Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is expertise badly designed?
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="Esker" data-source="post: 7894430" data-attributes="member: 6966824"><p>I think it was a really useful contribution in that it highlighted the aspects of the luck mechanic that actually matter: that is to say, the probabilities of success. The normalish curve you get by plotting probabilities of each individual roll doesn't really tell you much in itself, since you're never aiming for an exact roll, just to exceed a threshold. </p><p></p><p>And I thought it was helpful to note that you can't just switch to 3d6 and leave your DCs alone, because you're completely changing what DC 15 means, for example. It's like going from the U.S. to Australia and getting $15. You can have $15 in either place, but the number 15 only means something in a particular context.</p><p></p><p>For example, if we want to define a "fairly difficult" task for an average PC without training (figure a +1 ability mod as average) as something for which they have about a one in three chance (35%) of doing successfully, then when using 1d20 rolls, that makes the DC 15. If we want to define a 1/3 success task for the same character in a 3d6 system, then we need to set the DC around 13.</p><p></p><p>And then we can ask "what do we think being trained should do on a task that an untrained person can do with 35% success?" and ask the same question for other levels of difficulty, and for being an expert vs being trained.</p><p></p><p>The answer that RAW gives to all of those questions is, "it should increase the chance of success about 10%, increasing to 15%, then 20%, and eventually up to 30%". And this answer is the same regardless of the starting difficulty, obviously with the caveat that the chances can't go below 0 or above 100%.</p><p></p><p>The answer that you are implicitly giving if you switch to a 3d6 resolution mechanic and don't adjust bonuses or DCs is that the average untrained PC should succeed 1/3 as often at so-called "moderately difficult" tasks, and fail 1/3 as often on their "fairly easy" (DC 8 with a +1) counterparts, that on "fairly difficult" tasks, proficiency should raise your success rate by about 21% initially, and eventually about 67%, whereas expertise should initially further raise it an additional 25%, and eventually an additional 58%. On the other hand, for "fairly easy" tasks, proficiency should initially raise your success rate about 12%, and allow you to auto-succeed by level 17, whereas expertise should allow you to auto-succeed from level 1.</p><p></p><p>I think there are some nice aspects to that, but it's useful to realize that it's not <em>all</em> that different from making the proficiency bonus start at +4 and scale to +12 and adjusting everything else accordingly (most of the differences amount to less than a +/-1 on a d20 in either direction depending on the DC and starting bonus).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Esker, post: 7894430, member: 6966824"] I think it was a really useful contribution in that it highlighted the aspects of the luck mechanic that actually matter: that is to say, the probabilities of success. The normalish curve you get by plotting probabilities of each individual roll doesn't really tell you much in itself, since you're never aiming for an exact roll, just to exceed a threshold. And I thought it was helpful to note that you can't just switch to 3d6 and leave your DCs alone, because you're completely changing what DC 15 means, for example. It's like going from the U.S. to Australia and getting $15. You can have $15 in either place, but the number 15 only means something in a particular context. For example, if we want to define a "fairly difficult" task for an average PC without training (figure a +1 ability mod as average) as something for which they have about a one in three chance (35%) of doing successfully, then when using 1d20 rolls, that makes the DC 15. If we want to define a 1/3 success task for the same character in a 3d6 system, then we need to set the DC around 13. And then we can ask "what do we think being trained should do on a task that an untrained person can do with 35% success?" and ask the same question for other levels of difficulty, and for being an expert vs being trained. The answer that RAW gives to all of those questions is, "it should increase the chance of success about 10%, increasing to 15%, then 20%, and eventually up to 30%". And this answer is the same regardless of the starting difficulty, obviously with the caveat that the chances can't go below 0 or above 100%. The answer that you are implicitly giving if you switch to a 3d6 resolution mechanic and don't adjust bonuses or DCs is that the average untrained PC should succeed 1/3 as often at so-called "moderately difficult" tasks, and fail 1/3 as often on their "fairly easy" (DC 8 with a +1) counterparts, that on "fairly difficult" tasks, proficiency should raise your success rate by about 21% initially, and eventually about 67%, whereas expertise should initially further raise it an additional 25%, and eventually an additional 58%. On the other hand, for "fairly easy" tasks, proficiency should initially raise your success rate about 12%, and allow you to auto-succeed by level 17, whereas expertise should allow you to auto-succeed from level 1. I think there are some nice aspects to that, but it's useful to realize that it's not [I]all[/I] that different from making the proficiency bonus start at +4 and scale to +12 and adjusting everything else accordingly (most of the differences amount to less than a +/-1 on a d20 in either direction depending on the DC and starting bonus). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is expertise badly designed?
Top