Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9538425" data-attributes="member: 6790260">My own experience, and the agreement of others who have seen the same pattern, and the advice I have encountered across the web, and the adventures I've read.Maybe I and the several people I've spoken to who agreed about this have all had a weird and biased sample. But it's what I've seen, over and over and over again. I've had exactly two 5e DMs that didn't do this, and the first was technically a D&D Next DM, giving the playtest rules a shot.If you want to quibble that anecdotes aren't data, fine. Whatever. We can only argue based on our experience. My experience is that the skill system in 5e sucks in large part because people use it in a really really sucky way that strongly resembles how skills were used in 3e or--more likely--PF1e. Because I strongly suspect that that's exactly what happened here. People who knew 3e very well defected to Pathfinder, and thus continued doing things exactly as they had, until 5e came along. They then switched back and ran it exactly as they had run 3e because the two systems are, in most ways, extremely similar if not damn-near identical. Skills are one of the few places where they differ....but I have not seen a shred of evidence that the culture-of-play for 5e is different from the 3e one when it comes to skills.The fact that BG3 actually threw genuinely reasonable skill DCs at the player almost flabbergasted me. The vast majority of checks you make in the first area, the coast where you crashed? They're 10 or less. Some are as low as 5. Only one 5e DM I've ever had has done that--namely, Hussar.</blockquote>

Verification