D&D 5E Not liking Bounded Accuracy

[Azurewraith]

Sure its possible to narrate anything. But to me denying the drow elf the knowledge that she should have based on her background seems like a more severe invalidation of her choice to be a drow elf from this particular city.



Sure I would have different results even if their (adjusted) roll was the same. Let me sharpen the example: instead of wading through the stream, suppose the PCs are trying to jump across a 5 foot stream with 2 foot high rocks sticking out the stream. Two PCs both have an (adjusted) result of 10. One of the PCs has 16 Str, and the other has 6 Str. I would let the 16 Str PC clear the obstacle, while the 6 Str PC would not. Would you rule that they both succeed (or fail) the same?

The DC is the DC to me skill checks are broken down into 3 skill(Prof) natural aptitude(stat) and luck (dice). As for the drowned being there wouldn't it be a auto success or a int check to remember

 

[Eejit]

Re-read what I said, because this response isn't a counter for it.

Indeed, because you were trying to apply irrelevant truisms.

 

[Maxperson]

Indeed, because you were trying to apply irrelevant truisms.

How is a change to the rules being a rules change irrelevant to the discussion?

 

[Eejit]

How is a change to the rules being a rules change irrelevant to the discussion?

You weren't talking about changes to the rules, you were talking about interpretations of the rules and also about use of uncommon rules.

 

[Maxperson]

You weren't talking about changes to the rules, you were talking about interpretations of the rules and also about use of uncommon rules.

I have only been talking about changes to the rules. When there are gaps in the rules that requires a ruling to close that gap. That's a rules change.

 

[Eejit]

I have only been talking about changes to the rules. When there are gaps in the rules that requires a ruling to close that gap. That's a rules change.

And that's where your thinking differs from every other person in the thread.

The rules cover the basics of an infinite variety of circumstances. Filling in the gaps isn't making a new rule (you'd approach an infinite number of rules), rather it's applying the rules to situations where they aren't explicit.

 

[Maxperson]

And that's where your thinking differs from every other person in the thread.

No. People, including you, have demonstrated a distinct lack of understanding of what I am saying. They prove it over and over again by posting responses arguing that I am talking about following the rules. I'm not. I'm talking about the thousands and thousands of gaps in the rules.

The rules cover the basics of an infinite variety of circumstances. Filling in the gaps isn't making a new rule (you'd approach an infinite number of rules), rather it's applying the rules to situations where they aren't explicit.

That's impossible. They can only ever cover a finite variety of circumstances. If you think otherwise, you're fooling yourself.

 

[Orlax]

I have only been talking about changes to the rules. When there are gaps in the rules that requires a ruling to close that gap. That's a rules change.

Let's dive into this simple statement. How can you change a rule that didn't yet exist? That's called creating rules, not changing rules. At best you are home brewing there.

 

[bmcdaniel]

suppose the PCs are trying to jump across a 5 foot stream with 2 foot high rocks sticking out the stream. Two PCs both have an (adjusted) result of 10. One of the PCs has 16 Str, and the other has 6 Str. I would let the 16 Str PC clear the obstacle, while the 6 Str PC would not. Would you rule that they both succeed (or fail) the same?

The DC is the DC to me skill checks are broken down into 3 skill(Prof) natural aptitude(stat) and luck (dice).

If that works for you, I don't have any problems with it, but I should note that it doesn't follow D&D rules per the Player's Handbook. If you read section 182 of the Player's Handbook, you will note that a DC 10 Athletics check allows a character to clear a low obstacle equal to 1/4 of his Str score. In other words, the same DC has different results for different characters.

 

[Azurewraith]

If that works for you, I don't have any problems with it, but I should note that it doesn't follow D&D rules per the Player's Handbook. If you read section 182 of the Player's Handbook, you will note that a DC 10 Athletics check allows a character to clear a low obstacle equal to 1/4 of his Str score. In other words, the same DC has different results for different characters.

This I did not know I shall consult my group after reading up on this