D&D 5E How difficult should Difficulty be?

[Yaarel]

That was amazingly generous. If a PC in my game was on a world he had never been to and had no connection to, there would be a zero chance of success. You only roll if the outcome is in doubt. I would have simply told him no he doesn't know.

Yup. That is what I call "narrative adjudication".

If in the context of the story it sounds implausible, then the answer is automatically, No.

Oppositely, if it sounds like it should automatically succeed, then it does.

Only if it sounds like it could go either way, does one reach for dice.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yup. That is what I call "narrative adjudication".

If in the context of the story it sounds implausible, then the answer is automatically, No.

Oppositely, if it sounds like it should automatically succeed, then it does.

Only if it sounds like it could go either way, does one reach for dice.

I agree, though l’ll add that if it sounds like it could go either way, but there’s no consequence for if it fails, then I’ll have it automatically succeed (I mean, might as well if it’s all the same, right?)

 

[Stalker0]

That was amazingly generous. If a PC in my game was on a world he had never been to and had no connection to, there would be a zero chance of success. You only roll if the outcome is in doubt. I would have simply told him no he doesn't know.

And your well within your right to do so, as I will often do in other circumstances. But in this case, I decided to let the player go for it, and crazy enough it worked out for him.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

A PC’s.

Of what specific level and capability?

"A PC" could have anything from a -1 to a +33 or more potential bonus. What is actually impossible for one PC may be relatively easy for another depending on so many factors like tier, skill and party synergies.
Unless you change the DCs for the same task dependent upon who is attempting it, you need a baseline bonus to judge chance of success.

Whether you call a task that is failed 50% of the time is "Medium" or "Hard" is just personal preference. But you need to have a single point for which that chance is 50% to decide on the DC.

I didn't realize you were doing it with the roll for guidance since @Stalker0 said it was a 4.

Also, the wizard had advantage, so with that factored in the chance increases to 7.19% over all.

Whoops. Missed the advantage bit. I'm pretty sure the Cleric just got lucky as well as the Wizard though.

Point still stands though. In a party without a cleric or bard, it would have been impossible to make the roll.

As it is, Stalker0 no doubt remembers this event as a "beat the odds" moment that probably caused excitement and interests at their table.
The other 12 times they set that DC and the party didn't get so extremely lucky would be less memorable, except as an "I failed" moment for the player.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I am rather surprised to see an argument where it seems you and I are on the same page, @DND_Reborn, but here we are.

Yes, I think skill DCs in 5e are often a little high on the high end. DC 30 should be for tasks that push the boundaries of the superhuman; pushing a statue off of your friend just long enough to let them out is not superhuman, real human beings actually achieve that sort of thing now and then (often mothers defending their children or the like, but still, things like that happen IRL.) Having numbers go so high, so fast puts a damper on players trying awesome, epic actions. I find players are often far too skittish or safety-focused. Doing things that makes them more skittish is not productive.

IOW: "Nearly Impossible" is by Earthly standards. The actual limit should be a Gurren Lagann-style "beyond the impossible," where you defy reason itself, committing a deed that will become legend in its own right, the tale of your might resonating across the pages of history.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah but what's the alternative? You want to make tasks approachable, but your only real metric is "guy who has dump stat, no proficiency" vs. "guy with high stat, proficiency, and possibly expertise".

One should, I think, start with the assertion of "what do I think the PC's in my game should be able to do, and how easy or hard it is".

I don't come to it from the angle of making tasks approachable. For me, the question is, "how hard would this task actually be, given the circumstances and the resources of the PCs?" If my answer is functionally impossible, then there's no roll.

 

[Horwath]

I would change d20 for 3d6. Maybe only for ability checks. to give more consistency

then change DCs from:

5,10,15,20,25,30,35(if you really want impossible DC)

to:

5,10,15,18,21,24,27

with 3d6 and -1 modifier, at DC5, you only have less than 5% chance to fail where with d20 you have 25%.
then again DC15 for -1 falls from 25% chance to same less than 5% chance

now for nearly impossible DC(30, changed to 24) and with +17 bonus, you need 7 on 3d6, a 90% chance to succeed.

 

[James Gasik]

I don't come to it from the angle of making tasks approachable. For me, the question is, "how hard would this task actually be, given the circumstances and the resources of the PCs?" If my answer is functionally impossible, then there's no roll.

I guess that's fair, I've just had this ongoing hate affair with a certain kind of DM, which is why I'm always leery when high DC ability checks are tossed out, without any real regards for the odds of success, or worse, in an attempt to keep players from "getting away with murder".

Tell me if you've ever heard something like this before.

DM: "Ugh, my players are so uncreative. They only ever want to cast spells or just "I attack, 17 on the die, take this much damage". They never want to come up with crazy ideas, flip over tables, swing on chandeliers!"

DM in game: "So you want to slide down a bannister to make a charge attack? Uh, that sounds difficult. Make me a DC 20 Acrobatics check; if you succeed, you attack with disadvantage, and if you fail, you fall, take a d6 of damage, and end up prone".

Player: "Yeah, uh, you know what, I'll just walk down the stairs and attack next turn."

DM: "Jeez, what's wrong with you people? Don't you want to take risks and have fun?"

 

[DND_Reborn]

Difficult doesn't scale by level, so the doors that are DC 15 to get through at level 1 are DC 15 at level 20.

Neither do I. Hopefully that was never conveyed in my OP!

A DC of 30 represents a nearly impossible action. That a level 20 person has a 10% chance of success with something that is nearly impossible is really good. For 99.999% of the population, there would be no chance of success at all.

10% is much too low for level 20 to me, though. At this point we're talking the pinnacle of PCs. Now, with expertise it does increase significantly, but only two classes get that feature, and feats are options so you can't rely on that. Also, this is something the PC should be able to do solo to be really heroic--not rely on magic, help, etc. Otherwise, that defeats the heroic feel IMO.

I have found the 5-point shift will probably work nicely the more I've thought about it. With +11, a DC 25 would be a 35% chance to succeed, roughly 1 in 3. That is enough to give the PC a real chance, but not so much to make it feel automatic at all.

I am rather surprised to see an argument where it seems you and I are on the same page, @DND_Reborn, but here we are.

LOL, it has to happen from time to time.

Yes, I think skill DCs in 5e are often a little high on the high end. DC 30 should be for tasks that push the boundaries of the superhuman; pushing a statue off of your friend just long enough to let them out is not superhuman, real human beings actually achieve that sort of thing now and then (often mothers defending their children or the like, but still, things like that happen IRL.) Having numbers go so high, so fast puts a damper on players trying awesome, epic actions. I find players are often far too skittish or safety-focused. Doing things that makes them more skittish is not productive.

IOW: "Nearly Impossible" is by Earthly standards. The actual limit should be a Gurren Lagann-style "beyond the impossible," where you defy reason itself, committing a deed that will become legend in its own right, the tale of your might resonating across the pages of history.

Agreed. But, as I consider it this morning, a 1st-level PC could have an ability 20 for +5, with proficiency +2 would be +7. So, they could attempt a DC 25 "Nearly Impossible" task with a 15% chance of success. What ordinary folk consider "nearly impossible" this be has a decent, albeit low, chance to do it.

I would change d20 for 3d6.

Yeah, I have thought about this to. I was working on it when I posted the OP. But, I realize the d20 is "king" still and easy to use.

 

[Horwath]

Yeah, I have thought about this to. I was working on it when I posted the OP. But, I realize the d20 is "king" still and easy to use.

that maybe true, but I always thought that the biggest problem of a d20 system is THE D20.