Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 8653891" data-attributes="member: 6801845">The system does provide guidance.  Difficulty can go anywhere from very easy to nearly impossible.  It doesn't give specifics because there are a near infinite number of challenges that are not opposed rolls.I have no idea what you mean by "no information".  As a DM when I describe something I'll give the players the information I believe the PCs would have.  You keep saying it's not a simulation like it's a mantra.  It's meaning kerfluffle by now because you can't explain it other than say that the game provides no information.  I disagree.Do a quick search on how long it takes to pick a lock.  You'll find that it can typically take between 7 seconds and 45 minutes to open a lock while sometimes being impossible.  If you want to simulate ... sorry ... mimic that in a game there's only so many ways to emulate that.  One way is to use D&D's methodology, perhaps with degrees of success/failure which is what I do.  I am simulating the outcome of attempts to pick a lock.  The reasons it can take differing amounts of time to open a lock is due to several things from lock construction, whether the lock has a broken or sticking spring to just plain luck.  Sometimes you open a lock quickly because you just happen to lift the mechanisms just right on the first try.  In D&D we represent that by the roll of a die.But this is a tangent.  If you don't things like this are simulation, fine. If that's the case I don't see how any TTRPG could be considered having elements that are simulationist, which I think is a silly interpretation.  But you do you.  But it comes back to the same question.  What option is there?   Other games have a set target number for all task resolutions that are uncertain and I would find that unsatisfying.  A lock on a farmer's shed should be far easier to pick than the lock on a god's treasure chest.  Degrees of success/failure is covered in the DMG, and is something I use depending on the type of check.  You keep saying things are arbitrary, but everything about games is arbitrary at some point.In 3.5 we had some example DCs.  One was given the <a href="https://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/climb.htm" target="_blank">type of wall you were given a DC to climb them</a>.  But it didn't really matter because as a DM that just meant I had to reverse engineer the target DC I wanted.  If I had low level PCs and I wanted a wall they could climb but it shouldn't be too difficult then I wanted a DC 10 so I had to look up on the table how do describe it.  Or maybe I wanted to make it more difficulty so I also had to cross reference in the climb modifier.  It gave the illusion of objectivity but it was really just a layer of unnecessary complexity.  That was just for climbing, how can you possibly come up with a comprehensive list for every action the PCs might want to take that have an uncertain outcome?  Come up with the equivalent of monster entries?  We have a couple thousand of official monsters and enumerable custom variants.  I don't even know where you could start with a list of possible actions that wouldn't end up just like the climbing guidelines except exponentially worse.But I'd also say that everything about D&D (and all TTRPGs) is arbitrary.  The AC of a bullywug?  Arbitrary.  How much damage a red dragon's breath does?  Arbitrary.  It may follow some logic, just like when I set the DC for that lock or that wall, but ultimately it's just arbitrary made up numbers.  They're just made up by someone else that as a DM I have to look up.So I'll ask again.  What options are there that would be better?</blockquote>

Verification