Unsatisfied with the D&D 5e skill system

GMMichael · Jun 4, 2019

5ekyu said:
I guess some folks take more time on DCs and do its an issue. Me, nah, cant think of a DC that took longer to assign than it would take me to decide "no roll needed". So, really, tho it might would be so in your games, it's a well trained and quick response in mine so, none of my time lost.

That's good. I notice that D&D has a breakdown of what DCs should be in five-point increments, which is much better than stressing over the difference between a 13 or a 14. Still, I find it odd that DMs have to ask themselves "is there a roll needed here?" or "would a roll for this auto-succeed?" I prefer just to let PCs tell their share of the story, and when it occurs to me that MY version of the story (as GM) would be different from what I'm hearing, that's when I ask for a roll. It's a subtle difference, but a difference nonetheless.

Tony Vargas said:
I agree a more with the latter than the former. It's not much time, for at least some return, taking into account /who/ is making an attempt. It may not much more time to figure every DC whether the task is a foregone conclusion or not, but what's the potential return?

There's an interesting aspect of D&D difficulty classes: they're the exact same thing, mathematically, as penalties to a PC's roll. In a sense, EVERY DC is 10, and when things get more difficult, the PC's roll just takes a penalty against that 10. So I don't see PCs as having different DCs to accomplish the same task. Your return on the investment of customizing DCs is that you have a custom-tailored DC waiting for a PC who might not even end up rolling for that DC. Wasted time. If you use one DC, and just apply a bonus or penalty to the PC's check who is making the attempt, then at least you're spending rules-related time on a character who is invested in that rule/judgment/DC.

Tony Vargas said:
What if the Rules Are Intended to be ambiguous, so the DM has plenty of room to interpret them as desired?

You stopped a little short of a product endorsement there, but I'll take it. I would hope that the players in that situation understand the DM's interpretations, otherwise they're headed for GM and system failure.

5ekyu · Jun 4, 2019

DMMike said:
That's good. I notice that D&D has a breakdown of what DCs should be in five-point increments, which is much better than stressing over the difference between a 13 or a 14. Still, I find it odd that DMs have to ask themselves "is there a roll needed here?" or "would a roll for this auto-succeed?" I prefer just to let PCs tell their share of the story, and when it occurs to me that MY version of the story (as GM) would be different from what I'm hearing, that's when I ask for a roll. It's a subtle difference, but a difference nonetheless.

There's an interesting aspect of D&D difficulty classes: they're the exact same thing, mathematically, as penalties to a PC's roll. In a sense, EVERY DC is 10, and when things get more difficult, the PC's roll just takes a penalty against that 10. So I don't see PCs as having different DCs to accomplish the same task. Your return on the investment of customizing DCs is that you have a custom-tailored DC waiting for a PC who might not even end up rolling for that DC. Wasted time. If you use one DC, and just apply a bonus or penalty to the PC's check who is making the attempt, then at least you're spending rules-related time on a character who is invested in that rule/judgment/DC.

You stopped a little short of a product endorsement there, but I'll take it. I would hope that the players in that situation understand the DM's interpretations, otherwise they're headed for GM and system failure.

Yeah well I guess we just dont get by as best we can. We just lumber our way thru, with our story and gameplay- not mine or theirs but our.

Calls for checks (possibly even rolls) are made when resolutions are needed and the specifics of the characters will matter. Kinda what we all blundered into when we started mucking around with all that chargen stuff about ability scores, proficiencies, size of HD, 5' increments of movement etc etc etc asbif ghost was gonna be useful.

But it works for us but we never found it odd that questions of certainty or not and resolution mechanics etc would come up in that kind of game. If we wanted a more tell my story vs tell their story conflicts-only resolution gameplay, we could have and would have chosen any number of other systems that focus chargen and minimal mechanics around that experience rather than one as mechanics driven as 5e. Pages of character stats and numbers dont really help that playstyle all that much in our experience, duffers that we are.

Tony Vargas · Jun 4, 2019

EzekielRaiden said:
I believe Saeviomagy is saying that someone can be empowered purely through the genetic lottery, or can work fantastically hard and be totally powerless (e.g. slave labor).

Broader meaning of 'empowerment' sounds like. There's having power, and there's being delegated the 'power' to take initiative & self-manage in order to meet more ambitious expectations (a cynical spin on the management-buzzword version of empowerment, because y'know, it's me).

And, TBH, DM Empowerment does not sound like the social activism meaning of Empowerment. Players fit the model of a disenfranchised majority, not DMs, who, if anything, are the 1%ers (OK, 17%ers 5:1 being a pretty common player

M ratio). Also, that kind of empowerment doesn't flow from an authority by fiat. If there were a grassroots player movement standing up to tyrannical DMs, they might be after that kinda empowerment.

DMMike said:
Your return on the investment of customizing DCs is that you have a custom-tailored DC waiting for a PC who might not even end up rolling for that DC. Wasted time.

If you use the whole 5e skill system, though, that literally never happens. You only determine a DC when a player has declared an action, /and/ you've decided not to simply narrate success or failure. Only at that point do you determine a DC.

I would hope that the players in that situation understand the DM's interpretations, otherwise they're headed for GM and system failure.

Nod. Players need to be able to trust their Empowered 5e DM, more so than the 5e system, because that system is just a starting point, the DM, not the system, is going to get you were you actually want to go. It's a radical change in philosophy from 3e/4e, even if a lot of the underlying mechanics are very similar.

twofalls · Jun 4, 2019

I'm surprised that this thread still has any life left in it, I've long ago stopped paying attention to it, but have been getting notices. I do want to thank the contributors, I learned a lot reading this.

Stalker0 · Jun 4, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
You only determine a DC when a player has declared an action, /and/ you've decided not to simply narrate success or failure. Only at that point do you determine a DC.

Or DCs. I think many actions warrant progressive dcs.

For example, let’s say a player is investigating a scene. I might set a dc 15 to determine a particular fact. But if the player rolls a 30...I’m likely going to give them more. A 30 is Sherlock Holmes level of deduction, they can literally make connections that aren’t possible to a normal mind.

Many scenarios aren’t black and white, the die roll can give increasing levels of benefits depending on the check involved

Tony Vargas · Jun 4, 2019

Stalker0 said:
Or DCs. I think many actions warrant progressive dcs.

For example, let’s say a player is investigating a scene. I might set a dc 15 to determine a particular fact. But if the player rolls a 30...I’m likely going to give them more.

Degrees of success? Sure. But you don't even really need to determine any break-points ahead of the roll, do you? Just, take into account the magnitude of the result when you narrate the success.

Satyrn · Jun 4, 2019

lowkey13 said:
I don’t want to shatter your illusions, but coconut milk doesn’t come from a cow that drank pina coladas.

My illusions! They have been shattered!

Or:

That is actually exactly where coconut milk comes from in my megadungeon campaign.

Satyrn · Jun 4, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
Degrees of success? Sure. But you don't even really need to determine any break-points ahead of the roll, do you? Just, take into account the magnitude of the result when you narrate the success.

I do need to determine them ahead of time. Or I would if I actually used degrees of success.

I have found some my most unsatisfying DMing comes when I don't decide what a die roll means before it is rolled.