldn't have to roll to see if you can find out what's in the dead guy's non-secret pockets or coin purse.




though it occurs to me that some DMs might use such a mechanic as a lazy way to determine the amount of coinage carried by a minion.

[Kurt Kurageous]

In the year or so I've been playing D&D, every DM I've played with has had players roll Investigation almost every time they search a corpse for loot. 90% of the time it has made no sense to me why such a roll was called for.

There were no time constraints on performing the action, no hidden pockets in their armor, no items that appear outwardly mundane that require a careful to recognize their value. It's just roll well or, and I've heard this phrase countless times, "you find nothing of value", despite how illogical such an outcome might be. Perhaps this is just me, but searching a body doesn't strike me as an action that commonly requires deductive reasoning, and yet this kind of roll is very common in my experience.

Do others see Investigation rolls used like this, or call for such rolls themselves? I'd love some insight into why this is so common.

Why? Not all DMs read the Angry DM blog.

Your DM likes the dice to talk a lot. Every reason you gave against it is valid, especially "not time constraint." You can also add, "no consequence for failure."

You could deal with it by saying that you strip off the clothes/armor while another member searches the clothes, another looks at belts and pouches. If DM still wants a roll, deal with it or quit the group.

[Sigreid]

Well, there was that one American Dad where Steve directed his friends to search the orcs carefully in their MMO because they like to hide their treasure way up in their rear ends.

[BW022]

Do others see Investigation rolls used like this, or call for such rolls themselves? I'd love some insight into why this is so common.

I've never seen this. For me, it would fall under a mundane task. If they don't specifically say how they are searching a body, I'm assuming a casual search through the body, clothes, obvious pockets, etc. I'd general rule they find whatever the creature has on them which isn't specifically hidden or not obvious.

"Ok. You do a casual search the bandit and hit pouches. He has leather armor, a longsword, a broken shield, a gold earing, a pouch with 14 silver, some food wrappers, and a wooden spoon."

If there is something unusual on them, then I'll see general DCs and typically rely on the passive investigate value of the person -- or I'll have the players pre-roll 20 investigates and randomly select one.

"Ok. You do a casual search the bandit and hit pouches. He has leather armor, a longsword, a broken shield, a gold earing, a pouch."
"However, Barlong notices some faint wires and runes on the edge of the pouch." (It's a trap)
"Ranak, notices that under his leather bracer on his left arm there is a tattoo."

If they specifically say they are doing a specific type of search, then I'd just give them the information (a strip search would automatically find the tattoo) or allow a roll (for example if they specifically said they were looking for traps or examining anything before opening it.)

[DwarfFighter]

Looting corpses seems kinda immoral.

Sure, it's an established part of pen-and-paper role playing games. And it makes sense to acquire resources to advance.

But imagine this playing out: A couple of burly thugs accost a foppish dandy in a bar, only to have their butts handed to them as the dandy proves to be a legendary fighter who knocks them out with ease. The dandy then rifles through their pockets for loose change and takes their boots, all in front of the other gawking bar patrons.

Doesn't that seem off?

I mean: Even Han Solo, noted scoundrel, let Greedo keep his gun and credits.

-DF

[Gryndle]

Looting corpses seems kinda immoral.

Sure, it's an established part of pen-and-paper role playing games. And it makes sense to acquire resources to advance.

But imagine this playing out: A couple of burly thugs accost a foppish dandy in a bar, only to have their butts handed to them as the dandy proves to be a legendary fighter who knocks them out with ease. The dandy then rifles through their pockets for loose change and takes their boots, all in front of the other gawking bar patrons.

Doesn't that seem off?

I mean: Even Han Solo, noted scoundrel, let Greedo keep his gun and credits.

