Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 5813967" data-attributes="member: 53980">That's as silly as suggesting that you're advocating that DDN should be completely without rules. Not that I'm saying that, but let's not oversimplify valid points to the point of absurdity.You can't legislate a bad DM out of existence. I think we can all agree with that. However, a good framework can assist an inexperienced or unexceptional DM to perform better than with a poor framework. To put that another way, I think we can all agree that it's impossible for WOTC to design an objectively perfect game. Does that then imply that they shouldn't bother designing the best game they possibly can? Clearly not.Personally, I expect to see "DCs" for commonly attempted tasks. So a shoddy door might be an automatic success with Str 10, while a solid oak door is only automatic with Str 16 (or whatever). If they give us an assortment of good guidelines, we can have the best of both worlds. DMs have a bit of guidance when setting "DCs", which offers a reasonable basis of expectations regardless of whose table you sit at. Simultaneously, because they can't possibly cover every scenario, DMs will still be able to exercise their own discretion in determining those "DCs" (such as for a solid oak door of shoddy design).</blockquote>