D&D (2024) Influence Action

[EzekielRaiden]

I really don’t understand why this is any better to you than simply dm decides the dc. It seems like it’s going to boil down to precisely that.

Not at all. Because when the rules start and stop at "DM says," there are no mechanics. There are no tools. There is NOTHING to interact with, except cajoling the DM into doing whatever it is you want them to do--and failing probably about as often as you succeed (unless you "learn to play the DM" which is something I strongly dislike, it's manipulative.)

And if this is all you’ve been wanting to see any time you’ve talked about the skill and DC ‘issue’ then I think there’s been alot of miscommunication for a long time.

You seem to be misunderstanding what I've asked for here.

A DM exercising discernment and human reasoning is the absolute, bare-miniumum, basic floor for something. It is not, by itself, adequate. But "DM says" is exactly that--no more and no less. That is why I have a problem with it. There is no game. There is no engagement. There is no cleverly leveraging tools to achieve an end. There is, only and exclusively, badgering the DM to give you what you want, and being disappointed some significant portion of the time.

But, again, the community cannot accept that when you stop hiding

I disagree, and I don't think it's productive for us to discuss it any further. I consider your position cynical in the extreme; you consider mine idealistic to the point of ridiculous. I'm really not sure it is possible for us to discuss matters meaningfully if your starting position is, "It is not and will never be possible for D&D players to like a system that actually has mechanics for non-combat challenges." That, to me, is quite clearly an extreme position; "it is possible, but it may be difficult or require significant effort, so we should consider what our options are" is, if not an outright moderate position, at least significantly more moderate than "it is not and never will be possible."

 

[MichaelSomething]

Because literally over a year of searching for a game resulted in absolutely, positively nothing. No games. Period. Despite scouring four different forums, multiple VTTs, Discord, Reddit, the works. Zero games.

It feels a lot more productive to make noise about something that is unlikely but not impossible to change than to keep beating my head against a wall of absolute, total silence.


Not from my perspective. There are plenty of acceptable targets, and 4e is one of them. Pick a part; I'm sure you'll find people to this day spouting outrightly false things about it. Or forgetting it ever existed. Both happen quite a bit.

Am I chopped liver over here??? (May edit later to add context link when not on phone)

 

[Stoutstien]

I personally think that static DCs are 10X lazier than giving the GM a odds table and asking them to adjudicate actions but if you are going to use one don't set it so anyone without serious investment in that particular type of check never have a chance even with advantage.

 

[AnotherGuy]

You want a book that has 600 pages in it and subsystems that are fun but niche. I respect it but this kind of naive idealism needs to be balanced with realistic game design. Not every system will be as heavy as combat, because it would slow down the game and essentially feel as if several different games are taking place across one campaign. Thats valid, but not the design goals of 5e.

I don't think after 50 years it is too much of an ask that they develop the other 2 pillars beyond the basic skill check.

 

[AnotherGuy]

We have six step DC chart, what the rules should do is to advice on how to set proper DC, not to just give up.

What's important here is that 5e24 DMs should be told not to throw away their old 3.x & Pathfinder books where skill DCs were analysed, so that they can refer back to them.

We (the player base) want a nuanced customised rules light game with and without alignment, skills checks and skill challenges, with loose and structured social pillar mechanics that support low and high magic worlds for characters of all levels with real world and fantasy physics...etc what is so hard about that.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Am I chopped liver over here??? (May edit later to add context link when not on phone)

Not at all! Your game came after that year of effort.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I disagree, and I don't think it's productive for us to discuss it any further. I consider your position cynical in the extreme; you consider mine idealistic to the point of ridiculous. I'm really not sure it is possible for us to discuss matters meaningfully if your starting position is, "It is not and will never be possible for D&D players to like a system that actually has mechanics for non-combat challenges." That, to me, is quite clearly an extreme position; "it is possible, but it may be difficult or require significant effort, so we should consider what our options are" is, if not an outright moderate position, at least significantly more moderate than "it is not and never will be possible."

I do not think you are idealistic to the point of ridiculousness. I also do not think it is not and never will be possible for DnD players to like a system that has mechanics for non-combat challenges.

I think it is currently unreasonable to demand something like that, when even a basic system of "start at DC 15" is being torn apart for being too restrictive on DM freedom while simultaneously being torn apart for being not nearly robust enough to give it any mechanical weight. Especially since you keep taking a vague yet harsh tone with everyone, even while some of us were not even clear what you wanted.

And I think you are also aware that, even though what you want is skill challenges, saying "I want skill challenges" isn't going to get positive results from this community on EnWorld. Even though, I would completely agree with you that skill challenges, especially for social situations, make for a great framing device.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I think it is currently unreasonable to demand something like that, when even a basic system of "start at DC 15" is being torn apart for being too restrictive on DM freedom while simultaneously being torn apart for being not nearly robust enough to give it any mechanical weight. Especially since you keep taking a vague yet harsh tone with everyone, even while some of us were not even clear what you wanted.

I think it would be perfectly possible to have a system that both addressed that criticism and did at least somewhat what @EzekielRaiden wants.

Have actual bloody guidelines for determining the DC! Then it is not weirdly context independently fixed DC, nor it is just GM making something up. Sure, it would still rely on GM judgment, but as factors for deterring the DC would be know to players it would be something the players could make at least somewhat informed choices about.

2014 version actually has something like this in DMG, though it is a bit barebones. We'll see whether the new DMG has it too. Though I think it would be better that this stuff was in PHB, so that they players actually knew how the system works and could thus better engage with it.

 

[Shardstone]

Man we already know an easy DC is 10, a typical DC is 15, and a hard DC is 20. Imagine what that means for your social situation. This isn't rocket science.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Man we already know an easy DC is 10, a typical DC is 15, and a hard DC is 20. Imagine what that means for your social situation. This isn't rocket science.

Easy to whom? I think some benchmarks and guidelines would be helpful, espesially for new GMs.