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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9197871" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Does your spouse do it as a hobby, or as a way to support your house and family? Do you believe that those different approaches would lead to different results?And yet, the game states otherwise. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/7.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-2642.png" alt="🤷‍♂️" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" />DC 15, with Alchemist tools, to create a basic fire. So you successfully cooked food? Do you imagine if you failed to cook food, you would still have cooked food? Does that make sense? To me, if you fail at a task, you don't succeed at that task. Or that baseball is a bad example? Nah, it must be that I'm a two-faced liar who knows he is wrong and that you are right.Not a weird example. The point. I was told that the character with a 16/14/14/14/14/14 was broken. Mechanically. But if it can work just fine in a solo game.... how can it be broken? And as a person who has played solo games, I can tell you, having low scores is a death sentence for fun. Unless you have fun by losing all the time.Wouldn't being drunk be poisoned, so disadvantage? Nothing to do with the DC. Road conditions are bad? Disadvantage, nothing to do with the DC. Do PCs never make skill checks outside of combat? Bizarre, I thought exploration was a pillar of the game. Driven the vehicle before? In the context of DnD it doesn't matter. Even in the context of driving, driving a new car doesn't affect your likelihood of not crashing that much. Now, again, the stated DC was "a sharp right turn". Maybe it was at a higher speed. Enough to feel the pull of the car. Do you still expect 70% of the people who make that turn to crash? The rate of car accidents is around 0.3%, how does a 70% failure rate make sense?I'm against rolling too. But I don't think the standard array is very great either. It's decent, but it inevitably ends up with multiple PCs unwilling or dreading rolling when it matters, because mathematically, having between a +1 and a -1 is a death knell for accomplishing anything other than the most basic of tasks. And the standard array gives you FOUR stats in that range, out of SIX. But propose most players should have a +2 in multiple abilities? And you are an extremist.Why would they have to take the higher scores into account? The Standard array allows you to start with two +3's. Does no one roll their highest score with skill proficiency in your games? If they do, then you are already taking into account ranges of +5 to +10 on skill checks over all levels of play. Why would you need to adjust anything for people with +2's?</blockquote>

Verification