D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Micah Sweet]

And thus the exhausting, essential conservatism. There's no looking for a path towards realizing any sort of play goal, there's just reflexive defense of "playing the way I've always played and feels normal to me."

What makes that exhausting to you? What, in fact, is that to you and your play at all?

 

[JConstantine]

The mechanics of success or failure is not the issue, it's how it's tied to the fiction of the world the characters inhabit.

I’m not a fan.

Agree with @AlViking above.

The reason I ask is because I find roll under systems feel subjective to PCs, like if in D&D a GM changed the DC based on who was attempting the action. I was curious as to where people found the dividing line on the objectivity of the world.

 

[Enrahim]

The reason I ask is because I find roll under systems feel subjective to PCs, like if in D&D a GM changed the DC based on who was attempting the action. I was curious as to where people found the dividing line on the objectivity of the world.

It wouldn't the GM changing DC to character though? It would rather be as if everything is having one DC. The per character component is the same as the stat/skill bonuses in a D20 based system.

 

[JConstantine]

I don't see what's wrong with the GM choosing.

I'm not sure anyone sees anything wrong with the GM choosing. Simply that rolling is the GM disclaiming decision making because they want to avoid personal bias.

 

[JConstantine]

It wouldn't the GM changing DC to character though? It would rather be as if everything is having one DC. The per character component is the same as the stat/skill bonuses in a D20 based system.

I'd say that is an equally valid way of looking at it, but it comes down to whether one is viewing it from the character, or the task.

For example, task perspective: this specific lock requires Player A to roll X, Player B to roll Y and Player C to roll Z. Changing DCs.
Character perspective: Player A needs to roll X for this specific lock, but also X for this different lock, and X again for a third lock. Singular DC.

 

[The Firebird]

The reason I ask is because I find roll under systems feel subjective to PCs, like if in D&D a GM changed the DC based on who was attempting the action. I was curious as to where people found the dividing line on the objectivity of the world.

You can recast that system as fixed DCs with skill bonuses, though.

E.g., Steven has a STR of 10. Margaret has a STR of 14. They both try to open the door--Steven needs 10 or under, Margaret 14 or under.

Compare: DC = 20. Steven has a +9 bonus and needs an 11 or better. Margaret has a +13 bonus and needs 7 or better. The odds are the same.

So the system has fixed DCs and the players have skill bonuses of STR-1 (or = STR, call the DC 19 for everything).

Roll under accomplishes this cleanly and with less math.

 

[Enrahim]

I'd say that is an equally valid way of looking at it, but it comes down to whether one is viewing it from the character, or the task.

For example, task perspective: this specific lock requires Player A to roll X, Player B to roll Y and Player C to roll Z. Changing DCs.
Character perspective: Player A needs to roll X for this specific lock, but also X for this different lock, and X again for a third lock. Singular DC.

But the lock perspective is the same in D&D. On one lock a player A need to roll X, player B to roll Y and player C to roll Z where X, Y and Z is DC-(stat+skill) for A, B and C respectively?

 

[Faolyn]

How precisely does a thief "making their own luck" result in an unknown cook sleeping soundly?

They got in quietly and cleanly enough to not wake anyone up.

 

[Enrahim]

Going by the cultures of play article, Gygaxian D&D would be "classic", not "trad", so yes?

That blog post was quite empathicaly argued against in this though: Broken RPG Theory: The "Six Cultures of Play"
So I think it might be a poor idea to assume that as a commonly accepted language.

 

[Thomas Shey]

To use this as a springboard, a question for @AlViking @Maxperson and others who care about the independence of the world:
How do you feel about trad/sim systems that use roll-under, like BRP or the Black Hack, where the result is effectively subjective to the character's stat as opposed to an objective external DC?

It would seem an odd objection, since such systems just bake the difficulty into modifiers on that roll.