D&D 5E 5E low level monster skill checks

[CapnZapp]

This, the "focused character", is one of the reasons we switched expertise to advantage instead of doubling proficiency bonus. With expertise, pretty much many things were pathetically easy...

I know there are people having trouble with Expertise.

I don't. That there exist a small number of builds that can completely trivialize non-epic skill checks is not a problem.

That any character that isn't actively bad at something completely overshadows even specialized monsters is.

 

[CapnZapp]

the endgame content certainly does look very easy for mooted levels 13-15; lots of DC 10-15 checks, as you say, and endboss monsters that a well built level 15 PC could likely solo.

so...

what conclusions do you draw from that...?

 

[S'mon]

so...

what conclusions do you draw from that...?

Well my mooted conclusion (above) is that you are probably right that published official 5e adventures at higher levels are too easy even for the intended casual audience. I haven't had a problem with the stuff I've run though, probably because I use 3rd party and converted 3e/PF or OSR stuff, and the conversion process is extremely easy. Much easier than running 3e/PF in the Original Klingon. And I don't think there is any inherent design flaw in the system. Although I don't use the encounter building system, which looks pretty terrible - I eyeball it same as when running 1e-3e.

 

[Oofta]

Well my mooted conclusion (above) is that you are probably right that published official 5e adventures at higher levels are too easy even for the intended casual audience. I haven't had a problem with the stuff I've run though, probably because I use 3rd party and converted 3e/PF or OSR stuff, and the conversion process is extremely easy. Much easier than running 3e/PF in the Original Klingon. And I don't think there is any inherent design flaw in the system.

I will be the first to admit that I rarely use published adventures, I'm more of a home brew guy who occasionally buys the published stuff to mine them for ideas and plots. So anything published is just a starter.

However, I think it depends a lot on your group. More than 4 people? Using feats? Magic items? Happen to have someone good at a specific skill? Use a more generous ability score generation than point buy or strict 4d6 drop lowest (or just have someone that was lucky)? It can all affect things.

But then again, maybe I'm just jaded. I've been tweaking and modifying monsters to suit my specific vision or to increase their threat for multiple editions now.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I know there are people having trouble with Expertise.

I don't. That there exist a small number of builds that can completely trivialize non-epic skill checks is not a problem.

Hardly a small number of builds... Just about every rogue and most bards, and many archetypes that grant double proficiency. They are trivializing higher checks as well, also making it very difficult and rare for monsters to challenge them--which removes some of the fun IMO. It isn't just that the floor is raised, the average and ceilings are raised as well.

That any character that isn't actively bad at something completely overshadows even specialized monsters is.

But this isn't the case either, at least not to the extent you are implying. Of course, I like to think you are expounding for emphasis more than truly believe this to that extreme.

 

[iserith]

I would say the challenge (or, to be more precise, difficulty) is not in using a method of random number generation to meet or exceed a target number, but in coming up with an approach that in context will achieve the desired goal. The action offered by the player (or by the DM for the monster in this case) is what influences the DC or suggests if there is an ability check is required in the first place.

If that concept is internalized, then concerns about the math largely tend to fall away in my experience.

 

[Oofta]

Hardly a small number of builds... Just about every rogue and most bards, and many archetypes that grant double proficiency. They are trivializing higher checks as well, also making it very difficult and rare for monsters to challenge them--which removes some of the fun IMO. It isn't just that the floor is raised, the average and ceilings are raised as well.

If you only have 4 people in your group, what are the odds of having a rogue or bard that happens to specialize in the skills you care about?

 

[DND_Reborn]

If you only have 4 people in your group, what are the odds of having a rogue or bard that happens to specialize in the skills you care about?

IME, pretty good. I can't recall the last D&D game (any edition) I played in where there was not at least one rogue or thief, many times with another character also multiclassed into it precisely to pick up expertise in the skills they care about. It bugs me, because it is min/maxing, but I can't stop players from doing it.

Considering the number of posts about stealth and/or perception, yep, it's an issue for more than just me. While advantage is a great thing and bumps up their normal result, it does nothing to inflate floors or ceilings, which lessens the issue many times to a good degree.

 

[Krachek]

Don't get me started on absolute abilities.

A thing like "cannot be surprised" might sound innocuous, but really, it's only result is to wreck stories.

Any dev that suggests abilities that trade in absolutes ("you cannot be tracked" is another) should simply be fired.

Just as I want specialized monsters to be actually good, I want there to be a chance of failure as well.

MM is already full of immunity and absolute abilities.

There is a feat that give immunity to surprise. Monster can’t have similar abilities?

There is no fair fight between monsters and PC. Monster skills are set to challenge untrained and unoptimize PC. But when the optimized PC come to help he will solve everything, just like any hero will do. by default DnD is set to heroic easy mode. If you need “PC trash hardcore mode” you will have to tweak the math.

 

[iserith]

IME, pretty good. I can't recall the last D&D game (any edition) I played in where there was not at least one rogue or thief, many times with another character also multiclassed into it precisely to pick up expertise in the skills they care about. It bugs me, because it is min/maxing, but I can't stop players from doing it.

Multiclassing is also an optional rule. Adding optional rules should in my view come with an expectation that things may not work exactly as intended in the base rules.