Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8367282" data-attributes="member: 16814">You've just described what I meant, though.&nbsp; That the fiction follows the DC, the DC doesn't follow the fiction.I'm not sure I agree with your last example.&nbsp; If, in 4e, you climb a wall and the DC is X, and then later, you climb the exact same wall in exactly the same way, but the DC is now Y, I think there would be issues.&nbsp; Unless your assumption is that climbing any way with piton is DC 15?&nbsp; In which case, no, I don't agree with this at all.&nbsp; The fictional positioning for different walls will be different, so the DC will alter to reflect that.&nbsp; The only way I could see a player being upset at a different DC would be if it was the same wall and nothing else was different as well.&nbsp; But, even gaining a few levels can impact that in 5e, as the GM may feel that this challenge has moved down in tier, or that prior experience with it lends itself to making it easier.I feel that we do not disagree in the broad scope, but that our examples are raising conflict due to assumptions about 5e play that don't align with my understanding of it.&nbsp; Your larger points are good, though.&nbsp; I still dislike the terminology you've selected, because I'm not being objective when setting DCs for 5e -- it's entirely my interpretation of things.&nbsp; The same situation can get different DCs from different 5e GMs.&nbsp; I don't really see that as objective, so I dislike the term.&nbsp; It's grounded in the fiction, though, in that whatever heuristic a 5e GM is using should treat similar situations similarly, but this doesn't mean there's an objective tie, just consistency.&nbsp; Your approach to 4e eschews this consistency outside the level/difficulty bands (it's consistent within them) so I definitely see a difference.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8367282, member: 16814"] You've just described what I meant, though. That the fiction follows the DC, the DC doesn't follow the fiction. I'm not sure I agree with your last example. If, in 4e, you climb a wall and the DC is X, and then later, you climb the exact same wall in exactly the same way, but the DC is now Y, I think there would be issues. Unless your assumption is that climbing any way with piton is DC 15? In which case, no, I don't agree with this at all. The fictional positioning for different walls will be different, so the DC will alter to reflect that. The only way I could see a player being upset at a different DC would be if it was the same wall and nothing else was different as well. But, even gaining a few levels can impact that in 5e, as the GM may feel that this challenge has moved down in tier, or that prior experience with it lends itself to making it easier. I feel that we do not disagree in the broad scope, but that our examples are raising conflict due to assumptions about 5e play that don't align with my understanding of it. Your larger points are good, though. I still dislike the terminology you've selected, because I'm not being objective when setting DCs for 5e -- it's entirely my interpretation of things. The same situation can get different DCs from different 5e GMs. I don't really see that as objective, so I dislike the term. It's grounded in the fiction, though, in that whatever heuristic a 5e GM is using should treat similar situations similarly, but this doesn't mean there's an objective tie, just consistency. Your approach to 4e eschews this consistency outside the level/difficulty bands (it's consistent within them) so I definitely see a difference. [/QUOTE]

Verification