D&D 5E Justin Alexander's review of Shattered Obelisk is pretty scathing

[Paul Farquhar]

hmmm... I sort of agree with you and sort of don't.

On one hand, you're right that "do we go left, right, or down that creepy stair?" is often a mostly random choice because the PCs have no idea what the consequence of the choice will be.

On the other hand, the order of the encounters can make a huge difference, because one of these encounters could be a potential ally with useful information or other type of help, another might contain a treasure that will be very useful in the dungeon etc. The "order of events" matters a lot! (unless they are all samey fights, in which case it's bad dungeon design).

On the other, other hand, the PCs choice of what path to take may not be fully random. There may be clues (that creepy stair smells of goblins!) and the PCs may gather further information (divination spells, sending a familiar ahead...). Once again, if a dungeon has no clues, and no way for the PCs to obtain info... bad dungeon design.

I think my point is not that it doesn't matter at all, but that it usually lies a long way down the priority list.

 

[Retreater]

I have to acknowledge that I haven't enjoyed the majority of products I've purchased from WotC during the 5e era - adventures least of all. They don't inspire me and are hard for me to use. This can be from campaign adventures like Rime of the Frostmaiden (IMO, an unconnected and illogical mess) to campaign settings like Eberron (just a zoomed-out overview with little gameable content that I'm unsure to how to even begin to use or get the feeling of).
So if there's any future for me with D&D, I'll have to do it without WotC. I will have to unlearn the official rules and use products like Level Up and Flee Mortals and write my own adventures.
The stuff from WotC - as far as I've encountered - isn't worth the time it takes to bring it to my table.

 

[SteveC]

Do all tasks get harder in your campaigns as the PCs level up?

I would say in general that in every edition of D&D with DCs (so 3E and forward) the DC for checks increase in general as you level up. And this is the experience I've had with published adventures as well. Any checks that involve monsters or other character increase simply because higher level monsters have higher values for checks that involve them, so yes.

As a DM I'm aware of this fact, and when I'm running a game I try and take this into account by asking "am I just making this check more difficult artificially?" When I do that it makes actions trivially difficult for proficient characters (or those with expertise) so I have to take "challenge" into consideration either. Frankly, it makes adjudicating checks more complicated than I'd like.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I would say in general that in every edition of D&D with DCs (so 3E and forward) the DC for checks increase in general as you level up. And this is the experience I've had with published adventures as well. Any checks that involve monsters or other character increase simply because higher level monsters have higher values for checks that involve them, so yes.

As a DM I'm aware of this fact, and when I'm running a game I try and take this into account by asking "am I just making this check more difficult artificially?" When I do that it makes actions trivially difficult for proficient characters (or those with expertise) so I have to take "challenge" into consideration either. Frankly, it makes adjudicating checks more complicated than I'd like.

Mike Shea has a good piece on this.

I agree with his basic premise that DCs should just be set based on the situation and not based on the characters. In other words, while using Thieves' Tools to pick a locked door in Orcus's lair will have a higher DC than doing the same with a locked door at the local tavern, it's not because the characters are higher level.

How to Choose DCs for Your 5e Game

Here's a quick way to determine the difficulty class (DC) when characters attempt to accomplish a risky endeavor in your 5e RPG. Think about the situation in the game's world. Then ask yourself, on a ...

slyflourish.com

 

[Ancalagon]

I have to acknowledge that I haven't enjoyed the majority of products I've purchased from WotC during the 5e era - adventures least of all. They don't inspire me and are hard for me to use. This can be from campaign adventures like Rime of the Frostmaiden (IMO, an unconnected and illogical mess) to campaign settings like Eberron (just a zoomed-out overview with little gameable content that I'm unsure to how to even begin to use or get the feeling of).
So if there's any future for me with D&D, I'll have to do it without WotC. I will have to unlearn the official rules and use products like Level Up and Flee Mortals and write my own adventures.
The stuff from WotC - as far as I've encountered - isn't worth the time it takes to bring it to my table.

I do agree with you that a number of 5e products - especially some of the adventures - have been underwhelming. That being said - just because the adventures/settings aren't to your taste, doesn't mean the rules are the issue. You can use 3rd party products or make your own adventures with the 5e rules.

... unless you don't like them either, of course.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Not agreeing here. With 4e, the difference between someone with proficiency and someone without is 5 (plus whatever difference in stats, assuming the same level). With 5e, the difference between someone with proficiency and someone without (omitting roguish expertise) ranges from 2 to 6 (plus whatever difference in stats, assuming the same level). So for most of a PC's career, the difference between skilled and unskilled is less than in 4e, and it's only greater than for a handful of levels many campaigns never get to.
Moreover, since most monsters don't have a lot in the way of proficient skills, they aren't leaving most PC skill bonuses in the dust even if non-proficient. And this is true no matter what the level vs level comparison of the monsters

It ranges from 3 to 18, actually, depending on the details.

A Paladin in plate armor has little need for Dex, and several stats that need to be high (Str, Con, Cha, arguably Wis). Dex is a plausible dump stat. Same for a Str Fighter who wants to literally anything other than just fighting. A Barbarian has no need for Wis, etc. Hence, the floor is not +0, it is -1.

