D&D 5E 5e consequence-resolution

[Oofta]

I mean we have guidelines for combat... and if there is one thing I have found in my almost 30 years of gaming is that PCs will find actions that NO ONE saw coming...

At which point I fall back on how to handle skill checks difficulty chart and have the PC make a roll against the appropriate DC if resolution is uncertain.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

At which point I fall back on how to handle skill checks difficulty chart and have the PC make a roll against the appropriate DC if resolution is uncertain.

I mean you can have the same rules you have for AC... just remove the term AC and have setting the DC to do something fall on the chart...

this even enhances combat "Last round i needed to hit DC 12 but this round it is 15"

 

[Bill Zebub]

I mean you can have the same rules you have for AC... just remove the term AC and have setting the DC to do something fall on the chart...

That works if the "combat system" you are adapting has nothing but "I swing my sword" every round.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

That works if the "combat system" you are adapting has nothing but "I swing my sword" every round.

that is 100% false. WoD had combat maneuvers and weapon modifiers and even a game with all the street fighter special moves while D&D was still in 2e.


just off the top of my head I can imagine an entire book of 9 swords full of maneuvers and special abilities...

heck every supernatural in the WoD has combat, and social special powers... most have exploration ones too

 

[Oofta]

I mean you can have the same rules you have for AC... just remove the term AC and have setting the DC to do something fall on the chart...

this even enhances combat "Last round i needed to hit DC 12 but this round it is 15"

True. Maybe just have increments and then attach labels so it would be easier. So 10 could be "easy" and "moderate" could be 15. If only.

 

[Bill Zebub]

that is 100% false. WoD had combat maneuvers and weapon modifiers and even a game with all the street fighter special moves while D&D was still in 2e.


just off the top of my head I can imagine an entire book of 9 swords full of maneuvers and special abilities...

heck every supernatural in the WoD has combat, and social special powers... most have exploration ones too

My point was clearly missed. But I may have misunderstood the post I was responding to.

 

[Hussar]

So I'll ask again. What options are there that would be better?

And, I'll answer again.

1. Character based success. If the DC's are more or less static between a range of 10-20, then it doesn't really matter does it? Your odds of success will always be the same. So, skip the whole thing and just hand it to the players.

2. These so called "indexed" difficulties. Not a bad idea.

3. A more robust system, similar to the level of complexity of the combat system, where using a skill isn't simply a "roll high" system with a vague bit of justification after the fact. Granted, that one's a bit beyond my skill level to develop, but, they do exist in a number of other games.

I'm sure that there are several more options. However, since these three have been mentioned, in this thread at least once, and in other threads repeatedly, I'm not really sure how much closer to the water I can lead you.

 

[Hussar]

While I would love that, my hunch is that it can’t be done for “a skill system.” It would have to be done for each activity. E.g. a haggling system as complex as combat, a swimming system as complex as combat, a tracking system as complex as combat, etc.

I agree. You likely would need a few systems here as we've lumped everything that isn't combat into one system - skills. So, it's the same system for persuasion as climbing as handling an animal. Which, really, it probably shouldn't be. Like I said, we'd need to add a fair degree of complexity here, even if the underlying d20 system can still function as a chassis.

 

[Oofta]

And, I'll answer again.

1. Character based success. If the DC's are more or less static between a range of 10-20, then it doesn't really matter does it? Your odds of success will always be the same. So, skip the whole thing and just hand it to the players.

I have no idea what that means. Success is not guaranteed if the DC is between 10 and 20. I do have people automatically succeed at some things, especially at higher levels if they are trained.

2. These so called "indexed" difficulties. Not a bad idea.

Degrees of success and failure is covered in the DMG. I don't think it applies to every single check. Sometimes you succeed or not.

3. A more robust system, similar to the level of complexity of the combat system, where using a skill isn't simply a "roll high" system with a vague bit of justification after the fact. Granted, that one's a bit beyond my skill level to develop, but, they do exist in a number of other games.

Such as? We had skill challenges. I still use a similar, but more flexible, structure at times. However, too often that structure as written just ended up in multiple checks by whoever had the highest modifier. The chase rules can give you an idea of how to expand into a more complex scenario, sometimes it applies but other times it does not. If you are attempting to open a lock, how much complexity do you want or need?

If you want to discuss some options, cool. I've given some examples of how I run more complex challenges myself. But just saying "do it better" isn't a discussion, it's a non-starter with nowhere to go.

I'm sure that there are several more options. However, since these three have been mentioned, in this thread at least once, and in other threads repeatedly, I'm not really sure how much closer to the water I can lead you.

I've asked for options, different ways of doing things. So far ... not much other than broad assertions with no actual suggestions.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

3. A more robust system, similar to the level of complexity of the combat system, where using a skill isn't simply a "roll high" system with a vague bit of justification after the fact. Granted, that one's a bit beyond my skill level to develop, but, they do exist in a number of other games.

Is combat not the same, though? Roll high to hit a higher AC. It’s not really more complex. What am I missing here?

Also, the Ability Check system in 5e is not something the DM justifies “after the fact”.

Examples:
After a player says their PC would like to pick a lock: “This lock looks a bit involved, but not too difficult, it will be a DC 15 Dexterity(Thieves Tools) check to unlock. On a success, it pops open quickly; on a failure, it’s going to take you at least 10 minutes and be a bit noisy”.

After a player declares their PC would like to smash a door down: “This door is well reinforced, to break it down will require a DC 20 Strength check. Feel free to add Athletics proficiency if you have it. On a success, the door will bust open. On a failure, the door won’t budge, you’ll make a racket and take 1d4 bludgeoning damage.”

Etc.

The stakes can be given ahead of time to represent that the PC’s are capable adventurers who have a sense of what they are doing. The meaningful consequences of failure can also be shared ahead of time if the DM chooses to do so.