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

[SkidAce]

Sorry about double quote, that was weird.

 

[Parmandur]

Not going to stop and calculate my player's chance of success every time I set a DC to find out if they are capable of it or not.

I mean on the extreme ends I hear yah and agree, if its a DC 2 or a DC 30, then I'm pretty sure they will/won't make it, so of course, no roll.

Otherwise, I'm choosing a DC based on the task spectrum (easy, hard, etc for example) and letting them roll.

I'm talking about stuff like a Wizard rolling for wrestling a Giant, or a Barbarian rolling for Arcana. Without Proficiency, there's not even a DC in some cases.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Unless you-as-DM also want the roll to inform as to the degree of failure; as in, there's no way in hell that PC's gonna make that climb but let's see just how badly this goes.

Which is why sometimes even impossible actions could get a roll, e.g. go ahead and roll to shoot an arrow at the moon; you ain't gonna hit it but on a 1 the arrow hits you or someone nearby when it comes down.....

So...if you make up your own rules, they may be incompatible with official rules?

Whodathunk?

 

[Lanefan]

So...if you make up your own rules, they may be incompatible with official rules?

Under 5e's official stance of "rulings, not rules", this statement cannot possibly be true.

Whatever rule I make up is my ruling, which - going by 5e standards - trumps whatever's in the book.

That said, anyone know yet whether 5.5 is going to stay with rulings-not-rules as its mantra? (I would assume yes, but at this point it's rather difficult to assume anything)

 

[Parmandur]

Under 5e's official stance of "rulings, not rules", this statement cannot possibly be true.

Whatever rule I make up is my ruling, which - going by 5e standards - trumps whatever's in the book.

That said, anyone know yet whether 5.5 is going to stay with rulings-not-rules as its mantra? (I would assume yes, but at this point it's rather difficult to assume anything)

Based on what they have put out so far, yes.

 

[Maxperson]

Under 5e's official stance of "rulings, not rules", this statement cannot possibly be true.

Whatever rule I make up is my ruling, which - going by 5e standards - trumps whatever's in the book.

That said, anyone know yet whether 5.5 is going to stay with rulings-not-rules as its mantra? (I would assume yes, but at this point it's rather difficult to assume anything)

Unless they plan to re-write everything, they're stuck with it. The rules are written too vaguely and with too many holes to function otherwise.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Under 5e's official stance of "rulings, not rules", this statement cannot possibly be true.

Whatever rule I make up is my ruling, which - going by 5e standards - trumps whatever's in the book.

That said, anyone know yet whether 5.5 is going to stay with rulings-not-rules as its mantra? (I would assume yes, but at this point it's rather difficult to assume anything)

Whether you want to call it a ruling or a rule, all you have discovered is that something you do at your table, which isn't in the official rules, might sometimes conflict with those official rules. You have every right to run your game however you want, of course, but it's not a flaw in the design if it conflicts with your houserule/ruling.

 

[Parmandur]

Unless they plan to re-write everything, they're stuck with it. The rules are written too vaguely and with too many holes to function otherwise.

I don't think there is any broadbased dissatisfaction with the approach that would motivate WotC to work on a change.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't thinknthere is any broadvased dissatisfaction with the approach thst would motivate WotC to work on a change.

Yep. That and there isn't time to re-write and playtest everything. No motivation and no time = stays the same.

 

[clearstream]

I understand that if a task is impossible, I don’t call for a roll. But sometimes a task should be possible for PC1 but not for PC2.

The new rule requires either:

(A) that if anyone can do it, then everyone can do it; or else

(B) that the DM must always track everyone’s mods.

One solve for that is just require proficiency. Or in some cases expertise.

So a given task may be impossible for the unskilled. There'll be edge cases, but as on the whole players allocate proficiency to their strengths, most of the time it will work out.

EDIT I see numerous others suggested same