That -1 will get worse and worse relative to the creatures you oppose. People who are truly great at a stat will have Expertise and their main stat supporting it, which maxes out at 5+6×2= +17. Hence, the maximum gap is +18 (counting a dump stat's -1). Even for ordinary efforts, without Expertise, the gap is -12.

All characters in 4e get half level bonus and every stat increases by 2 (meaning, modifier +1) by the time you hit Epic. The natural gap (barring feats and the like) will essentially never be greater than 14 points, counting both stats and Training. Since folk make such a big deal of 5e being "4e math ÷ 2," that means the gap in 5e should never be greater than 7. Since this is demonstrably not true (and, in fact, the maximum gap is almost twice as big!), I stand by my statement.

In 5e, everyone slowly falls behind on anything they aren't investing in. Especially saving throws, a known weakness and common complaint from early 5e. In 4e, everyone does get better, even at things that aren't their focus. A 5e "clanker" Paladin will never be any better at sneaking past a level 1 goblin than they were at level 1 themselves, unless they waste valuable resources on doing that alone. A 4e "clanker" Paladin actually does learn some things about being sneaky, and can sneak past that level 1 guard much more easily (but, notably, not necessarily guaranteed; even going from a -1 to a +15 is unlikely to ensure victory in all cases!)

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I do agree with you that a number of 5e products - especially some of the adventures - have been underwhelming. That being said - just because the adventures/settings aren't to your taste, doesn't mean the rules are the issue. You can use 3rd party products or make your own adventures with the 5e rules.

... unless you don't like them either, of course.

Honestly, I feel that 5e's track record for Adventures has been pretty good. Sure, many of them have serious problems. But as someone who played (for example) ALL of 4e's adventures, where (in the end) I think the only good one was Gardmore Abbey. The rest ranged from Meh to terrible (like much worse than any 5e one). 4e fans - tell me if I'm forgetting any good ones!

3e, IIRC, had Forge of Fury, Red Hand of Doom, and Sunlit Citadel... and? The rest were pretty bad, BY WotC, at least! Paizo was just getting started becoming what they are today - and at the time made much better adventures than WotC did. (Again, let me know if I'm forgetting anything).

I didn't even run published adventures before that because I HATED them. I've grown fond of a few of the classics more recently, though.

5e ones are "okay" - I don't think we've hit the age of really good "official" adventures yet. Someday we will. I live in hope.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I would say in general that in every edition of D&D with DCs (so 3E and forward) the DC for checks increase in general as you level up. And this is the experience I've had with published adventures as well. Any checks that involve monsters or other character increase simply because higher level monsters have higher values for checks that involve them, so yes.

As a DM I'm aware of this fact, and when I'm running a game I try and take this into account by asking "am I just making this check more difficult artificially?" When I do that it makes actions trivially difficult for proficient characters (or those with expertise) so I have to take "challenge" into consideration either. Frankly, it makes adjudicating checks more complicated than I'd like.

Wouldn't it be nice if you had a one-stop shopping reference for that? A place where you could look, that laid out what were appropriate easy, standard, and hard skill DCs for any given character level? I feel like that would be an excellent resource to draw on. Sadly, such a thing is clearly impossible in D&D; we will never see its like.

(This is sarcasm. That was precisely the function of the DC tables on 4e's DMG page 42.)

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Honestly, I feel that 5e's track record for Adventures has been pretty good. Sure, many of them have serious problems. But as someone who played (for example) ALL of 4e's adventures, where (in the end) I think the only good one was Gardmore Abbey. The rest ranged from Meh to terrible (like much worse than any 5e one). 4e fans - tell me if I'm forgetting any good ones!

3e, IIRC, had Forge of Fury, Red Hand of Doom, and Sunlit Citadel... and? The rest were pretty bad, BY WotC, at least! Paizo was just getting started becoming what they are today - and at the time made much better adventures than WotC did. (Again, let me know if I'm forgetting anything).

I didn't even run published adventures before that because I HATED them. I've grown fond of a few of the classics more recently, though.

5e ones are "okay" - I don't think we've hit the age of really good "official" adventures yet. Someday we will. I live in hope.

As an ardent battlemind 4e defender... you'll never hear me say that 4e adventures were all stellar. And the first couple were outright awful, some of the worst ever written (and, as a vaguely relevant aside, Mike Mearls has his name on both of those...) I think you're massively under-selling what was on offer, though. Cairn of the Winter King, The Slaying Stone, Remains of the Empire, and other adventures were all quite good. I once compiled a list of highly praised 4e adventures, and there are at least 2 adventures you could play at every level from the start to mid-Paragon, and that's not even counting the Chaos Scar adventures that are generally liked but not held in high esteem per se.

There's also both War of the Burning Sky and Zeitgeist, which are both really excellent and I hope that someday I get to play my Berish dragonborn paladin lay theologian. I have intentionally avoided reading anything past like 4th level because I actually hope to see it properly some day.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

A place where you could look, that laid out what were appropriate easy, standard, and hard skill DCs for any given character level?

Nope. DC has nothing to do with character level, only the difficulty of what they are trying to do.

Higher level characters have a better chance of succeeding at more difficult things.