D&D 5E Skills and Ability Checks -- Perspective on Consistency vs DM Empowerment

[Charlaquin]

I am fine with 5e being more vague, and not providing a set list of skill DCs for everything.

That said, the two things I would have liked to see more is:

1) Some more high level differentiation. Its completely possible for level 5 characters to hit DC 30 checks (aka the "top tier" skill checks). Beyond that, it becomes a little more frequent, but ultimately 20th level characters aren't doing anything "more epic" just "epic more often".

2) Some more examples of DC 35 and 40 checks. My level 10 characters hit these numbers a lot (guidance + bardic inspiration gives you a BIG boost). So I would like to see some examples of what is being the DC 30.

This, I’ve noticed, varies a lot from table to table. There are some groups who really take advantage of Guidance, Bardic Inspiration, Expertise, etc. to consistently hit those high DCs. In other groups, those skill-boosting spells and abilities pop up every once in a while to shore up a difficult roll, but don’t constantly come into play. Fortunately, 5e’s DM-Empowerment approach, well, empowers DMs to tailor their adjudication to suit the needs of their group.

 

[iserith]

I do not believe "anything is possible" is a useful answer.
People know there are opportunity costs of gaining character abilities.
People know there are resource costs to using abilities.
People expect those choices to be meaningful and I think it is entirely reasonable to expect them to be balanced against things with lower/greater thresholds of opportunity cost and lower/greater resource expenditures And 5e is basically demanding a DM who wants those to be balanced weigh all the systems granted specifics and resource spending against the carteblanche probabilities that is the attribute check system, all basically on the fly.

Yeah, maybe none of that actually matters all that much to the play experience for most people.

 

[Ashrym]

2) Some more examples of DC 35 and 40 checks. My level 10 characters hit these numbers a lot (guidance + bardic inspiration gives you a BIG boost). So I would like to see some examples of what is being the DC 30.

That's something I don't think we need, lol. That's number porn. Creating an action to match the highest stacking bonuses we can find is the opposite of bounded accuracy.

No more treadmills.

 

[Charlaquin]

Based on the question I have asked on this forum it even matters to many of those somehow championing how 5e does it. They just think they are going to figure it out on the fly... and the end effect is a huge just say no masked by ridiculous difficulties.

Umm...

Great for you wonderful anecdote and not useful

?

as a DM I would feel guilty over invalidating opportunity and design choices of the one player and why in hell is there even a resource cost if its easy to accomplish with a strength check? Maybe I should make it harder....

Because design choice and resource expenditure is supposed to mean something is why I want things balanced.

5e probably isn’t the system for you, then.

 

[Garthanos]

Multiple attacks are a class ability granted at higher levels but they are specific to classes.

Yeah show me one that isnt otherwise compensated by more powerful spell effects which coincidentally involve more damage and auxiliary effects (well defined entirely). The low advancement on 1 scale simply isnt enough advancement to be at all like the advancement in spells or even attack abilities.

 

[Ashrym]

Based on the question I have asked on this forum it even matters to many of those somehow championing how 5e does it. They just think they are going to figure it out on the fly... and the end effect is a huge just say no masked by ridiculous difficulties.

That would never happen in any of my games. I don't feel the need to hide behind a die roll to say "no" when I could have already said it instead of making the roll.

It's also evidences of over-rolling clouding the capabilities of the character. Randomness occurs when in doubt based on circumstances. Otherwise a person simply narrates the effect.

Right like the real world has a 16th level character in it who fights demi gods. I am not buying it.

That looks an example of the player setting the scope of the checks instead of the DM, but it also depends on how the checks are applied. It's not hard to look at the opposed check rules and apply those, for example.

I know that if I'm playing a barbarian that might fight demigods I have advantage on STR checks while raging and cannot roll below my STR score from 18th level on. That means my barbarian at 20th level with 24 STR and advantage while raging trying to wrestle with a demigod has a +13 athletics check, will average 28 on the checks, and cannot have less than 24 regardless.

What do you think the opposed checks are on these demigods? The monsters use the same ability system the players use.

 

[Tony Vargas]

No more treadmills.

BA is just a slow treadmill, running at the pace of proficiency.

The point of a slow treadmill is that it won't overwhelm the d20. That's 'good' if the scope of the game is not meant to shift too much over the range of play. In 5e, it's touted as a feature that foes you faced at low level never completely lose relevance, for instance, or that everyone in the party can generally contribute a check with a chance of succeeding or failing ( a very different chance, looking at a +11 or +17 vs a -1, but still a chance of success or failure, both).

That contrasts with 3e, in which BAB and max ranks could progress at a much higher, and very different rate, and with much more varied stacks of bonuses, overwhelming the d20, completely.

 

[Garthanos]

Right like the real world has a 16th level character in it who fights demi gods. I am not buying it.

That looks an example of the player setting the scope of the checks instead of the DM

Huh I am saying the foundations for what a level X character is capable of in general cannot be the real world because they do not exist in the real world the real world doesnt have people like this who can kill a house sized sentient flying beast armored like a tank with a dagger. What they can accomplish I do not think should be based on what anyone I know can accomplish they are at a different scale. And not treating them as a different scale makes them overshadowed by joe blow football player. (who can on average jump to match the baseline of a 20 strength character for instance). They need to be balanced against what spells and and special abilities other styles of heroes can accomplish. And not just joe blow football player those with those specifically defined advancement like powerful spells.

What percentage of skill checks are vs another character? a huge amount of strength checks I bet are vs environmental features.

That would never happen in any of my games. I don't feel the need to hide behind a die roll to say "no"

Oh they didnt think they were saying no but a really nearly impossible stunt unless you are extremely high level is the same thing and this was an affect easily achieved by a low level spell. I am sure they thought they were doing the games anything is possible guidelines and 10 percent is possible its just practically a stupid action waste in actual play.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The point of a slow treadmill is that it won't overwhelm the d20. That's 'good' if the scope of the game is not meant to shift too much over the range of play.

Huh I am saying the foundations for what a level X character is capable of in general cannot be the real world because they do not exist in the real world the real world doesnt have people like this who can kill a house sized sentient flying beast armored like a tank with a dagger. What they can accomplish I do not think should be based on what anyone I know can accomplish they are at a different scale.

Basically, you're saying that at some point in the scope of the game the d20 should be overwhelmed. That there should be things in the scope of the game that your +0 everyman simply has no hope of doing, while the +30 superman can't even fail at those same things.

In 5e, you can, as DM, make that happen: by narrating success for the superman, and narrating failure for the everyman, even if the superman is 'only' +11.

 

[Shiroiken]

Not part of the original conversation, but unlike 3E & 4E (where there are detailed rules for DMs), 5E has returned to the OD&D and AD&D roots, where the DM has final say. The positive to this remains mostly that DMs are no longer constrained to arbitrary rules that can halt gameplay (to look something up) or limit story opportunities. The negative of this is that like back in the day, being a good DM takes time, practice, and experience.

Back in the day, part of the job as a DM was to seek out potential DMs to teach. You'd guide them and help them learn the rules, how to tune their style, and how to adjust on the fly. Nowadays we don't do that anymore, which creates some problems for new DMs. Fortunately, we have countless articles, videos, podcasts, etc. that a new DM can look to for guidance. I still prefer the old apprenticeship method, but then again... I'm old