Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Esker" data-source="post: 7793706" data-attributes="member: 6966824">Yeah, I noted that as a benefit in the other thread. I've made my peace with the change in the context of advantage being able to stack. I just think, apart from that aspect, there's a mismatch between the solution and the examples you gave for why you think a high modifier is a problem. &nbsp;I don't think it makes sense to think about the chances of an outcome when you've conditioned on one of the rolls being high (or low). I think you should only be considering the overall chances of being noticed. If you assume the rogue rolls well, for a suitable definition of well, then a nat 20+perception is not enough to notice them unless the perception mod is nearly as high as the stealth mod. For a stealth mod of +7 and a perception mod of +2, say, the rogue makes the perception roll irrelevant if they roll a 16 or higher. If the rogue's mod were +10 they'd need only a 13 to render the perception roll irrelevant... but 16+ with advantage is more likely than 13+ without. But that's a silly way to analyze the situation. It doesn't matter how often one side's roll is rendered meaningless; all that matters is how often the rogue is noticed. You should think of the opposed check as a single random event. &nbsp;That's fine, but isn't a question of bounded accuracy <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-P" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :-P"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":-P" /> Oh man, 12 hours? That sounds pretty great. I'm guessing nobody in your group has kids of ages that require babysitters. My group is three couples, all of whom have kids, ranging from 0 to 7. Makes for an expensive hobby.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Esker, post: 7793706, member: 6966824"] Yeah, I noted that as a benefit in the other thread. I've made my peace with the change in the context of advantage being able to stack. I just think, apart from that aspect, there's a mismatch between the solution and the examples you gave for why you think a high modifier is a problem. I don't think it makes sense to think about the chances of an outcome when you've conditioned on one of the rolls being high (or low). I think you should only be considering the overall chances of being noticed. If you assume the rogue rolls well, for a suitable definition of well, then a nat 20+perception is not enough to notice them unless the perception mod is nearly as high as the stealth mod. For a stealth mod of +7 and a perception mod of +2, say, the rogue makes the perception roll irrelevant if they roll a 16 or higher. If the rogue's mod were +10 they'd need only a 13 to render the perception roll irrelevant... but 16+ with advantage is more likely than 13+ without. But that's a silly way to analyze the situation. It doesn't matter how often one side's roll is rendered meaningless; all that matters is how often the rogue is noticed. You should think of the opposed check as a single random event. That's fine, but isn't a question of bounded accuracy :-P Oh man, 12 hours? That sounds pretty great. I'm guessing nobody in your group has kids of ages that require babysitters. My group is three couples, all of whom have kids, ranging from 0 to 7. Makes for an expensive hobby. [/QUOTE]

Verification