Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Common sense isn't so common and the need for tolerance
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7249325" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>If you want the player's action to have a 5% chance of failure, set the DC accordingly. Maybe it'll be 9 or 7 instead of 10. It's entirely in your purview to do so.</p><p></p><p> Depends on the dragon, they're not all AC 23+</p><p></p><p> I recall seeing a designer quoted as saying that was exactly what they had in mind. You could toe-to-toe or cast a dragon to death if you were high enough level, but if you could gather enough determined archers together, you could also defeat it that way. </p><p></p><p> Narrating success or failure or call for a check is right there in the most basic take on the resolution system in the DMG.</p><p></p><p> Everything's optional. The passage you quoted was advice. </p><p></p><p> No, DM fiat is removed, at the DM's discretion, and replaced by BA - when he calls for a check. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>Semantics! </p><p></p><p>Seriously, though, bounded accuracy is about checks, and checks happen when the DM calls for them. Not calling for them when you don't want at least a 5% chance of failure (or success) isn't overriding them, it's just DMing. </p><p></p><p> He can if he wishes.</p><p></p><p> The system simply doesn't begin to work until the DM begins making rulings. Calling for a check is a ruling, success/failure, is a ruling. No DM, no ruling, no system. The DM is integral to resolution this time around.</p><p></p><p>If you're OK ruling something impossible in the face of a table giving a fixed DC for the action in question, and a player who's bonus alone overwhelms that DC, why would you have an issue with it in a system that tells you to rule success, failure, or call for a check? </p><p></p><p> You can get a +11 to a check, a +17 with Expertise. That doesn't overwhelm the d20. The 20th level expert can fail a check that an ordinary warm body might succeed at. (specifically, while rolling a 1, while the warm body rolls a 19, but it's still not quite overwhelmed).</p><p></p><p> In 5e, he's required to make that determination every time. </p><p></p><p> It makes for better 5e games if you can convincingly feign infallibility from behind the screen. </p><p><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7249325, member: 996"] If you want the player's action to have a 5% chance of failure, set the DC accordingly. Maybe it'll be 9 or 7 instead of 10. It's entirely in your purview to do so. Depends on the dragon, they're not all AC 23+ I recall seeing a designer quoted as saying that was exactly what they had in mind. You could toe-to-toe or cast a dragon to death if you were high enough level, but if you could gather enough determined archers together, you could also defeat it that way. Narrating success or failure or call for a check is right there in the most basic take on the resolution system in the DMG. Everything's optional. The passage you quoted was advice. No, DM fiat is removed, at the DM's discretion, and replaced by BA - when he calls for a check. ;) Semantics! Seriously, though, bounded accuracy is about checks, and checks happen when the DM calls for them. Not calling for them when you don't want at least a 5% chance of failure (or success) isn't overriding them, it's just DMing. He can if he wishes. The system simply doesn't begin to work until the DM begins making rulings. Calling for a check is a ruling, success/failure, is a ruling. No DM, no ruling, no system. The DM is integral to resolution this time around. If you're OK ruling something impossible in the face of a table giving a fixed DC for the action in question, and a player who's bonus alone overwhelms that DC, why would you have an issue with it in a system that tells you to rule success, failure, or call for a check? You can get a +11 to a check, a +17 with Expertise. That doesn't overwhelm the d20. The 20th level expert can fail a check that an ordinary warm body might succeed at. (specifically, while rolling a 1, while the warm body rolls a 19, but it's still not quite overwhelmed). In 5e, he's required to make that determination every time. It makes for better 5e games if you can convincingly feign infallibility from behind the screen. ;) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Common sense isn't so common and the need for tolerance
Top