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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is Expertise too good?
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="77IM" data-source="post: 7372582" data-attributes="member: 12377"><p>Expertise. Many people seem to like it because it allows automatic success. Yet the rule itself doesn't mention automatic success or state it as the purpose of the rule; it's just a natural consequence of how the math works out, as early as mid-levels.</p><p></p><p></p><p>No, lots of things are automatic, if the answer is obvious to me.</p><p></p><p>Also, lots of things are opposed rolls versus NPCs, with advantage/disadvantage on either side for circumstances.</p><p></p><p>I often use NPC stats to generate a DC. For example, Deception against someone is often against their passive Wisdom (Insight), with advantage/disadvantage for circumstances of the lie. Sometimes I'll bump the DC up or down 5 for advantage/disadvantage on the NPC's passive. I find a framework like this is much easier for me to use in setting a DC than just pulling something out of my butt. If I do just pull a DC out of my butt, it's usually 10 or 15, sometimes 20 for a thing where I feel like the PC should probably fail.</p><p></p><p></p><p>No, but I think for a check to be interesting, both options need to be on the table. Otherwise we should skip the check part.</p><p></p><p>Combine this with my previous answer: if something is automatic, <em>I</em> want to decide that, and the players usually go along. (Even if it's auto-fail, because I usually tell them beforehand. "You can ask the guard to step aside, but it won't work, because he'd be insane to do that.") If I start thinking about DCs, it's because the task isn't automatic, by definition.</p><p></p><p>So I don't like it when there's a modifier and a DC or opposed roll and then, because of Expertise, it becomes automatic after doing all that thought work -- <strong>it feels like Expertise is overriding DM authority.</strong></p><p></p><p>I love "bounded accuracy" as both a player and a DM because it means that when there is a check, everybody has at least a small chance of success and at least a small chance of failure.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Most of the times players ask to do stuff and if I don't have an obvious answer I ask them to make a check.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Here's another perspective, relating to the "DM authority" bit. I often view RPG play as a negotiation between the players and the DM. If the player says "I want to distract the chimera with a bit of food and then sneak past him!" it is almost always the case that the player WANTS to succeed, that is, they think they should succeed, or at least have a chance. Who am I to deny them that? I want to be a "Yes, but..." DM. So, I let the dice decide. I go to the dice when the players and DM don't agree that one outcome or the other "should" happen. The players get to influence the outcome in how they build their PCs, and by taking actions well-suited to their builds, and by spending Inspiration. I get to influence the outcome by picking the DC and advantage/disadvantage. Expertise makes my part of this process much harder because I can no longer set the DC without inadvertently allowing for auto-success or worse, auto-failure. In general I think the "auto" outcomes should arise naturally out of conversations with my players, or from discrete spell and ability affects that explicitly specify it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="77IM, post: 7372582, member: 12377"] Expertise. Many people seem to like it because it allows automatic success. Yet the rule itself doesn't mention automatic success or state it as the purpose of the rule; it's just a natural consequence of how the math works out, as early as mid-levels. No, lots of things are automatic, if the answer is obvious to me. Also, lots of things are opposed rolls versus NPCs, with advantage/disadvantage on either side for circumstances. I often use NPC stats to generate a DC. For example, Deception against someone is often against their passive Wisdom (Insight), with advantage/disadvantage for circumstances of the lie. Sometimes I'll bump the DC up or down 5 for advantage/disadvantage on the NPC's passive. I find a framework like this is much easier for me to use in setting a DC than just pulling something out of my butt. If I do just pull a DC out of my butt, it's usually 10 or 15, sometimes 20 for a thing where I feel like the PC should probably fail. No, but I think for a check to be interesting, both options need to be on the table. Otherwise we should skip the check part. Combine this with my previous answer: if something is automatic, [I]I[/I] want to decide that, and the players usually go along. (Even if it's auto-fail, because I usually tell them beforehand. "You can ask the guard to step aside, but it won't work, because he'd be insane to do that.") If I start thinking about DCs, it's because the task isn't automatic, by definition. So I don't like it when there's a modifier and a DC or opposed roll and then, because of Expertise, it becomes automatic after doing all that thought work -- [B]it feels like Expertise is overriding DM authority.[/B] I love "bounded accuracy" as both a player and a DM because it means that when there is a check, everybody has at least a small chance of success and at least a small chance of failure. I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Most of the times players ask to do stuff and if I don't have an obvious answer I ask them to make a check. Here's another perspective, relating to the "DM authority" bit. I often view RPG play as a negotiation between the players and the DM. If the player says "I want to distract the chimera with a bit of food and then sneak past him!" it is almost always the case that the player WANTS to succeed, that is, they think they should succeed, or at least have a chance. Who am I to deny them that? I want to be a "Yes, but..." DM. So, I let the dice decide. I go to the dice when the players and DM don't agree that one outcome or the other "should" happen. The players get to influence the outcome in how they build their PCs, and by taking actions well-suited to their builds, and by spending Inspiration. I get to influence the outcome by picking the DC and advantage/disadvantage. Expertise makes my part of this process much harder because I can no longer set the DC without inadvertently allowing for auto-success or worse, auto-failure. In general I think the "auto" outcomes should arise naturally out of conversations with my players, or from discrete spell and ability affects that explicitly specify it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is Expertise too good?
Top