I do have to say that I find the +10 bonus of pass without trace to be rather startling in a bounded accuracy system...
I'm not saying that incredible check results can't allow for incredible feats to be done. I'm just saying that, by doing very well at Task A, you are unlikely to end up performing Task B instead.Excellent points! Let's take it a step further though. If a DC 40 is an "impossible" check in the system, then characters capable of rolling that 40 can achieve more dramatic results than their less-skilled peers. This ought to feel exceptional. When you push the system to the extremes though (examples over here), your master pick-pocket should be capable of feats that a DC 40 couldn't achieve either. Shouldn't they? Or are you arguing that pushing checks past DC 40 should not continue to yield better results?
I thought that "bounded accuracy" would help us to eliminate stupidly high numbers. Things like pass without trace and the rogue's expertise seems to undermine that idea. How do you deal with the difference between "you do the thing" and "you do the thing spectacularly well" when spectacular is suddenly commonplace?
Relevant bonus comic.
While I do have the reputation of a killer DM, I'm curious why you consider this rat-bastard DMing. I've done this for years with many different rpgs, ever since a player tried to screw with the system. The rogue rolled low as he went to sneak ahead, so he came back to talk with the party before heading out again (planning on making another check). After a lengthy argument, I decided to never call for a roll (or accept an early roll) until it was too late to change anything.One of the things I do as a DM is wait on the roll until (or if) it matters. Example, the rogue wants to sneak up and try and untie the hostage being held by the orcs. I don't have them roll the stealth roll immediately. I wait until they're up close to the hostage and then roll. I know that's rat-bastard-DMing, but it keeps players on their toes. /evilDMlaugh
The spell pass without trace is handy as the "party needs to sneak" spell.
While I do have the reputation of a killer DM, I'm curious why you consider this rat-bastard DMing. I've done this for years with many different rpgs, ever since a player tried to screw with the system. The rogue rolled low as he went to sneak ahead, so he came back to talk with the party before heading out again (planning on making another check). After a lengthy argument, I decided to never call for a roll (or accept an early roll) until it was too late to change anything.