Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RangerWickett" data-source="post: 6164921" data-attributes="member: 63">I still think they should go way way back and use this skill system: <a href="https://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20110816" target="_blank">https://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20110816</a>It gets rid of the problem with the skill DC system from the past 2 editions, wherein the wide range on a d20 roll fails to match with the actual difference in difficulty. Like, if DC 20 is hard, and DC 10 is easy, even idiots should be able to succeed at easy most of the time, and experts should succeed at hard most of the time, but a 10-point difference in skill modifiers leads to weird number bloat.The system Mearls proposed back in 2011 just gives you ranks of skills from 0 to 6. If something's difficulty is at or below your rank, you just auto-succeed. If something's 1 rank higher, you'd make an ability check (DC 10) to pull it off. You don't have to worry about weird stuff like a character sometimes being able to jump a 20-ft. gap and sometimes only clearing 5 ft., or a diplomat farting and pissing someone off with a nat 1, or elite scouts failing to spot something while the half-blind wizard rolls a nat 20 and sees it. You've got a narrower range where there's actual uncertainty of your success. And if you really need to succeed but it's too challenging, you're encouraged to find a narrative solution rather than just throwing dice at the problem.</blockquote>

Verification