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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6776031" data-attributes="member: 5834">What I'm saying is you have a lot of latitude in how you write skill and ability checks. If you want to multiple DCs for the same challenge due to different levels of training, you are able to do that within the rules.As far as the second part, you only roll if the outcome is uncertain is not the exact meaning. You only roll if the result would matter is more what they're going for. That is what I'm getting at when I say the skill and ability check system is cinematic in nature. Even if a swim is going to be a hard swim, you wouldn't bother rolling if there wasn't a compelling reason to do so as determined by the DM. You may very well narrate that Joe the strong fighter with Athletics makes it across the swift moving river quite easily and Alex the Weak wizard has quite a hard time making it across the river, but manages to do it. You would narrate the event because they have plenty of time and it isn't compelling to have someone die on the river. There is no pre-made DC and encouragement to roll as there was in 3E/Pathfinder where there were hard-coded DCs for what type of water you were trying to swim across.If you and Hussar want to put yourself in a box that isn't there as far as how you design your DCs and let players roll, have at it. I'm not going to be in that box because my reading of the skill and ability check system says it doesn't exist. I see the skill and ability check system as a way to make my game more interesting and highlight player capabilities in a way that wasn't encouraged in previous editions of D&D like writing a check so that the Underdark Survival ranger feels extremely unique being the only one that can figure out something due to his particular high ability or a Knowledge (Arcana) guy of a certain proficiency level being smarter than all the guys in the same room with a +1 skill.Part that doesn't seem to be coming across is that I wouldn't do this for every check. I'd do it when I wanted to make a character standout for some reason other than combat. Part the other side of the argument doesn't seem to be accepting is I'm not breaching some rule by writing a challenge in this fashion. I'm using the system as intended: to enhance the game. Making a PC feel special because he's the only guy that figure something out with a roll isn't breaking a rule or somehow screwing over other players. It making them feel like the character they tried to build be it egghead or huge strong barbarian. I very much like that the 5E skill and ability system by the rules lets me do that. For example, I've written doors that say minimum 15 strength to break, disadvantage on that check if you are small, advantage if you are large, DC 20 to break. Writing a challenge in that fashion is not breaking the rules as you and Hussar seem to be indicating. if you're not indicating that, then we're not much understanding each other. I think the check I used in my example is very much possible using the 5E skill and ability check system. I don't need to have every door DC 20 strength check to break for everyone. That's 3E/Pathfinder thinking. This 5E system lends itself more to creative skill and ability challenges that I can use to add some verisimilitude to the game because in real life a bigger person, not just stronger, would have a much easier time breaking down a door. I like being able to add that type of verisimilitude to my skill and ability checks.</blockquote>

Verification