D&D 5E Q&A 8/1 - Attack & Skill Checks , Spell DCs and Stat Caps

[Sunseeker]

I am still unsure why they have decided to go with a 6/12 setup instead of a 5/10 as all the other numbers lend themselves. 12 is certainly lower than the highest skill bonuses allowed in prior editions, but when combined with skill feats, ability score bonuses and no doubt other magical buffs or item bonuses yet to come, we will see scores well into the 30s. I don't see why "easy" must srart at the 50% mark with a DC 10. These numbers could easily be reduced by setting the DC of "easy" to a lower number.

 

[darjr]

If the highest DC is 20, then you'll have PCs who regularly make it at 1st level. Without training.

I meant that it would only be those DC's with characters that have training and some other special feature, just for the skill in question. Everybody else the DC's would remain the same and for other tasks that PC tries as well.

 

[Viking Bastard]

I don't see why "easy" must srart at the 50% mark with a DC 10. These numbers could easily be reduced by setting the DC of "easy" to a lower number.

I suspect it's rather the other way around: Easy is set at 10 to accommodate all the bonuses.

People have come to expect a lot of things to deliver a bonus.

 

[Sunseeker]

I suspect it's rather the other way around: Easy is set at 10 to accommodate all the bonuses.

People have come to expect a lot of things to deliver a bonus.

And that's unfortunate. Bonuses will only grow as the game progresses. There's no reason to give that growth a head-start.

 

[keterys]

That's why you start off with a rule that bonuses don't stack, and you're pretty covered.

Though I actually like the idea of training being +10. Gives for a decent disparity and makes it less about every other bonus (item, feat, etc)

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

+6 and +12 seemed odd at first. But in a game where 18 is special, it has a certain symmetry. I'm okay with it.

 

[Li Shenron]

If we don't want someone with no bonus to have a chance at DC20, and we don't want someone with a decent bonus to a chance of failure, then probably the problem is in the d20.

 

[Sunseeker]

That's why you start off with a rule that bonuses don't stack, and you're pretty covered.

If bonuses don't stack, there's no point in having more than one, or at least no point to as many as we have. Perhaps it just needs pointing out how many sources there are.
Stats
Race
Class
Training
Feats
Magical buffs
Magic items
and I'm sure I'm forgetting something.

If bonuses don't stack, we could probably eliminate half of those, which I honestly wouldn't be totally opposed to. I'd love to see skill and stat-boost magical items removed. No more Belts of +OMG STR or Cloaks of Invisibility. Get rid of feats that only add bonuses and nothing else. This includes "Weapon focus"-type feats.

Bring us down to Stats, training and situational magic buffs, maybe leave something minor(+1 max) from class/background/theme and race.

 

[pemerton]

the outcome of a scene might hinge on a single check (whereas, in the grand scheme of things, a single missed attack does not often alter the outcome of an entire battle)

Apparently complex non-combat resolutin mechanics have become a thing of the past.

 

[keterys]

If we don't want someone with no bonus to have a chance at DC20, and we don't want someone with a decent bonus to a chance of failure, then probably the problem is in the d20.

I think that particular ship (changing dice) has sailed. Though even (2d10 or 3d6) +5 still makes DC 20 pretty easy.

And that's why I suggested a +10 training bonus, to spread the DCs out enough to make sense in a d20-land. You then set the DCs from 10 to 30, and you're good to go.