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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Barastrondo" data-source="post: 5502168" data-attributes="member: 3820">Oh, I know what it's meant to be at present. I simply disagree with the decision, particularly in conjunction with presenting things like skill challenges which have, say, two or three "medium" difficulty chances at success and two to four "hard" difficulty chances at success. A player group who doesn't find Skill Focus or skill-boosting items interesting enough to be a priority has two or three choices at decent odds for success, rather than the four to seven they'd have if the DCs simply accounted for a good stat + skill training. So the skill challenge is more repetitive unless someone says "Hey, 13+ is good enough odds for me!"And if you're not trained in any of the three medium-difficulty skills, and you haven't sunk resources into any of the skills you're trained at, you have no real incentive to roll dice in that skill challenge at all. You're potentially obliged to take part, but more likely to contribute a failure than anything. That's not a lot of fun for a player. Of course, that's an even different tangent, as it gets into how to design skill challenges so that everyone around the table is interested and just how to implement difficulties in an enticing fashion. Yeah, that's a fine way of dealing with things. Mostly my point is that there are groups out there who have no players who do what's "intended" of them: at best you may see someone train in the skills they're good at racially, but they're still as likely to make a goliath bard as a half-elf bard because they think the former idea is more interesting. High numbers are seen as desirable enough, but not sexy in the way that other tricks are sexy. The DMG2 DC chart works great for groups like this; the Essentials chart less so. There's less reason to keep up with the Joneses (the Joneses being people who like things like Skill Focus) if there aren't really any Joneses at the table.</blockquote>

Verification