Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 7002735" data-attributes="member: 6677017">[EDIT: I noticed that I made two different point 2s. I don't care enough to fix it, so I'm just noting it here.]In "brief":1) I remember the same design phase discussions as you. I think the DC is intended relative to the common human and should not change for other characters. I also like someone's conceptual assistance tweak to the phrasing of adding "challenge" to the end of term rather than "task". Would something the average person fails at 45% of the time be considered an "easy task" in natural language? Not on the earth I live on! Could it be considered an "easy challenge"? Absolutely! 2) You should make a general decision about what sort of genre emulation you are going for. Gritty realism, cinematic action, wuxia, myth, etc. Set your DCs based on natural language as interpreted within that genre. What I'm calling cinematic action* is the one most represented in official D&D examples, including rule books, novels, video games, etc, but you may want to do something else.If you accept #1 and #2 (just try it as a thought experiment) everything regarding DC more or less works.2) By the book, Athletics doesn't seem to apply to pure acts of strength like lifting, pushing, etc. It is more for stuff like jumping, swimming, climbing, (running?). While I'm not sure I like design that leaves certain tasks as orphans where no skill applies, but lets almost every other task theoretically apply a skill, this does help resolve the issue with high level character trained in Athletics being better at knocking over trees than giants without Athletics. I could go either way on how to rule this--just consider which outcome you are most comfortable with and make a decision.3) The highest ability score check result possible for a creature without proficiency and no special bonuses is 30. They can accomplish a nearly impossible task 5% of the time, and they are the only ones who can.4) Use the examples in the books for precedent on the sorts of rolls to make for improvised attempts. The most basic way of doing it that covers the majority of situations is:a) Initiating character uses an action (occasionally an attack instead) to make an appropriate ability check.b) If appropriate, opposing character makes an opposed ability check.c) Results are applied.The only modifiers given as examples are advantage or disadvantage.I think I might remember the rules mentioning using an attack roll for some sort of improvised actions at some point, perhaps buried in the DMG. In any event, I think allowing the rolls to be attack rolls or saving throws, whichever are most appropriate, is perfectly in line with the game design philosophy, and if it wasn't explicitly mentioned is likely an oversight.One thing I would recommend is to almost never (or even hardline never) use more than two rolls for an improvised action, one for the initiator, and perhaps one for any opposer. If possible, I would avoiding even doing things like having a character make a Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to grab a chandelier and swing their feet into someone and then make an opposed Strength (Athletics) check to see if they can knock them down. Instead, I'd prefer just making a single Strength (Acrobatics) check opposed by the defender's normal shove resisting roll. This is more fun because it increases the likelihood of success, and lets me feel like I'm passively retroactively fighting back against the overly complex and fun-destroying triple jeopardy rules of attempting combat maneuvers in 3e. If you want to encourage characters to do this, only require one roll (sometimes opposed) for success, because characters do stuff they succeed on and stop trying stuff they don't. How often did people try that stuff in 3e? Unless they feats, "almost never" because it was a hassle and rarely worked, and you were better off just swinging your weapon until they stopped moving.So, in the ogre's situation, here is how I would do it:1) I'm going for a cinematic action style where stuff like that is possible. Is it possible for a regular commoner? Uhm, no. So the DC should be above 20 (you could fudge that to 20 if it were right on the edge of what were possible, but this is beyond the edge in my opinion). Is this something that would be a very difficult challenge, or a nearly impossible challenge in general? Going by simple DCs, I'd say it's a very difficult challenge (DC 25), but I think the ogre should be able to do it, so I'm going to go with a DC 22 instead. (I would thereafter use the same DC if a human or anyone else tries to do this--I just used the ogre to help me come up with an appropriate DC.) This is a feat of raw Strength, so that's all it is: a Strength check.2) The ogre has much better leverage than a normal human. The disarm rule in the DMG gives precedent for exactly this sort of thing: advantage and/or disadvantage. So I'm going to give the ogre advantage for his size. This means he will succeed about 28% of the time. So with a few attempts he can make it happen. This seems about right for the cinematic action genre, since the tree is still pretty formidable compared to the ogre. The numbers work.3) You implied you are going for an area attack. So if the ogre succeeds on the Strength check, then those in the area make either an ability check or a saving throw. I'm not sure if the goal is to pin people, knock them down, damage them, etc. Precedent implies that you go with a save to resist damage, and an ability check or save to resist a condition. So if you want to smack them, DC 12 Dexterity save or take damage based on the Improvised Damage chart (either 1d10 or 2d10 based on what you feel is closest on the chart). Opposed ability checks are pretty much always one on one. Since this is an area of effect, they should resist a pin or a knockdown with a save (if it were only one character, you might go with a check instead). In either case, the effect is similar to a Shove, so you might want to allow the characters to make their choice of a Strength or Dexterity save. Or you could rule one way or another based on how you visualize the scene. On a failure they are either knocked down or Restrained, based on the goals, the ogre, and the tree. (You could go with Grappled instead of Restrained, but game precedent of monster attacks and spells favors Restrained, and it is cooler.)4) A Restrained character can use their action to make a Strength check to escape from the tree, with an arbitrarily set DC (I'd say 10 or 12, it shouldn't be terribly hard).*The rule book examples on whether or not there is a chance of failure seem to take a gritty realism approach. Things they don't make you roll for are "duh" extremes, like walking across a room or ordering an ale. Some people have preferred to take a more story-based approach, going with whether there should dramatically be a chance of failure, which is cool, but not what the books really imply with their examples. I tend to play somewhere in between myself, using a variant of the automatic success rule, and being a bit more generous on occasion.</blockquote>

Verification