Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Darrin Drader" data-source="post: 4531494" data-attributes="member: 7394">Ability checks aren't DM fiat; at least not in most cases, and not any more than the skill system is. Take for example needing to balance on a lot suspended by chains, over lava and you must get to the other side to achieve the ultimate goal. Now, any smart PC is going to rig up a rope system to keep the sudden death scenario from occurring, but aside from that, how do you achieve the outcome?3.5 - Make a balance check with the DC set to the width of the log and then modified by a number the DM assigns.1st &amp; 2nd edition - Make a Dex check. Try to roll under your Dex. The DM may assign a modifier that makes the check easier or harder.In both cases, the DM (or just as often as not, the adventure designer) is the final arbiter of how difficult something will be. In both cases, there is a solid mechanic upon which to allow a character to attempt an action. The only real difference is that one system acknowleges that a character might be more accomplished in specilized sorts of activities than the other, which prefers a more broad interpretation. It's usually fairly easy to determine which ability score to use, so it isn't as though there is no basis upon which to decide what sort of check to make.3.5 - Skill check vs. DC.1st and 2nd edition - Ability check against ability score.Another point to consider is that it's actually much less time consuming to reference an ability score when deciding how to adjudicate a non-combat action than it is to find the appropriate skill, then reference the rules for that specific skill to set the suggested DC, and then modify it based on specific conditions. The first is more intuitive while the second is more precise, but in my experience, both lead to similar results most of the time.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Darrin Drader, post: 4531494, member: 7394"] Ability checks aren't DM fiat; at least not in most cases, and not any more than the skill system is. Take for example needing to balance on a lot suspended by chains, over lava and you must get to the other side to achieve the ultimate goal. Now, any smart PC is going to rig up a rope system to keep the sudden death scenario from occurring, but aside from that, how do you achieve the outcome? 3.5 - Make a balance check with the DC set to the width of the log and then modified by a number the DM assigns. 1st & 2nd edition - Make a Dex check. Try to roll under your Dex. The DM may assign a modifier that makes the check easier or harder. In both cases, the DM (or just as often as not, the adventure designer) is the final arbiter of how difficult something will be. In both cases, there is a solid mechanic upon which to allow a character to attempt an action. The only real difference is that one system acknowleges that a character might be more accomplished in specilized sorts of activities than the other, which prefers a more broad interpretation. It's usually fairly easy to determine which ability score to use, so it isn't as though there is no basis upon which to decide what sort of check to make. 3.5 - Skill check vs. DC. 1st and 2nd edition - Ability check against ability score. Another point to consider is that it's actually much less time consuming to reference an ability score when deciding how to adjudicate a non-combat action than it is to find the appropriate skill, then reference the rules for that specific skill to set the suggested DC, and then modify it based on specific conditions. The first is more intuitive while the second is more precise, but in my experience, both lead to similar results most of the time. [/QUOTE]

Verification