Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
GMing and "Player Skill"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 9745874" data-attributes="member: 6779196"><p>This is a very real problem, and fixed DCs is one possible solution to it. Though, they do come with their own drawbacks - in defining the DC of an action, you necessarily limit the possibility space, as well as creating negative space. To unpack that a bit, the long lists of DCs in 3e discouraged a lot of 3e DMs from allowing actions that didn’t have DCs listed, very similarly to how the existence of attack powers in 4e discouraged a lot of 4e DMs from allowing players to improvise maneuvers in combat outside of their set Powers.</p><p></p><p>My preferred solution is to set DCs on a case by case basis, but <em>tell the player the DC</em> before making them commit to the action. So, if a player describes some sort of survival action, expecting it to be Easy or Medium based on their experience with action movies, but your military experience tells you would be Hard or Very Hard, telling the player “that will require a DC 20 Survival check” gives them the opportunity to say “oh, that’s harder than I expected. Can I try something else instead?” or to spend additional resources to shore up their chances (e.g. spending Heroic Inspiration, drinking a potion of Enhance Ability, etc.)</p><p></p><p>Some DMs are uncomfortable with that approach because a DC is highly specific metagame knowledge that, in their view, the character doesn’t have access to. In my view, the DC is an abstraction of the actual difficulty of the task, and telling it to the player (who needs to make the actual decision of what to do) helps close the information gap between them and the character (who needs to actually perform the task). The character doesn’t know the DC, because that’s not a thing in the fiction. But they do have experience in the world, and knowing the DC approximates, in an abstract way, the knowledge the character ought to have about the difficulty of the task in a world governed by the judgment of someone with your military experience.</p><p></p><p>For those who are still uncomfortable with the precision of the information a DC provides, potentially allowing the player to calculate their exact odds of success, I recommend telling them the difficulty in qualitative terms (Easy, Medium, Hard, Very Hard, etc.) and giving those categories ranges. So, for example, instead of Easy, Medium, and Hard always being 10, 15, and 20 respectively, Easy could cover a range from 8-12, Medium 13-17, and hard 18-22, etc. You could even introduce a small random element to setting the DC, for example making Easy 5+2d4, Medium 10+2d4, and Hard 15+2d4.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 9745874, member: 6779196"] This is a very real problem, and fixed DCs is one possible solution to it. Though, they do come with their own drawbacks - in defining the DC of an action, you necessarily limit the possibility space, as well as creating negative space. To unpack that a bit, the long lists of DCs in 3e discouraged a lot of 3e DMs from allowing actions that didn’t have DCs listed, very similarly to how the existence of attack powers in 4e discouraged a lot of 4e DMs from allowing players to improvise maneuvers in combat outside of their set Powers. My preferred solution is to set DCs on a case by case basis, but [I]tell the player the DC[/I] before making them commit to the action. So, if a player describes some sort of survival action, expecting it to be Easy or Medium based on their experience with action movies, but your military experience tells you would be Hard or Very Hard, telling the player “that will require a DC 20 Survival check” gives them the opportunity to say “oh, that’s harder than I expected. Can I try something else instead?” or to spend additional resources to shore up their chances (e.g. spending Heroic Inspiration, drinking a potion of Enhance Ability, etc.) Some DMs are uncomfortable with that approach because a DC is highly specific metagame knowledge that, in their view, the character doesn’t have access to. In my view, the DC is an abstraction of the actual difficulty of the task, and telling it to the player (who needs to make the actual decision of what to do) helps close the information gap between them and the character (who needs to actually perform the task). The character doesn’t know the DC, because that’s not a thing in the fiction. But they do have experience in the world, and knowing the DC approximates, in an abstract way, the knowledge the character ought to have about the difficulty of the task in a world governed by the judgment of someone with your military experience. For those who are still uncomfortable with the precision of the information a DC provides, potentially allowing the player to calculate their exact odds of success, I recommend telling them the difficulty in qualitative terms (Easy, Medium, Hard, Very Hard, etc.) and giving those categories ranges. So, for example, instead of Easy, Medium, and Hard always being 10, 15, and 20 respectively, Easy could cover a range from 8-12, Medium 13-17, and hard 18-22, etc. You could even introduce a small random element to setting the DC, for example making Easy 5+2d4, Medium 10+2d4, and Hard 15+2d4. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
GMing and "Player Skill"
Top