Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6279090" data-attributes="member: 1465">That's how I feel too... and the reason why I am not completely sure bounded accuracy (or d20) works well with skills.Something similar could be said about combat, however it's not quite the same.Someone can say that at 1st levels the PCs are fighting one ogre and at 15th they are fighting one huge dragon. And bounded accuracy helps keeping ogres relevant even at 15th levels, although you might need a fairly large band of them and not just one, to challenge the party.But bounded accuracy is all about the bonus spread to d20 rolls, and in a combat that ogre or dragon is going to take many such rolls before defeating it (usually a few round, in each of which many PC takes one or more attacks), while skills are often a yes/no single roll. Furthermore, IMHO having a monsters that cannot (yet) be hit does not carry the same feeling as a challenge that cannot (yet) be won, such as a cliff that cannot (yet) be climbed, a raging river that cannot (yet) be crossed, or a lock that cannot (yet) be picked. Perhaps it's just because most players assume that when they meet a monster they have to fight it, or at best the only other option is usually to run away, while failed or unwinnable challenges normally only prompt the PCs to make a new plan. There is no problem in saying "there's no chance you can climb this castle's walls at this level" because climbing the castles walls was never necessarily the only possible plan. It feels a bit different instead to say "there's no chance you can hit this monster" (I am not saying this should never happen, I am just highlighting the difference in feel). Incidentally this is probably the reason why automatic hits have been in the game for ages for attack rolls, but never for skills!</blockquote>

Verification