Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
One D&D Cleric and Species playtest survey is live.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8884279" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>I agree, different discussion. The ideas are related though, parts of the same system and so they pull and push on each other.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I never said it was an insult, just noting the usage as it seems to give a certain viewpoint. Understanding the bias we bring to a conversation is hard, but it can also help us understand where disagreement arises.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You seem to have hit on exactly my point, though I wasn't sure if you would increase the DC or not. But a Bard who doesn't have strength will never attempt to use strength to intimidate. Their strength is largely irrelevant to their plans and actions. And they can ALSO get a DC decrease, as you note, for being as you have phrased "crafty". </p><p></p><p>And we aren't talking about the Goliath being as good at intimidation <em>in general</em> as the bard, but instead of the Goliath being good at using strength and size to intimidate. Notably, even if we laid out the numbers and used the Goliath's strength, they are only getting a +4 compared to the Bard's +10 (+4 cha, level 5 with Expertise so +6 from prof). So the Bard is still better, but the Goliath has ONE avenue that they can use when it is appropriate. </p><p></p><p>And yes, if you decide to lower the DC by 5, then you have numerically done the same thing as letting them use their strength... but feel-wise, you haven't. Because you normally don't tell them how many points the DC is lowered by, and you may not even tell them it has been lowered (that is a table specific thing, so I can't assume) but they are still rolling a die with a negative, not a die with a positive. Even if the math is identical, the feel of the roll is different. </p><p></p><p>A player who rolls with their best mod, but fails anyways likely feels something along the lines of "I tried my best, but it wasn't enough. Just bad luck I guess." It feels like they did everything they could, and so it is easier to accept the failure. But someone who rolls with their worst mod and fails feels like "What did I expect, of course I failed, I'm not built to succeed at these things." and even worse, if they succeed, it feels like a fluke. It doesn't feel like clever play was rewarded, but that the dice just happened to be high enough for them to counter-act their bad ability. </p><p></p><p>DC 10 with a 1d20-1 just feels worse than a DC 15 with a 1d20+4, even though they are the same math. This is also why earlier I spoke about giving players bonuses instead of lowering the DC. Because then the player feels that bonus more keenly, it has effected their side of the equation, not your side, and so psychologically, it feels more impactful.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't consider this adversarial at all, however, I have noticed certain trends in thoughts about the "other side" so to speak. For example, I just recently encountered a video from a year ago where a youtuber sought to address problems they saw in WoTC's adventure design by giving more narrative powers and more options to the DM. This makes perfect sense.... if you assume a DM like that youtuber, who has decades of experience DMing and a solid consistent friend-group they run for who they know the limits and desires of intimately. However, it would be a nightmare for DMs who are only on their first year of DMing, and rely on those adventures to give them structure and direction. The sort of DMs who need far more consideration. But, that youtuber doesn't imagine DMs like that, because they are a DM, so they imagine DMs like themselves and other DMs in their circle who are highly experienced. And if they do consider new DMs then they reason that those DMs have access to experienced DMs to help guide them through the problems they encounter, because that is the situation around them. </p><p></p><p>I find this same sort of thing often with DMs who think about players. Quite often on this site I've found people who consider players as masters of the system who seek to bend the rules of play to manipulate towards the outcome they want. Likely, because they themselves are highly experienced DMs who also play, and they can imagine themselves doing that. This isn't a condemnation, just an observation, because I've spent a long time working with new players for a few months at a time, before groups around me crumble. That has given me a different set of biases, and a different thrust to my views. I far more often see players who struggle to match the story they want to how they can achieve that story, and so I have found many ways to ease that transistion. Since very few of them get to the point of trying to always engineer success forever (which is not much different than anyone playing, very few people try to intentionally fail) I don't run into the problems you predict.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>We can if you want. I just like discussing.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8884279, member: 6801228"] I agree, different discussion. The ideas are related though, parts of the same system and so they pull and push on each other. I never said it was an insult, just noting the usage as it seems to give a certain viewpoint. Understanding the bias we bring to a conversation is hard, but it can also help us understand where disagreement arises. You seem to have hit on exactly my point, though I wasn't sure if you would increase the DC or not. But a Bard who doesn't have strength will never attempt to use strength to intimidate. Their strength is largely irrelevant to their plans and actions. And they can ALSO get a DC decrease, as you note, for being as you have phrased "crafty". And we aren't talking about the Goliath being as good at intimidation [I]in general[/I] as the bard, but instead of the Goliath being good at using strength and size to intimidate. Notably, even if we laid out the numbers and used the Goliath's strength, they are only getting a +4 compared to the Bard's +10 (+4 cha, level 5 with Expertise so +6 from prof). So the Bard is still better, but the Goliath has ONE avenue that they can use when it is appropriate. And yes, if you decide to lower the DC by 5, then you have numerically done the same thing as letting them use their strength... but feel-wise, you haven't. Because you normally don't tell them how many points the DC is lowered by, and you may not even tell them it has been lowered (that is a table specific thing, so I can't assume) but they are still rolling a die with a negative, not a die with a positive. Even if the math is identical, the feel of the roll is different. A player who rolls with their best mod, but fails anyways likely feels something along the lines of "I tried my best, but it wasn't enough. Just bad luck I guess." It feels like they did everything they could, and so it is easier to accept the failure. But someone who rolls with their worst mod and fails feels like "What did I expect, of course I failed, I'm not built to succeed at these things." and even worse, if they succeed, it feels like a fluke. It doesn't feel like clever play was rewarded, but that the dice just happened to be high enough for them to counter-act their bad ability. DC 10 with a 1d20-1 just feels worse than a DC 15 with a 1d20+4, even though they are the same math. This is also why earlier I spoke about giving players bonuses instead of lowering the DC. Because then the player feels that bonus more keenly, it has effected their side of the equation, not your side, and so psychologically, it feels more impactful. I don't consider this adversarial at all, however, I have noticed certain trends in thoughts about the "other side" so to speak. For example, I just recently encountered a video from a year ago where a youtuber sought to address problems they saw in WoTC's adventure design by giving more narrative powers and more options to the DM. This makes perfect sense.... if you assume a DM like that youtuber, who has decades of experience DMing and a solid consistent friend-group they run for who they know the limits and desires of intimately. However, it would be a nightmare for DMs who are only on their first year of DMing, and rely on those adventures to give them structure and direction. The sort of DMs who need far more consideration. But, that youtuber doesn't imagine DMs like that, because they are a DM, so they imagine DMs like themselves and other DMs in their circle who are highly experienced. And if they do consider new DMs then they reason that those DMs have access to experienced DMs to help guide them through the problems they encounter, because that is the situation around them. I find this same sort of thing often with DMs who think about players. Quite often on this site I've found people who consider players as masters of the system who seek to bend the rules of play to manipulate towards the outcome they want. Likely, because they themselves are highly experienced DMs who also play, and they can imagine themselves doing that. This isn't a condemnation, just an observation, because I've spent a long time working with new players for a few months at a time, before groups around me crumble. That has given me a different set of biases, and a different thrust to my views. I far more often see players who struggle to match the story they want to how they can achieve that story, and so I have found many ways to ease that transistion. Since very few of them get to the point of trying to always engineer success forever (which is not much different than anyone playing, very few people try to intentionally fail) I don't run into the problems you predict. We can if you want. I just like discussing. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
One D&D Cleric and Species playtest survey is live.
Top