-DF

kinda depends on the setting. In your example, yeah its all kinds of wrong. but if you are a ragtag band of adventurers with no real support structure out to stop some freakish big-bad from carrying out some insane scheme....then taking loot off of dead orcs to support your quest isn't immoral, its just practical. otherwise you start playing a game where your characters all have day jobs or are well funded from another source. Or they die badly when they run out of ammunition, spell components, healing kits, and food and they cant maintain their gear.
edit: not too say those scenarios couldn't be fun...just different

[Laserlight]

My players in 5e aren't looting NEARLY as voraciously as we did back in AD&D days. Nowadays, GP are fairly unimportant and my players often don't loot monsters. Back then, if we ran into a lock we couldn't pick, we'd cut the door apart and steal the lock.

In D&D, we generate a LOT of bodies and 99% of the time, there's no drama in searching them. Why would you waste time on rolling?

[Tanarii]

In D&D, we generate a LOT of bodies and 99% of the time, there's no drama in searching them. Why would you waste time on rolling?
I've run plenty of D&D games where I don't even expect players to tell me they loot the corpse or search the room. I just skip to telling them what they find.

Less so when I'm running games where time and being careful matter of course. Different campaigns can have totally different flavor, depending on if searching the wrong place in the wrong way can get you killed, or looting corpses fully or carefully searching for traps can cost you a wandering monster encounter.

[GreyBlack]

Looting corpses seems kinda immoral.

Sure, it's an established part of pen-and-paper role playing games. And it makes sense to acquire resources to advance.

But imagine this playing out: A couple of burly thugs accost a foppish dandy in a bar, only to have their butts handed to them as the dandy proves to be a legendary fighter who knocks them out with ease. The dandy then rifles through their pockets for loose change and takes their boots, all in front of the other gawking bar patrons.

Doesn't that seem off?

I mean: Even Han Solo, noted scoundrel, let Greedo keep his gun and credits.

-DF

I suspect it's a holdover from when D&D was more medieval; picking over the battlefield and taking people's boots, weapons, and even gold teeth was a common practice up until around WWI.

[Sigreid]

Looting corpses seems kinda immoral.

Sure, it's an established part of pen-and-paper role playing games. And it makes sense to acquire resources to advance.

But imagine this playing out: A couple of burly thugs accost a foppish dandy in a bar, only to have their butts handed to them as the dandy proves to be a legendary fighter who knocks them out with ease. The dandy then rifles through their pockets for loose change and takes their boots, all in front of the other gawking bar patrons.

Doesn't that seem off?

I mean: Even Han Solo, noted scoundrel, let Greedo keep his gun and credits.

-DF

Eh, by the looting stage they aren't using it anymore. But then I started playing back when D&D could have been named Home Invasion Robbery with Magic.

[GreyBlack]

Eh, by the looting stage they aren't using it anymore. But then I started playing back when D&D could have been named Home Invasion Robbery with Magic.

.... I have a new campaign idea.

[Grey Watcher]

I can see it as a way to avoid the I Think I Just Failed a Spot Check Problem. Especially understandable if the DM has, either in their current group or in a prior one, dealt with players who couldn't or wouldn't refrain from metagaming.

That said, I think a high roll should be rewarded with something, even if it's just an opportunity to add narrative detail. Even if there's no additional cash or treasure to be found, even in the absence of narrative tools like plot hooks and clues, I think most appreciate the kind of flavor text that keeps things from feeling too much like a video game where every goblin is not only mechanically identitical to every other goblin, but also LOOKS exactly the same.

I've played under DMs that feel as you do, and don't want to roll if there aren't specific consequences and I get it, but I've always found it jars my immersion a bit when I sometimes get told "roll for that" or "you don't have to roll" for the same action.

So yeah, some people prioritize streamlined play over verisimilitude and some vice-versa. Sounds like you and your DM are on opposite sides of that one.

[War_lord]

At tables I've been at, no one bothers looting the corpses, it breaks up the action, and fishing around for small change isn't really a major thing in this edition with how few mechanically meaningful gold sinks you find. There's no much you can do about a DM who insists on calling for rolls in situations that don't warrant it except either leave or stage a player revolt if the other players find it as tedious as you do.