Classes that get expertise or bonus skill proficienciesWhat do you mean by “skill classes”? That term doesn’t sound like a thing in 5e.
Classes that get expertise or bonus skill proficienciesWhat do you mean by “skill classes”? That term doesn’t sound like a thing in 5e.
In your example there really is no “check”. Perhaps you meant “the task is easy” so the sailor doesn’t need to make a check - the DM grants auto-success.It can produce a slightly different result, too. I don't believe this quibble materially impacts my central point, which is that a sailor can't really fail to dock their boat. The check is easy (DC 10, barring unusual factors like a raging storm) and they pass it without rolling.
Yes, that’s what I’m interpreting @Charlaquin to mean. You seem to be quibbling over the degree of my “most likely” vs your “almost certain”.I find it helpful to think about the DCs from the perspective of low-level characters (including in my view, 0th level or "skilled" people). On that same page in the DMG it describes that "a DC 30 check is nearly impossible for most low-level characters" and the perspective "low-level characters" is repeated in several places. So I believe that's what the designers were going for. @Swarmkeeper take a look at DMG239 - the section on Difficulty Class. Rather than "most likely" I believe it almost certain that the designers wrote the DCs from the perspective of low-level characters... because they say they did on that page.
Good use of “anchors” to allude to your sailor example!While that helpfully anchors the day-to-day world, it is not quite so useful for DMs. I believe DMs need to have in mind characters who can achieve what would be nearly impossible for a low-level character. Say at second tier - +4 mod, +3 prof, +3 exp, +d4 guidance, +d8 inspiration - 13-42 with an average roll of 27. For me that can lead to an interesting investigation of ones assumptions about the game-world.
I’m not following…Classes that get expertise or bonus skill proficiencies
If they succeed without rolling there isn’t a check.It can produce a slightly different result, too. I don't believe this quibble materially impacts my central point, which is that a sailor can't really fail to dock their boat. The check is easy (DC 10, barring unusual factors like a raging storm) and they pass it without rolling.
I’m not following…
You want to “hand out expertise and reliable talent” to all the “skill classes” that already “get expertise or bonus skill proficiencies”.
Rogues are all set already.
Bards just need Reliable Talent.
Is this really what you are getting at?
Ah, thanks for the clarification. I get where you are coming from now.I mean artificers, rangers, and monks.
I mean the task is "easy". Is that what you mean? Where we might differ is that I am thinking about what that could tell us about the game world, and the nature of day-to-day activities within it.In your example there really is no “check”. Perhaps you meant “the task is easy” so the sailor doesn’t need to make a check - the DM grants auto-success.
I mean to buttress the view that the DCs get their meaning from the point of view of "low-level characters" - which is what I understood @Charlaquin was espousing. Did it seem that I was disagreeing? I was saying that words in the DMG add substantial weight to that view.Yes, that’s what I’m interpreting @Charlaquin to mean. You seem to be quibbling over the degree of my “most likely” vs your “almost certain”.
You may have mistaken the intent of my second example. I start by saying "While that helpfully anchors the day-to-day world, it is not quite so useful for DMs." So I mean that while a low-level perspective anchors the description-text of DCs (such that very hard actually is very hard), it stops being useful quite early on in a campaign arc.I disagree here. First of all, second tier is not low-level, so you’re now changing the definition you just established. Second, if a party brings their resources to bear in accomplishing tasks more easily (or even automatically), that’s great and should be encouraged. Inspiration, expertise, guidance, and the like are not always available and really needn’t be considered by the DM when setting DCs. As @iserith mentions above, the DC (if one is even needed) should be based on the task at hand and the approach. Otherwise, IMO, we are encouraging the DM to engage in an ability check arms race for no real gain in game play fun.
Likewise, but what is happening in the fiction as characters level is very often that they are confronting far greater challenges. So the average lock on a house door doesn't suddenly escalate in DC, but they are attempting to defeat a lock designed to protect an artifact precious to the high house Dannihyr of Amn.I don't calibrate skill check DCs based on the player characters; I calibrate them on what seems reasonable within the fiction.
That's what I am challenging on considerations like usefulness and mechanical necessity. There is a check, but it is waived... for skilled characters. It's conceivable for there to exist a being that can regularly fail that same check, and such a being would need to make the check.If they succeed without rolling there isn’t a check.