D&D (2024) Auto-succeed/fail on ability checks

[GMforPowergamers]

They didn't change the important rule: the DM does not ask for a roll unless there is a chance for failure. So there is still no such thing as pulling a 20 and passing an impossible check

yes no "I can jump the moon on a 20" but also the DM now has to know if they set a DC 20+ weather he wants to let people rolll for 5%s or not

 

[Ibrandul]

Ok, fair enough, but what world building is served by greater than DC 20 checks. I am curious. Could you give me an example from play?

1. 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 the population. I call for everyone to roll a DC 20 Int (Rel) check.
2. The same thing happens, but the party is in Neverwinter, and none of them has ever traveled outside of Realmspace. Tharizdun has tried to gain power in Realmspace recently, but the deity is very little known there. The DC is 25.
3. The same thing happens, but the party is in the Mournland and has never left Eberron. Eberron is metaphysically cordoned off from the rest of the multiverse (though not in an absolutely impenetrable way), and it is extremely strange that Tharizdun's name should be spoken there. But do any of the PCs know how strange this is? The DC is 30.

Those are all knowledge-based examples, of course, but I wanted to give a very specific sense of what world-building purpose is served by such checks.

More generally, I have players ask all the time to do things that are really difficult, whether they know it or not.

1. "Can I nonmagically calm this wild catoblepas that hasn't noticed me and convince it we are no threat?" "Maybe. Roll Wis (Animal Handling)." Wild catoblepases are naturally aggressive and prone to attacking adventurers on sight, but they can be domesticated. The DC is 20.
2. Same thing, but the PC doesn't know that she has inadvertently positioned herself between the catoblepas and its baby. DC 25.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I'm starting to think my DMing style is very unusual:

• I frequently set DCs higher than 20—partly, I think, because my players routinely attempt to do things that are "hard" or harder;
• only about 1/3, or in some cases less, of game time is spent on combat;
• there are lots of calls for rolls outside of combat;
• there's fairly even distribution of rolls across all the various skills (so that ability checks using knowledge skills are common, whereas I'm starting to think most DMs seldom call for these); and
• there are lots of calls for everyone to roll ability checks using knowledge skills (usually followed by, for example, "Did anyone roll a 25 or higher?").

If your DMing style has very little in common with mine, then yeah, I guess this change would pose no problem.

Honestly the only one that doesn't seem familiar is DC 25 knowledge checks coming up frequently. And I have no problem switching to 20-always-succeeds for my games if that's what the table wants to do.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I don't think I've ever set a dc that someone would need a 20 to be successful at and got it. I've certainly had people roll a 20 on a check before (and succeed). NOW they get inspiration instead of "Darn it, I critted on this ability check. Wish I'd saved that roll for an attack!" (Either way, they would succeed, I suspect).

Only time it came up in live game for me was an opposed check: 20+2 perception vs 19+10 stealth. I ruled they didn't see the hiding character because 22 is less than 29.

Under the new rule, they would have seen the hider. I'm not convinced this is a major or important change overall.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

1. 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 the population. I call for everyone to roll a DC 20 Int (Rel) check.
2. The same thing happens, but the party is in Neverwinter, and none of them has ever traveled outside of Realmspace. Tharizdun has tried to gain power in Realmspace recently, but the deity is very little known there. The DC is 25.
3. The same thing happens, but the party is in the Mournland and has never left Eberron. Eberron is metaphysically cordoned off from the rest of the multiverse (though not in an absolutely impenetrable way), and it is extremely strange that Tharizdun's name should be spoken there. But do any of the PCs know how strange this is? The DC is 30.

Those are all knowledge-based examples, of course, but I wanted to give a very specific sense of what world-building purpose is served by such checks.

More generally, I have players ask all the time to do things that are really difficult, whether they know it or not.

1. "Can I nonmagically calm this wild catoblepas that hasn't noticed me and convince it we are no threat?" "Maybe. Roll Wis (Animal Handling)." Wild catoblepases are naturally aggressive and prone to attacking adventurers on sight, but they can be domesticated. The DC is 20.
2. Same thing, but the PC doesn't know that she has inadvertently positioned herself between the catoblepas and its baby. DC 25.

Thanks for responding and I honestly cannot see what difference a 5% autosuccess or fail is going to make to the players or the characters in any of the outlines circumstances.

 

[Ibrandul]

Thanks for responding and I honestly cannot see what difference a 5% autosuccess or fail is going to make to the players or the characters in any of the outlines circumstances.

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 are permitted, and someone has a high enough mod).

In this circumstance, it simply doesn't matter who the PCs are.

That doesn't make a difference?

 

[Charlaquin]

My point is it changes the dynamics of DM Fiat.
Before you could objectively decide the difficulty of an action and let the dice fall where they may. You only had to deny an attempt on the case of possibility

Or in other Terms,when a DM is potentially deciding on a check, they are thinking about 2 things: Possibility and Probability.

Possibility is the ability for the character to even succeed at the action.
Probability is how likely they can succeed at a possible action.

Usually you think about if the action is possible, usually by examining proficiency, equipment, or other parameters. Then you set a probability based on a difficulty you gauge if you deem the action possible.

Sometimes possibilty and probability are linked. An action's scucess might be only of pure difficulty or experience. In these times you can merge Possibility and Probability and set a DC. A DC over 20 is only possible for the talanted, skill, or enhanced as you cannot roll higher than a 20 without a modifier. A DC over 20 also had a low probability of success. PCs do to their equipment and magic can high themselves up their probability of success and turn the impossible to possible.

Automatic Success on a 20 wonks it up as it puts more work on the DM by enhancing the Fiat of when an actions possibility chances via a chance of probability.

It's more work for a DM in a game that already piles work on them.

I get where you’re coming from, and on paper I agree. But in practice I don’t feel like it’s going to make a noticeable difference in gameplay at my table. I don’t think the situation where I call for a check and the DC is higher than a PC can achieve with a natural 20 ever really happens in games I run.

 

[Charlaquin]

From my perspective, it feels like auto success on a 20 and auto failure on a 1 is going to be a thing for the same reason alignment is still a thing: it’s just part of what people think of when they think of D&D. Alignment continues to persist despite having basically no mechanical function anymore because alignment chart memes are a part of how people engage with D&D. Likewise, telling the story of the time you had a crazy scheme and your DM humored you by letting you roll for it, and you got a nat 20 is part of how people engage with D&D. “You can certainly try…” is almost as iconic of a Mercerism as “How do you want to do this?”

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Only time it came up in live game for me was an opposed check: 20+2 perception vs 19+10 stealth. I ruled they didn't see the hiding character because 22 is less than 29.

Under the new rule, they would have seen the hider. I'm not convinced this is a major or important change overall.

The deja-vu that gives me makes me think that I've seen this happen, yeah.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

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 are permitted, and someone has a high enough mod).

In this circumstance, it simply doesn't matter who the PCs are.

That doesn't make a difference?

What?

Now you have me completely confused. A 22.6% success chance (an awfully precise number) is 17 or better on a D20 rolling high.
Why make them roll at all if their stats have no bearing, just roll a D20 behind the screen and tell them if you get 17 or better.