Pathfinder 1E "Page 42" for Pathfinder

[The_Gneech]

The scaling of DCs is a philosophical point which I've seen convincing arguments for both ways. Personally, I prefer a mix of static and dynamic DCs, depending on the circumstances. Sneaking behind enemy lines, one of the classic "skill challenge" uses, should be considerably harder if the enemy is fire giants than if the enemy is goblins, right?

On top of which, the world is trying to make their life harder ... why else would monsters be advancable (or be able to take class levels)?

This doesn't mean the exact same locked chest is DC 15 one week and DC 29 the next. This means that the tougher, smarter monsters you're fighting these days can afford chests with better locks on them.

-The Gneech

 

[Perram]

A very neat idea. Page 42 was indeed a table I missed very much from 4e, and I'm glad to see something similar here. I'll try it out at my next session and tell you how things go!

 

[ruemere]

The scaling of DCs is a philosophical point which I've seen convincing arguments for both ways. Personally, I prefer a mix of static and dynamic DCs, depending on the circumstances. Sneaking behind enemy lines, one of the classic "skill challenge" uses, should be considerably harder if the enemy is fire giants than if the enemy is goblins, right?

Definitely. That's why DC should be a function of circumstances (or CR) instead of a difference between party level and CR.

On top of which, the world is trying to make their life harder ... why else would monsters be advancable (or be able to take class levels)?

I am not against advancing monsters. I am against leveling up the world in general to match character proficiency.

This doesn't mean the exact same locked chest is DC 15 one week and DC 29 the next. This means that the tougher, smarter monsters you're fighting these days can afford chests with better locks on them.

Agreed. It looks like I misunderstood your intention - in general, descriptive terms were applied to fixed DCs (not so under PFRPG rules), to deliver better information about test results.

Sorry.

Regards,
Ruemere

 

[benjamin]

Totally Awesome... I will sooo use it... I often find myself in the situation where a player says... "I'm going to bla bla bla <something cool>" And I think... "OK... For this hero, I think that would be a pretty (easy/hard) thing to do..." now I can just find the DC right off this table to match... So an easy job for a commoner... or a easy job for a legend are both there...

Consider it used... and much appreciated!

Benjamin


**************************************
Want incredibly atmospheric background
soundscapes for your gaming table?
Go to: www.syrinscape.com
Download for free!
See a program demo, and listen to mp3s
of Syrinscape in action.
**************************************

 

[Dannager]

DCs should not scale with level. Your players should feel stronger, better and more in charge with each passing level - instead, by looking at the table one is fully justified in assuming that the world is conspiring to make your life (and just your life) harder, since if a Joe Average tried to pick the same random lock, he would get a different DC.

DCs should not scale with level, part II. 4E dreadfully bland skill point distribution (i.e. skill bonus being the function of one's level instead of result of one's resource management) results in predictable skills. For 3.x and PFRPG this is patently false for skills falling outside of "must have" group.

In short, DCs should be based on scenario level and circumstances. This is Sauron's lock, so DC is XX.

Regards,
Ruemere

This represents, I think, a lack of understanding of Gneech's intentions as well as the 4th Edition design team's intentions. The way you think scaling DCs work is not the way scaling DCs actually work.

To paraphrase someone else who clarified this a while back, the cliff doesn't become harder to climb because you're higher level. The cliff becomes harder to climb because at higher level the cliffs you are climbing are made of slick, scalding-hot rock, covered in poisonous spiders, and battered by the ever-changing winds of the elemental chaos.

The DC chart is simply a way for DMs to assign appropriate DCs to challenges they feel are level-appropriate.

 

[Scott DeWar]

is there a print friendly version?

 

[The_Gneech]

I'll toss it into a PDF with some more concrete "how to use this" info sometime the week.

-The Gneech

 

[Scott DeWar]

ohhhh, that would be soooo appreciated! *bows low to floor*

 

[Walking Dad]

...
In short, DCs should be based on scenario level and circumstances. This is Sauron's lock, so DC is XX.

Regards,
Ruemere

But you can do just this with the table.

Don't look on the character sheets, but distribute scenario levels through your adventure (like you already choose the EL of the given encounters).

So, a common tavern would have level 3 at most, what determines the DC's of the locks, etc., regardless if your 15th level PC's enter it or not.

 

[billd91]

But you can do just this with the table.

Don't look on the character sheets, but distribute scenario levels through your adventure (like you already choose the EL of the given encounters).

So, a common tavern would have level 3 at most, what determines the DC's of the locks, etc., regardless if your 15th level PC's enter it or not.

You can, but I think there's a conceptual difference at work here. With the table, you look for a difficulty set to the characters at their level and come up with the rationale afterwards to justify the DC. Ruemere, I think, prefers the opposite direction - set the DC appropriate to the specific case, don't worry about what's on par with the PCs' level.
For some people, it's like the tail's wagging the dog to do it the 4e table way.