Please cure my 4e illiteracy

[Imaro]

are all rooms the same?

does this apply to the other things that have set DC's as well though. Either skills scale by level or they don't, but assuming both is just confusing and contradictory... regardless of if it's ad-hoc skill use or regular skill use it should have some type of consistency.

 

[malraux]

Just to be clear:

Anyway, what I try to do is actually to use the level of thing to set the DC. In practice, this is always about the same. ie, the cavern that level 5 characters are likely to explore is probably about a level 5 cavern, with monsters of about level 5. Five levels later, the caverns the party are exploring are deeper underground, with more twists and turns, weirder geology, etc, so it makes sense to me that the difficulty should go up.

Why do you assume that level 1 characters and level 20 characters are looking through the same chest full of junk? Shouldn't it be easier to find the valuable things in a goblin's rickety box compared to an elder black dragon's chest full of hidden compartments, intricate locks, false baubles, etc?

If the party is staying at a basic inn, that's a low level sort of place, it gets a low level DC to search it. If the party is staying at an inn in the City of Brass, chances are the proprietor does have some special hiding places that a lower level character couldn't find.

Yes I agree that exclusively relative dcs don't make a lot of sense. In practice, for most games, there won't be a lot of difference for more cases. Of course you can get the guidelines to breakdown, but luckily that's why they are guidelines, not rules.

 

[malraux]

does this apply to the other things that have set DC's as well though. Either skills scale by level or they don't, but assuming both is just confusing and contradictory... regardless of if it's ad-hoc skill use or regular skill use it should have some type of consistency.

Almost nothing in the rules in the PHB has a fixed DC though. Acrbatics check have a variable DC, depending on the difficulty of the surface. Searching has a variable difficulty depending on how well something is hidden. IDing monsters depends on the monster level. Swimming is a function of how rough the water is. etc.

 

[Maltese Changeling]

Almost nothing in the rules in the PHB has a fixed DC though. Acrbatics check have a variable DC, depending on the difficulty of the surface. Searching has a variable difficulty depending on how well something is hidden. IDing monsters depends on the monster level. Swimming is a function of how rough the water is. etc.

Mustrum's suggestion to read p. 42 as referring to DCs for distinct levels of challenges (as opposed to distinct levels of PCs) follows perfectly from this observation.

 

[Truename]

Because in most games (IME) as you go up in level, you tend to fight tougher things, end up in more alien locations, and deal with more complicated obstacles. Most 20th level characters are not still fighting level 1 goblins. I agree that if they do, then yes, it should be a static DC. But for most games, the level of the challenges is roughly a function of the level of the party.

You realize this totally discounts a sand-box style game.

If you're looking for a way to make it work, the house rule others have suggested makes a lot of sense: use the challenge's level rather than the PCs level.

If you're just looking to whinge, then carry on, because by the RAW you're right.

 

[malraux]

Mustrum's suggestion to read p. 42 as referring to DCs for distinct levels of challenges (as opposed to distinct levels of PCs) follows perfectly from this observation.

Yeah, that's a bit more succinct than my verbosity, but pretty much what I'd advocate as well. In practice I personally don't think it matters much either way for almost all cases though.

 

[Imaro]

If you're looking for a way to make it work, the house rule others have suggested makes a lot of sense: use the challenge's level rather than the PCs level.

If you're just looking to whinge, then carry on, because by the RAW you're right.

Actually I would like WotC to address both this and skill challenges as far as officila clarification in a FREE article on their site.

 

[Cadfan]

Guidelines on making ad hoc rulings that are written into the rules are still rules by any definition with which I'm familiar. Broad rules subject to interpretation by the referee, but still rules nonetheless.

Dude, its a chart. It tells you whether an ability score DC will be easy, medium, or hard for a character of a particular level. Ditto for skill DCs and attacks. It also tells you a damage expression that will be low, medium, or high for a given level. And it gives an example of a DM assigning a DC and damage to something made up.

The "rules" are, "decide if something is easy, medium, or hard, then look it up on the chart." And the chart is just a chart.

The section of the book that page 42 falls under is entitled, "Actions Not Covered By The Rules." I'm not aware of any game system, ever, capable of creating rules that consistently govern improvisational actions not covered by the rules. In fact, I'm fairly certain that there's a freshman philosophy class at my alma mater where they mathematically prove that this is impossible. Something to do with rules not being capable of including all the rules necessary to create the rules.

