Search results

Sorry—are you accusing me of not reading the rules?

I wasn't saying anything here about whether DMs are permitted to do what you're describing (that is, to choose not to call a roll on the basis of proficiency). I misunderstood you, if that's what you were talking about. Here's what I'm talking about: A PC wants to attempt a very hard task (DC...

Thanks for clarifying.

Is there something in RAW—anything, anywhere—that actually states this? Or is this just your interpretation of the passages I quoted? Sincere question; maybe I missed something. If not, I’d like to know on what basis you think that “we think it’s impossible for that PC” is always going to line...

I've just pored over the relevant sections of the 5e PHB and DMG with a fine-tooth comb. Let me preface this by saying: no one is DMing the game wrong. My argument is only about RAW, and is intended to rebut the several folks who are saying that RAW forbid an ability check when a PC's stats are...

With your procedure (assuming I understand you correctly), the DM constantly monitors all mods and, if a nat 20 wouldn't be good enough to hit the DC once mods are added or subtracted, then the roll is prohibited and does not occur. So there would never be a situation when a nat 20 would fail...

I think the fundamental wellspring of disagreement here is that some DMs (myself, for one) think of ability check DCs as the difficulty that an indeterminate character would have performing the task. And it turns out that other DMs (Maxperson and UngainlyTitan, for two, if I understand them...

Correct. This was in response to people telling me that 2014 RAW demanded that no rolls ever be made by players unless a nat 20 would succeed. My question was, if you play that way, how do you adjudicate the situation I was describing? That’s a good point. The 2014 rules don’t provide any...

Thanks for explaining. It’s great to get an insight into other people’s styles. You're right—our basic philosophies are on different planets! I've never even considered the idea of setting DCs based on which character is attempting the task. I wonder how many DMs operate that way? It seems to...

Thanks. That's a very common house rule—but it is a house rule. And it nerfs the Bard's Jack of All Trades feature, among other things. You keep saying "if failure is meaningful." I know that's language from the RAW, but I confess it has always struck me as highly ambiguous in many situations...

What would you do if the group encounters something and someone asks, "Have I heard about this before?" Would you let the player roll a knowledge ability check to determine that? Arcana, History, and Religion each "measure your ability to recall lore" about these topics. That's all they do. If...

Do you really do this? Every time? Really? Let's say a PC says she wants to climb a 100-foot-tall, dangerous wall. The DM determines that a DC 22 Strength (Athletics) check is required to successfully climb the wall. The PC's modifier for this check is +0. (The DM may not know this, by the...

I'm sure you're right: this is the movie tie-in adventure book. Neverwinter is a really good guess, too. I'm far less persuaded by the notion that they didn't say so because they're waiting until they see whether the movie looks good or bad. It's Hasbro making the movie, not some other studio...

This is awesome! But... as a matter of playtesting, I wonder whether this rule would have led to such excitement if it had been a part of the game from the beginning.

This is a total tangent, because truly wacky edge cases like this shouldn't be taken into account when evaluating a proposed rules change. But, under current rules and using only WotC-produced items and abilities, it's possible to succeed on a DC 30 check despite rolling a natural 1. (I mean...

To be clear: this precise situation, where everyone has an exactly equal chance, will happen only on checks where the DC is exactly equal to 20 + the highest modifier in the party on that particular check. Part of the discrepancy between my position and others' is that it seems this is very...

I don't intend for it to be taken as universal. I was asked for an example of why I might set a DC at 30 for the sake of world-building; I gave the example; then I was told the new rule wouldn't make a difference in that case, when it actually more than quadruples the chance of success. I don't...

All five PCs are rolling. Under the new rule, one PC out of five needs to roll a 20 to succeed, and everyone succeeds on a 20. There’s a 22.6% chance that at least one will do so. And let's say that one of them has a +10 to the check— a cleric with a +5 Wis mod, plus a proficiency bonus of +5...

The party in Eberron has a 22.6% probability of someone knowing the thing that is supposed to be "nearly impossible" to know. None of their stats or skill proficiencies will raise or lower this probability (though guidance, bardic inspiration, etc., could raise their chances even higher if those...

A party of five 16th-level characters hears a cultist raving about Tharizdun. The players have not heard of Tharizdun during play in this campaign. The party is in the Free City of Greyhawk, and none of them has ever left Greyspace. Tharizdun is a Greyhawk deity but not a widely known one among...