A player in my game has a habit of making statements like:
"I make a Religion check to see if I recognize that symbol."
"I want to use my Persuasion skill to talk past the guard."
"Can I use Insight to try to…"
All of these sound wrong to me, as I'm expecting them to just say what they want to do without reference to a skill. Sometimes there wouldn't even be an ability check required, or what they're describing is covered by a different skill.
I don't find much support in the core rules for players describing actions like this, though the books don't spend a lot of time on how players describe actions. Are players allowed to declare outright that they are making a specific ability check?
I'm not necessarily looking for how to handle this particular player. The problem I'm seeing at my table is that less experienced players have started to adopt the same mannerism. I want to tell them "this isn't how you play the game", and my question here is really "This isn't how you play the game, right?" or "Should I be discouraging new players from playing this way?" I think the example of play and the How to Play on pages 5 & 6 of the PHB support this. I want to know if there are other sources that might strengthen or weaken that argument.
Note: I'm concerned only with the general rules. There might be specific cases where this is okay, e.g. if a monster had turned invisible and a player, knowing the rules about hiding said, "I make an active Perception check to find them", I'd allow it (though even here the player could just say "I try to find them" without needing to reference the skill).
Best Answer
The Ability Check is a DM decision
Page 174 of the PHB covers Ability Checks and how they work (emphasis mine):
The player comes up with the narration of what they're doing and then the DM determines HOW or IF success is determined.
But why can't the player suggest?
The rules (Basic Rules, 58) also account for this.
So, they absolutely CAN, if that's the way the table environment is set up. But it is the DM who has final determination on what ability that action described requires. It may not be the ability someone is proficient in, but that doesn't mean it's unfair. The player may have a good reason for wanting to use that ability - and if they narrate their action appropriately it may work the way they want. But the DM determines if, when, and what the player will roll to determine success.
The key is really in how they describe what they want to do. Not everyone is comfortable with roleplaying, but all players should be able to describe what they're doing and HOW they're saying something (but not necessarily WHAT they are saying.)
Being a good DM is listening to players and knowing their strengths and weaknesses (both as characters and as players.) Helping guide the player to the narrative they're trying to create is absolutely fine! Just be wary of twisting a situation so that it's always at their best. There are times when that's fine, but there are times when what they're trying to do really only works one way and the DM can make that call, too.