DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
On the topic of passive checks, IMO 10 is too high. If you're making a check, the idea that 10 is the default means half the time you are better off "not trying" (in the passive sense). I like passive of 5+, personally.
D&D 5E Ability check DC based on level
jgsugden
Legend
@Corrosive Glad you found what you were looking for already, but to supplement it:
Consider whether the check is one that all, or only one, PC needs to make. That has a dramatic effect on selecting a reasonable DC for a check.
If your skill check is to see if a PC knows some obscure lore, only one PC needs to make the check. You may set a very high DC for such as check in a high level game. However, if the ability check in question is to leap from one side of a collapsed bridge to another with a giant Sphere of Annihilation beneath it, setting a very high DC may be condemning some weaker PCs to death.
Also to consider: When a PC obtains proficiency in a skill that partners with their prime ability scores, that should be something they are very good at doing. If they have expertise on top of that, they should be unreasonably good. That is an investment of resources, and it should be paid off rather than just seeing the DC raised to offset their high skills. That is the primary reason for the system that is agnostic to the abilities of the PCs when it sets DCs.
Consider whether the check is one that all, or only one, PC needs to make. That has a dramatic effect on selecting a reasonable DC for a check.
If your skill check is to see if a PC knows some obscure lore, only one PC needs to make the check. You may set a very high DC for such as check in a high level game. However, if the ability check in question is to leap from one side of a collapsed bridge to another with a giant Sphere of Annihilation beneath it, setting a very high DC may be condemning some weaker PCs to death.
Also to consider: When a PC obtains proficiency in a skill that partners with their prime ability scores, that should be something they are very good at doing. If they have expertise on top of that, they should be unreasonably good. That is an investment of resources, and it should be paid off rather than just seeing the DC raised to offset their high skills. That is the primary reason for the system that is agnostic to the abilities of the PCs when it sets DCs.
Setting DCs based on the PC's skill is saying "I want the PC to have an X% chance of succeeding." The problem with that, IMO, is that it fails to model the world in any way. If, on the other hand, an action has the same DC no matter who is doing it, it defines something about the world. Note that I am not talking about "realism" -- leaping 20 feet across a chasm during an earthquake can be a DC 5 task if that models the action movie world the PCs operate in. The important part is that the DC is consistent regardless of who performs the action.
As an aside, I am not a fan of the breakdown of difficulties by 5s, or the DCs in 5E in general. 5E is way too swingy for way too long (level wise) for even DC 20 to be a viable difficulty for most operations. I use 8 plus increments of 3 (so 8, 11, 14, 17 and 20) with 20 being the very high end of difficulty.
Or it could be a design tool to model the world. You know your archvillain needs a special lock on his vault, specially designed to thwart his high level adventurer foes, so you need to know how likely a high level adventurer is to succeed a certain check.
Laurefindel
Legend
Setting the DC by task works well as long as you can put those difficulty levels in context. How hard is climbing up this cliff? DM #1 will say easy (DC 10), the other will say hard (DC 20), DM #3 says DC 17, just 'cause. To a great extent, this is rather arbitrary. DCs being all over the place in the published adventures relate to that.
Knowing what is "hard" for a party of 13th level characters is useful to use as a base of comparison. I think that's what @Corrosive was after. Once you know that DC 15 = 63% success rate for an average 13th-level adventurer (as an example, I have no idea what DC vs success rates are*), then you can design your adventure with the right difficulties in mind when that is necessary, and make a "hard" challenge hard for your PCs.
[edit] ninja'd by Morrus (in essence)
* actually, the table Corrosive found stipulates that DC 13 = 65% success rate for a proficient-but-not-specialized 13th level PC. A very useful chart if you ask me. Once you set your DC at 13 because you want this relative success rate, then is stays at 13 for the level 1 character too, of course, but at least you took an educated guess when designing your adventure.
Knowing what is "hard" for a party of 13th level characters is useful to use as a base of comparison. I think that's what @Corrosive was after. Once you know that DC 15 = 63% success rate for an average 13th-level adventurer (as an example, I have no idea what DC vs success rates are*), then you can design your adventure with the right difficulties in mind when that is necessary, and make a "hard" challenge hard for your PCs.
[edit] ninja'd by Morrus (in essence)
* actually, the table Corrosive found stipulates that DC 13 = 65% success rate for a proficient-but-not-specialized 13th level PC. A very useful chart if you ask me. Once you set your DC at 13 because you want this relative success rate, then is stays at 13 for the level 1 character too, of course, but at least you took an educated guess when designing your adventure.
Last edited:
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
So, by this design idea though are you going to lower the DC for the same challenge if a lower level party encounters it? It seems like what would be a 65% success rate for 13th level would be only 45% for 8th level maybe and 25% or something for 1st level. If you adjust the DC to meet the PCs level of ability, that's fine, but not something I would want personally as either a player or DM.
As far as what level of challenge is what level of challenge for whatever level of PC, yeah the math can give you a good idea of baseline. Of course, I would never consider something "hard" if my chance of success is 65%---but that is just a different design mentality. shrug
I don't think that's the intent in this case. It's more of a benchmark: this BBEG is designed for 13th level PCs so the DCs in his fortress are X. They remain X even if the party comes ta him at 8th or 20th level.
Laurefindel
Legend
DC remains the same regardless.
The table is there for you to take an educated guess at setting the "right" DC when designing your adventure, taking your PC level and proficiencies in account.
If a lower character attempts the same task, it will remain the same DC. When the character come back 5 levels later, it will still be the same DC, except that what was hard for them back then might be easy now.
No. You use that information to design your adventure so it's an appropriate challenge for the character levels it's designed for.
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
Well, that is what I am hoping for, but I have known DMs who design their game with the idea of varying the DCs so a "hard" challenge is always hard--which personally I never agreed with as a style, but to each their own.
Similar Threads
