Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Esker" data-source="post: 7645141" data-attributes="member: 6966824">So here's the proposal I've been working on. I'm still looking at the math to calibrate it, but the design goals are as follows:1. Expertise should have less of an impact on easy to moderate difficulty tasks than it currently does, so as to avoid the bounded accuracy problem of saturating success rates.2. Regular proficiency should feel more meaningful for easy to moderate difficulty tasks than it currently does.3. Expertise should not be weakened in general, since doing so makes two classes weaker relative to other classes.4. These criteria lead me to posit that the gap between proficiency and expertise should be widened compared to RAW for high difficulty tasks. This reflects the colloquial meaning of being an "expert": your specialized training will be most apparent when doing particularly complex or difficult things.5. But we don't want the expert to start doing really difficult things too routinely. So if we want to widen the gap between expertise and proficiency at high DCs, that suggests making it harder for the merely proficient to do those things and keeping the expert close to where they are now, under RAW.6. Even though I'm weakening proficiency at high DCs, the strengthening at moderate DCs will be felt more, on balance, since those things come up more often.With that logic in mind, here's what I came up with:1. Skill checks use 2d10 instead of 1d20.2. We adopt the variant rule that makes proficiency add a die instead of a fixed value (1d4 corresponding to +2, 1d6 to +3, etc.)3. Ability score modifers are dropped by 1 across the board: 8-9 is now -2, 10-11 is -1, 12-13 is 0, etc.4. The expertise feature grants a second proficiency die, but only if the base roll is 11 or higher. So, roll 2d10 first. If the natural result is 2-10, just roll a single proficiency die as normal. If the natural result is 11-20, roll two proficiency dice.Here are the success rates at level 5 for an ability score of 18 for this scheme in graph form by DC, compared to RAW, and comparing no proficiency to proficiency to expertise.EDIT: Oops, meant to post the graph for ABI 12, but this is the one for ABI 18.<img src="https://imgur.com/mk3E2By.png" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" /></blockquote>

Verification