Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9202178" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Right, so if a PC wants to burst the rope binding their arms, while surrounded by orcs, and having only a few seconds, is that a DC 17 or not? If a PC wants to burst the rope binding their arms while in a jail cell, having an hour, is that a DC 17 or not? DM decides, so which scenario is the baseline that the DM is supposed to use? I mean, looking at the rules of rope... both are DC 17, There is nothing in the rules to determine I should change the DC based on either scenario.Please explain to me how the odds for success on DC 15 with a 1d20+0 are altered by only asking for it once per session instead of three times? I'm not familiar with this type of math where the number of unrelated checks changes the math of the check.But wait, aren't all characters supposed to have their chance to shine? How does that happen if two people have the same skill, but one of them is far superior at it? Wouldn't that mean you've devoted a highly significant resource (proficiency) in a check that you will always be second class in? And, if there are limited skills that are useful, wouldn't you end up with everyone taking the same skills, and then making the situation worse? Because they are worse than another player at their best skills, and then they have practically no chance with their non-proficient skills. Where exactly is the player supposed to shine in those instances? When do their skill proficiencies matter?I'm glad for your players. Most people aren't excited about failing and facing consequences because they just happened to have a low number in a score. Which, I know you won't believe, because you believe the majority always agrees with you, but it is true. Most people don't like failing.</blockquote>

Verification