Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 6056321" data-attributes="member: 1210">That seems to be what's indicated so far, at least from what I've seen.Nah, low stats should give penalties IMHO... or else we should eliminate stat bonuses altogether. (I know, that's probably too radical.)I don't like putting hard caps on most of the numbers. I prefer the flatten the math without absolutely restraining it via numeric caps like that.Hey, didn't I just say something like this?? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I'm really liking the idea of most situational modifiers being advantage or disadvantage instead of + or - a given value.Well, if we keep ability bonuses, then a DC 20 task only requires a 16+ for a character with an 18 stat and no training. With training at +3, he only needs a 13+. With another +3 from level gains, feats, etc. he only needs to roll a 10+ to accomplish a nearly impossible task- that doesn't sound very impossible at all! That's why I don't like hard caps on the numbers for DCs. The playtest document, I think, sets DCs about right up to the 16ish range, but really hard tasks should go higher. I sometimes set task DCs by asking, &quot;Who should succeed on this check half the time?&quot; So let's say we're talking about a character trying to piece together a shattered clay tablet before the troll breaks through the door and enters the room. I might say to myself, &quot;He's got about a minute and dozens of bits to fit together like a 3D jigsaw. Half the time, a guy with an Int 18 who is trained for this kind of thing could probably pull it off. That guy would have +7 to his check... he'd need to roll an 11... so my final DC is 18.&quot; That kind of thing. So yeah, a lock that would challenge the god of thieves should be higher than DC 23 or whatever they top out at in the playtest doc, IMHO.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="the Jester, post: 6056321, member: 1210"] That seems to be what's indicated so far, at least from what I've seen. Nah, low stats should give penalties IMHO... or else we should eliminate stat bonuses altogether. (I know, that's probably too radical.) I don't like putting hard caps on most of the numbers. I prefer the flatten the math without absolutely restraining it via numeric caps like that. Hey, didn't I just say something like this?? :D I'm really liking the idea of most situational modifiers being advantage or disadvantage instead of + or - a given value. Well, if we keep ability bonuses, then a DC 20 task only requires a 16+ for a character with an 18 stat and no training. With training at +3, he only needs a 13+. With another +3 from level gains, feats, etc. he only needs to roll a 10+ to accomplish a nearly impossible task- that doesn't sound very impossible at all! That's why I don't like hard caps on the numbers for DCs. The playtest document, I think, sets DCs about right up to the 16ish range, but really hard tasks should go higher. I sometimes set task DCs by asking, "Who should succeed on this check half the time?" So let's say we're talking about a character trying to piece together a shattered clay tablet before the troll breaks through the door and enters the room. I might say to myself, "He's got about a minute and dozens of bits to fit together like a 3D jigsaw. Half the time, a guy with an Int 18 who is trained for this kind of thing could probably pull it off. That guy would have +7 to his check... he'd need to roll an 11... so my final DC is 18." That kind of thing. So yeah, a lock that would challenge the god of thieves should be higher than DC 23 or whatever they top out at in the playtest doc, IMHO. [/QUOTE]

Verification