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
how to run long distance travelling without it sucking
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="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6524965" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>This dovetails rather nicely with my posts on the other thread about objective vs subjective DCs. I haven't done an extensive analysis to establish a baseline competency across a spectrum of builds across levels. However, my guess is that if you were going to establish a subjective DC framework for 5e (roughly representing 4e, 13th Age, and DW), I'd probably go something like this:</p><p></p><p>[TABLE="width: 500"] [TR] [TD]Level/Difficulty[/TD] [TD]Easy[/TD] [TD]Medium[/TD] [TD]Hard[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]1-4[/TD] [TD]8[/TD] [TD]12[/TD] [TD]16[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]5-12[/TD] [TD]9[/TD] [TD]13[/TD] [TD]18[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]13-20[/TD] [TD]10[/TD] [TD]15[/TD] [TD]20[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] </p><p>I rather like the paradigm of:</p><p></p><p>Trained/Prof + PAS (primary ability score) = ~ auto-success on E, ~ 80 % success on M, ~ 60 % success on H</p><p></p><p>UT/N-prof + SAS (secondary) or T/P + TAS = ~ auto-success on E, ~ 45 % success on M, ~ 25 % success on H</p><p></p><p>That would aid in the Group Check math problem you're referring to, especially if you allow secondary members accept an auto-failure on their effort to use the Help action.</p><p></p><p>[HR][/HR]</p><p>As a quick aside, when I was running one-offs for the playtest packets and for the evening one-off that I ran (which basically mocked the prior session of a current game with a different system), I ran the unified conflict resolution system I devised for 13th Age (and used the 1-4 numbers above as subjective DCs). Its pretty simple and handles dramatic momentum rather well. It was used for a travel scenario like the player in the lead post is looking for. It was akin to a Deuce game in Tennis:</p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Campaign Win</strong> < <em>Disadvantage </em>< <strong>Square One </strong>> <em>Advantage </em>> <strong>Campaign Loss</strong></p><p></p><p>It works to keep the situation in the most dramatic areas (cusp of victory, edge of defeat) with the most interesting outcomes for as long as possible until the conflict is cemented either way. 5e's disad/ad mechanic works well to support that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6524965, member: 6696971"] This dovetails rather nicely with my posts on the other thread about objective vs subjective DCs. I haven't done an extensive analysis to establish a baseline competency across a spectrum of builds across levels. However, my guess is that if you were going to establish a subjective DC framework for 5e (roughly representing 4e, 13th Age, and DW), I'd probably go something like this: [TABLE="width: 500"] [TR] [TD]Level/Difficulty[/TD] [TD]Easy[/TD] [TD]Medium[/TD] [TD]Hard[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]1-4[/TD] [TD]8[/TD] [TD]12[/TD] [TD]16[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]5-12[/TD] [TD]9[/TD] [TD]13[/TD] [TD]18[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]13-20[/TD] [TD]10[/TD] [TD]15[/TD] [TD]20[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] I rather like the paradigm of: Trained/Prof + PAS (primary ability score) = ~ auto-success on E, ~ 80 % success on M, ~ 60 % success on H UT/N-prof + SAS (secondary) or T/P + TAS = ~ auto-success on E, ~ 45 % success on M, ~ 25 % success on H That would aid in the Group Check math problem you're referring to, especially if you allow secondary members accept an auto-failure on their effort to use the Help action. [HR][/HR] As a quick aside, when I was running one-offs for the playtest packets and for the evening one-off that I ran (which basically mocked the prior session of a current game with a different system), I ran the unified conflict resolution system I devised for 13th Age (and used the 1-4 numbers above as subjective DCs). Its pretty simple and handles dramatic momentum rather well. It was used for a travel scenario like the player in the lead post is looking for. It was akin to a Deuce game in Tennis: [B] Campaign Win[/B] < [I]Disadvantage [/I]< [B]Square One [/B]> [I]Advantage [/I]> [B]Campaign Loss[/B] It works to keep the situation in the most dramatic areas (cusp of victory, edge of defeat) with the most interesting outcomes for as long as possible until the conflict is cemented either way. 5e's disad/ad mechanic works well to support that. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
how to run long distance travelling without it sucking
Top
