New DC Table, based on level 1 DCs and DM Screen

[AbdulAlhazred]

Compare the damage tables on pages 42 and 184 of the original DMG. They're identical. It's not a stretch to think that if one changes, so too does the other.

I'm still gonna check the DM kit's screen when I get to my FLGS today, but I expect it to match that errata.

They are still different tables. I believe they are also reproduced in one other place in the DMG, but I may be misremembering. It HAPPENS that the two tables WERE the same, but taking the errata at face value they did NOT change the one on page 42. They may have intended that, but maybe not. Or maybe there will be a different update to that table.

Honestly the old table really kind of makes more sense for damage from stunts. The new table really doesn't have sufficient range of possible values since only 2 numbers exist per level. Most stunts should be doing more damage than EITHER of those numbers. At least the more significant ones should.

It seems to me that really the main points of the new table were to increase DCs at high levels where they often became trivial and to make the distinction between easy, medium, and hard more useful. The old easy DCs were really a bit low and not terribly useful, which meant the table really ended up being 2 usable values per level range. The new table lets you use medium DCs most of the time instead of often needing to resort to hard ones. It's a nice tweak but really I think the effect on actual SCs being used in play will not be that great.

 

[Siberys]

Well, it's the same table as is on the DM Kit's screen, and it's used there for improvised damage values. I'm therefore inclined to say that the damage table on p42 has been changed to match errata.

I can't wait for the RC so I can verify this hypothesis.

 

[jbear]

I like the new DC scale of 8 Easy 12 Medium 19 Hard. It seems more like it.

What i dislike is the progression is totally impossible to remember off the top of your head. The difficulty is changing on the chart in a totally unpredictable way. I'm hoping that is because these have been semi-guessed, but I imgine they are guesses based on what the OP has observed in those photos of the essentials materials.

I don't like having to look anything up during a game session besides my encounter notes. I like to make rulings on DCs on the fly depending on what my players throw at me. This seems like it will far more difficult to do that accurately without consulting your DM Screen.

Is there some obvious or important math reason that the DCs dont progress uniformly, and by uniformly I mean, if Hard Becomes 21 at level 3 then why do medium and easy remain the same at that level?

 

[keterys]

Because the Hard DC increases by more over 30 levels than Easy or Medium?

In the same way that skill bonuses do, for that matter.

Your worst skill advances by 15 over 30 levels. Your best might get 26 over those levels, though 19-21 is more common.

 

[Aoirorentsu]

Also, FYI for Insiders, there's an interesting discussion of the new DCs (as well as the official unveiling of the new ones) here.

An interesting discussion point is when to use each skill difficulty. It's a bit different from my previous thoughts, and very interesting.

So, there you go.

 

[Camelot]

Might someone please summarize this interesting article for those of us who don't have DDI? =)

 

[keterys]

Roughly. Easy DCs are for people who aren't trained and don't have the right stats, or when doing group checks (I'm assuming not all group checks, though, cause that would make them near autopass). Moderate DCs are people who are trained or have the right stat, or a decent combination of secondary stat and racial or feat bonus. Hard DCs are for people who are heavily invested, with training, a stat, and either feat or item bonuses.

In general, the goal is for the typical target to succeed on an 8 on the die (ie, fail 35% of the time) roughly.

 

[Joshua Randall]

I believe the article has now been opened to non-subscribers, too.

 

[bganon]

I like the new DC scale of 8 Easy 12 Medium 19 Hard. It seems more like it.

What i dislike is the progression is totally impossible to remember off the top of your head. The difficulty is changing on the chart in a totally unpredictable way. I'm hoping that is because these have been semi-guessed, but I imgine they are guesses based on what the OP has observed in those photos of the essentials materials.

This isn't quite exact but it's very close:

Easy DCs are about 8+(1/2)*level. You can get the exact numbers by counting epic levels as one being one level higher than they actually are.

Medium DCs are about 12+(2/3)*level. The actual numbers are a little slower during heroic, but I don't think you're ever off by more than one just scaling by (2/3)*level.

Hard DCs are close to being just Medium +7/+8/+9 per tier, so the formula would be 18+(2/3)*level with an extra +1 per tier. Actually, the real numbers have an ever so slightly steeper progression, but this is never off by more than one.

It's not real easy, but if you can remember 8+(1/2)*level, 12+(2/3)*level, and +7/+8/+9 then you'll be very close to the full table.

 

[Aspeon]

I believe the article has now been opened to non-subscribers, too.

So it has- thanks for the heads up. Sounds like the distinction is pretty much what I said back on the first page:

To veer slightly more OT, I think "easy/moderate/hard" is less useful than "Endurance check everyone has to make and will be harmed if they fail/Skill challenge check everyone has to make, but with a few different options/Perception check the elf ranger will make on behalf of everyone." I think the way I'd use these is pick the table column based on purpose, and then +/- 5 to be easy or hard.

I kind of think this is the philosophy they should've taken to begin with, so I'm satisfied.