Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 9791834" data-attributes="member: 93670">I don't entirely disagree, but I think we are moving into debating the shades of gray.  The 3.x rules pretty much cover all of the stuff you mention Y thes hades come into play with how much weight you apply  to individual rules subsections & how flexible those sections are under the GM's needs.  The relevant rules in 3.x are really split between the PHB & DMG. IMO that split is entirely justified because I as the GM need my players to understand there is some flexibility & how actions their PCs can take are able to color outside the lines to reach a point where the GM can metaphorically put their thumb on the scale.I think it's relevant to discussion because Mearls mentions the 3.5 DC table in a questing beast(?) interview with a reference to climbing a wall covered in butter.  That example is just as ridiculous & eye rollingly contrived as he described it then, but the DC30 Hurriedly climb a slick brick wall->who could do it-> high level barbarian from <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/hot-take-d-d-has-not-recovered-from-2e-to-3-0-transition.693849/post-8861111" target="_blank">the actual list</a>  is not at all strange with d&d or even real world bricks.[spoiler="the 3.5PHB sections"]<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">PHB64 : Trying again.  Omitting this from 5e was a huge problem for me as a GM because it spells ot to players that bob can try again & Alice could try after Bob, but that there may or not be consequences as a result of the prior check.  A shockingly high number of new to d&d with 5e players I see expect "Oh I'm proficient too [*dice clatter*]->does result do it" seem to hardcore expect CRPG style  results there & don't even try to account for the situation or attempt to justify the second check.  As a GM I sirely miss the player creativity here & some of that creativity came from attempts to invoke later sections to their benefit★</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">PHB64: Untrained skills:  5e does kinda cover this & I'm not sure about 4e, but it's good to call out because sometimes there's a reason unrelated to skill bonus that alice or bob might need to bring relevant knowledge such as a wizard deciphering the runes in a ward of some form enough that they could hand a new skill check off to the rogue</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">PHB64: Favorable & unfavorable conditions is the continuation of that last example, but also it sets the foundation for the GM to confidently use some of the many tools provided in the DMG & gives players a ballpark idea of how much taking action to invoke them might help.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">PHB64: holy heck I'm so tired of 5e only D&D players expecting literally any action to take no more than a standard action & then acting like the DM is the one  being adversarial when they say it takes considerable time for their PC to go about canvassing the whole town searching the room or whatever.  It's not really relevant to the grey area but It's important enough to sorely miss & deserves a mention.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">PHB65: Practically impossible tasks.  I think this may have been what you were referring to, but it's only one piece if the puzzle & the GM has semi quantum tools to hook with (un)favorable conditions with almost quantum results.  Overall it was a good thing for players to know it existed since the GM could always just reality check any disconnect inscenario understanding by explaining or asking for what a player thinks the scenario is.  It's also where DC30/40/50 skill checks eventually became possible for a specialized high level PC with appropriate relevant gear like +7 skill items & such on top of many levels of dedicated investment in a skill. PCs eventually shifted to investing in other skills, but one trick pony specialized  NPCs & magic items/consumables existed for a good reason <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">PHB65: Combining skill attempts... This is where some of the more powerful DMG tools really come into play</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">PHB65: checks without rolls talks about taking 10/20.  Most importantly is the party manipulating the scenario with their actions to allow this as an option★.  Those "DC25, 30, 35, 40 and 50" checks start looking pretty darned reasonable when the result of a die roll can be settled through other more reasonable DC actions.. heck taking 20 witha mere +5 is auto success.  This was one of those rules where players either read the rules & converted extremely difficult/almost impossible checks into fun & interesting multistep puzzles  through their actions  & the DMG even had a section about chunking tasks.  Even at Level 1 it was possible for a specialized character to use taking 20 so they could auto succeed at a dc25 check once the party took actions so they could clear the way for that.</li> </ul>[/spoiler][spoiler="the 3.5DMG sections"]<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">DMG30: modifying the roll or DC.  It's pretty much a rehashing of some of the PHB sections that was rephrased to be DM facing.  Importantly though is that it talks about circumstances that improve or hamper a PC's performance at a task -AND circumstances that modify the task inself.  4e kinda lost that & 5e has "Oh I help, that should give you advantage" as the first last and only card for far too many.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">DMG30 <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/giving-an-ad-d-feel-to-5e.679228/post-8241363" target="_blank">DMs Best Friend</a>.  I sorely miss this because it gave a granular toolkit I could use a gm for adjudicating what also helps/hinders & what is just overlap of some low hanging fruit already in play.  More importantly is that it gives the GM a thing they can point to & say "look that's the rule I'm using, use player facing PHB tools to interact with it"</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">DMG30: Delineating tasks.  A rule to turn a maybe impossible skill check into a chunked puzzle  with no predefined solution or even an adventure seed/structure.  Once again this was a big loss.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">DMG31: <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/hot-take-d-d-has-not-recovered-from-2e-to-3-0-transition.693849/post-8861111" target="_blank">Table 2-5 Difficulty class Examples</a>.  Not much to say, it had columns for DC Example Roll (Key Ability) &  Who Could Do It. If a GM looked at it as prescriptive  with example & DC being the important part it gave iffy results, if they looked at who could do it held up alongside whatever scenario a check was being made in then it worked great & the DM still had other tools</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">DMG32: General vrs Specific.  "I search the room" & "I search behind the bookcase" should obviously hasve different DCs along with different results.  This allowed the GM some additional wiggle room depending on how players phrased their creative efforts to use the player facing PHB skill check related tools.  It also meant that players had motive to be specific when they thought there was something to gain even when doing that could come with a cost. Players would inevitably see this & the other DMG sections making them rules subsystems they were aware of on some level.  If the players didn't seek it out themselves, simply having it in the DMG allowed the GM to say "look!" and convey the point without needing to meat puppet PCs or channel comic book guy from the simpsons  before he was well known</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">DMG32: Degrees of failure/success.  This was really just two sides to a quantum coin where the GM could set that DC50 you note & give an interesting or useful result either way as appropriate to the check result even when it's nowhere near the DC50.  I';ll give an example of the time I had to call a locksmith after a tenant changed the locks  moved out & claimed to loose their key.   He said "this naughty word lock" while picking the lock. Without breaking stride he had it open & was offering to install a useful lock, that was a high degree of success... The time my lawnmower closet's electronic lock quit working & I hacksawed it off over an hour or two would probably be a poor one & I knew it would be when I got the hacksaw out .</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">DMG32: Checks without rolls.  GM facig side of Taking 10/20 </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">etc</li> </ul>[/spoiler]The two big breakdowns on the grey area were if a player/gm read the section on things like taking 10/20 delineating tasks the weight of "who could do it" vrs the example/DC & how they could do it 4e streamlined that <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/should-bounded-accuracy-apply-to-skill-checks-thoughts-on-an-old-alexandrian-article.707833/post-9505232" target="_blank">a bit</a> with easy medium & hard DC ranges for 10 different level ranges, but it left out too many tools & added the +PC Level to create new problems rather than trusting the GM to decide "who could do it" as appropriate & trusting both sides of the GM screen to make opening the door for taking 10/20 via player driven puzzle the important part★I approve of that</blockquote>

Verification