NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8196770" data-attributes="member: 6987520">Yeah, that's been the crux of the issue really: the debate of what constitutes difficulty and the need for a check.I don't get why some posters feel that their interpretation is the correct version and refuse to acknowledge the other position is perfectly valid as well. shrugI mean, there are plenty of climbs where I am not going to ask for a climb check, like using a rope to pull yourself up over a 10' wall, for example. Sure, IRL there are a lot of people who probably couldn't do it, but with enough time and such I'll give PCs the benefit of the doubt, after all, a fall would only be 1d6 damage, insufficient to kill ANY PC except a sorcerer or wizard with CON 8 or lower... (assuming standard array). Now, if the PC had just 1 HP left... maybe, because a failure could lead to interesting complications since the damage would be enough to knock them out if they fell.But 80 feet? Yeah, I am certainly asking for a check then, because it is basically saying how well can you avoid significant damage when facing this challenge. Think of it like a trap. If the PC needs to make a check to disarm a trap, it is to avoid the damage (or whatever) the traps causes. Even given enough time without any other factors, I will still call for a check to avoid damage (if they failed by 5 or something?).If the PC has plenty of time, other DMs might not bother with a check and just say "After a few minutes you disarm the trap" and move the story along.Both work fine in my book depending on what type of game the DM is running.</blockquote>

Verification