Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lizard" data-source="post: 4673516" data-attributes="member: 1054">Yeah, it might be a good subject for a Dragon article or even some errata. Because, frankly, as I read the DMG, I got the impression that if the PCs encountered a wall at 3rd level and the same wall at 15th level, the climb DC should be increased. (The famous &quot;chart on page 42&quot; seems to feed into this, with the same maneuver doing more damage the higher levels the PC are -- I guess when an epic PC slides down a bannister to kick a monster in the teeth, he slides REALLY fast!)This really is not as clear as it could be in the text. As written, it seems that you should interpret it as &quot;If the PCs are level X, the DCs are Y&quot;, rather than &quot;A DC of Y is a challenge for a level X party&quot;. Some parts of the PHB and DMG seem to use &quot;objective&quot; DCs (i.e, this kind of door is DC 10, this kind is DC 20) while others use &quot;subjective&quot; DCs (&quot;This is a Hard DC for the party&quot;). Skill challenges, in particular, seem infinitely scalable -- the exact same challenge can work for a 1st level party or a 30th level one. Whether this is a bug or a feature depends on design goals and context: For example, should a group of Epic level PCs REALLY have a hard time persuading a petty duke to do their bidding? By the same token, should 1st level PCs be able to bargain with an Efreet prince? Use of skill challenges for wilderness survival, etc, has the same issues -- does Aragorn have as much trouble scavenging for food in the Shire as he does in the depths of Mordor?I get what the DMG is trying to do -- to say, &quot;At party level X, here are how tough the challenges should be&quot; -- but it comes across as very Morrowindish, where the same dungeon that held level 1 monsters when you were level 1 holds level 10 monster if you're level 10. (And, my gawd, was THAT a turnoff when I realized it. Killed the whole game for me. Really.)To a certain extent, &quot;auto scaling&quot; has always been a part of D&amp;D and any other &quot;zero to hero&quot; style game. If you're 15th level, you rarely, if ever, run into first level monsters -- or 25th level monsters. This is explained in all kinds of ways, from &quot;Yes, you've met a lot of orcs on your journey. You killed them in seconds and got no XP&quot; to &quot;You have left behind the old lands and entered the deeper dungeons&quot; and everything else. There's always been a background assumption that you'll encounter &quot;level appropriate&quot; challenges whether in terms of monsters, skills, or whatever. Older editions of D&amp;D have devoted more space to helping DMs justify these things, whether it's &quot;monsters by dungeon level&quot; in 1e, or extensive details of just how tough a door is based on what it's made of in 3e. 4e just eliminates the middleman and says &quot;If your party is 10th level, the DCs should be between X and Y&quot;, and leaves it mostly up to the DM to figure out why that is and convey it to the players. Experienced DMs will have no trouble saying, &quot;Not only is this lock exceptionally well made, it seems to be slightly enchanted -- your lockpicks bend and twist as you struggle to work them&quot;. Less experienced DMs might not be conditioned to convey this kind of information, or, even worse, not to include &quot;too high&quot; DCs to let the PCs know when they've wandered off track. (&quot;You want to pick the lock on the high wizard's tower? Uh, well, you're first level, so I guess that's DC 12&quot;.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lizard, post: 4673516, member: 1054"] Yeah, it might be a good subject for a Dragon article or even some errata. Because, frankly, as I read the DMG, I got the impression that if the PCs encountered a wall at 3rd level and the same wall at 15th level, the climb DC should be increased. (The famous "chart on page 42" seems to feed into this, with the same maneuver doing more damage the higher levels the PC are -- I guess when an epic PC slides down a bannister to kick a monster in the teeth, he slides REALLY fast!) This really is not as clear as it could be in the text. As written, it seems that you should interpret it as "If the PCs are level X, the DCs are Y", rather than "A DC of Y is a challenge for a level X party". Some parts of the PHB and DMG seem to use "objective" DCs (i.e, this kind of door is DC 10, this kind is DC 20) while others use "subjective" DCs ("This is a Hard DC for the party"). Skill challenges, in particular, seem infinitely scalable -- the exact same challenge can work for a 1st level party or a 30th level one. Whether this is a bug or a feature depends on design goals and context: For example, should a group of Epic level PCs REALLY have a hard time persuading a petty duke to do their bidding? By the same token, should 1st level PCs be able to bargain with an Efreet prince? Use of skill challenges for wilderness survival, etc, has the same issues -- does Aragorn have as much trouble scavenging for food in the Shire as he does in the depths of Mordor? I get what the DMG is trying to do -- to say, "At party level X, here are how tough the challenges should be" -- but it comes across as very Morrowindish, where the same dungeon that held level 1 monsters when you were level 1 holds level 10 monster if you're level 10. (And, my gawd, was THAT a turnoff when I realized it. Killed the whole game for me. Really.) To a certain extent, "auto scaling" has always been a part of D&D and any other "zero to hero" style game. If you're 15th level, you rarely, if ever, run into first level monsters -- or 25th level monsters. This is explained in all kinds of ways, from "Yes, you've met a lot of orcs on your journey. You killed them in seconds and got no XP" to "You have left behind the old lands and entered the deeper dungeons" and everything else. There's always been a background assumption that you'll encounter "level appropriate" challenges whether in terms of monsters, skills, or whatever. Older editions of D&D have devoted more space to helping DMs justify these things, whether it's "monsters by dungeon level" in 1e, or extensive details of just how tough a door is based on what it's made of in 3e. 4e just eliminates the middleman and says "If your party is 10th level, the DCs should be between X and Y", and leaves it mostly up to the DM to figure out why that is and convey it to the players. Experienced DMs will have no trouble saying, "Not only is this lock exceptionally well made, it seems to be slightly enchanted -- your lockpicks bend and twist as you struggle to work them". Less experienced DMs might not be conditioned to convey this kind of information, or, even worse, not to include "too high" DCs to let the PCs know when they've wandered off track. ("You want to pick the lock on the high wizard's tower? Uh, well, you're first level, so I guess that's DC 12".) [/QUOTE]

Verification