And if ad hoc DCs don't map well to DCs established in skill descriptions, well, I can see how that disconnect might bother people.

The ad hoc DCs don't map to anything except easy, medium, or hard. Its up to the DM to decide what is or is not easy, medium, or hard. I concede that a DM might decide poorly. At least for this edition he has a handy chart! Maybe that will help him a little bit.

I like rules light systems that rely on referee adjudication, but there is a burden on the referee to be consistent. In more rules intensive systems, then the both the rules and the ref need to be consistent. In my experience, of course.

I agree, but that has nothing to do with the chart. Its just a chart. Its a handy reference for when you don't have a pre determined DC or damage roll or whatever. The chart can't be consistent or inconsistent. Its just a chart.

 

[Cadfan]

For the record, stated once, and clearly:

It is impossible for the ad hoc rulings page to create inconsistent rulings or rulings that scale with level, because if you already have a predetermined DC with which your new DC could be inconsistent, you aren't supposed to be using the chart for improvisational ad hoc DCs.

It is also impossible to create ad hoc rulings that are consistent, because "ad hoc" means that the DM is inventing it out of his own brain. The best you can come up with is maybe a chart that guides the DM in making sure that he is able to properly express what he comes up with in his brain ("hmm, I think this should be pretty easy to do") in game terms (ie, in numerical DCs).

Maybe I need to add, "ITS JUST A FRIGGIN' CHART!" to my signature.

 

[Remathilis]

Except for searching rooms, where the chart is used to set the DC's for examples... why is this different from everything else again?

Also this doesn't in any way address the discrepancies in dynamic DC's vs. static DC's... what's interesting is that people are arguing totally different justifications for the chart and static DC's totally dependent upon personal interpretation.

So I guess at level 20 all rooms the PCs enter, be it an inn, a warehouse at the local docks or the BBEGs fortress are riddled with secret compartments, magical darkness and bleed into the elemental chaos and shadowfell at the same time just so that the high search DC can be justified?

You're both putting the cart before the horse.

The DM, not the PC's set the "level" of the challenge. Every challenge (be it a skill check, skill challenge, monster encounter, or whatever) has a level. For most relevant encounters, the level of the encounter is equal to the level of the PCs (give or take two). Encounters with levels much higher than the PCs level are typically too hard, those much lower aren't worth the hassle.

Most DM's set the level of the encounter equal to the PCs because that's the sweet spot of challenges. Monster encounters with a level near the PC's level are typically good fights, treasure of their level is typically good treasure, and DCs of their level are a good range of target numbers. This doesn't have to be the case though; just as if High-level PCs go into the woods to pick a fight with kobolds (encounter levels 1-3). PCs who use their skills on mundane tasks (searching an inn) will find the challenge non-existant and the reward unfulfilling.

So the inn might be a level 1 area. Why? Not because level 1 PCs stay there, but because that's the level the DM set for it. It WOULD be a good challenge for level 1 PCs. The warehouse might be level 5; the DM peppers it with level 5 monsters, level 5 treasure parcels, and level 5 traps. And level 5 DCs. Why 5? Well, either he sets it arbitrarily (sandbox) or based on the fact that he knows his 5th level PCs are going there (tailored). The BBEG might be level 8, the stronghold of the drow level 11, etc. You get the idea.

So a level 1 PC doesn't need a 15 to climb a ladder and 10th level PC need a 25 to climb the same ladder. The PC isn't setting the DC. However, a ladder in a "level 1" zone is DC 15, while a ladder in a level 10 zone is 25, probably because its higher to climb, made of human bones, etc. If the level 1 ladder ended up shipped to the level 10 zone, it wouldn't become DC 25, mostly likely it would be ignored; its no longer a meaningful challenge to climb the 15 ladder unless there is a drastic chance of failure (since everyone can take 10 and they have at least a +5 from level).

Of course, the game DOES assume your 10th level PCs are wandering around 10th level zones more often than they are 1st level zones. Near-paragon PCs usually have more important things to do than clear out kobold warrens. However, if your PCs turn left and end up in the Caves of Chaos instead of the Tomb of Horrors, you're going to be using that "level 1-3" line on the DCs chart, not the "level 10-12" line.

Are we all clear on this now?