Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Should Bounded Accuracy apply to skill checks? Thoughts on an old Alexandrian article
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9505196" data-attributes="member: 71699"><p>100% agree, and on that the following 2024 PHB text is apposite</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">The DM and the rules often call for an ability check when a creature attempts something other than an attack that has a chance of meaningful failure. When the outcome is uncertain and narratively interesting, the dice determine the result.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Local cultures of play can vary significantly. Here, I am focusing on what the rules demand.</p><p></p><p></p><p>To my reading, the 2024 text avoids encouraging hyper-narrow interpretations of skills or calls for checks that are uninteresting better than the 2014 text does. Frex, consequences resolution is shifted from the DMG into the PHB. Some posters are vexed to have skills less tightly defined: I read that same light touch as a conscious choice aimed at encouraging less hyper-narrow application.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I intended my words to be understood as meaning that instead of the contribution from the d20 being +1 to +20, it becomes +10 to +20 (ignoring the distribution, as I did throughout.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Agreed, but my point is to show what a party might well have. I take it you do not disagree that those mechanics are available to player characters and do factually represent the <em>possible </em>(regardless of how common) range? I'm running a short campaign right now to understand the 2024 rules. <em>Guidance </em>features prominently, but we have no bard, ranger or rogue so no one has expertise.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I suspect that you are taking my numbers to be the modifier: they're not, they're the rollable result. Hence the missing "+"... I literally intended (and in fact typed) "-4 to 52".</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">+1 to +20 for the d20 (which becomes +10 to +20 with Reliable Talent, so does not change the top end)</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">+2 to +6 for proficiency</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">+2 to +6 for expertise</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">+1 to +12 for Bardic Inspiration or Psi-Bolstered Knack (I assume only one can apply)</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">+1 to +4 for guidance</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">-4 to +5 for ability score (player characters cannot have 1 or 2, ordinarily)</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p>The lowest number I can roll is +1 -4 = -3. Throwing in the kitchen sink yields up to 53. So the range of rollable result is -3 to 53. The range of modifiers is -4 to +33.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9505196, member: 71699"] 100% agree, and on that the following 2024 PHB text is apposite [INDENT]The DM and the rules often call for an ability check when a creature attempts something other than an attack that has a chance of meaningful failure. When the outcome is uncertain and narratively interesting, the dice determine the result.[/INDENT] Local cultures of play can vary significantly. Here, I am focusing on what the rules demand. To my reading, the 2024 text avoids encouraging hyper-narrow interpretations of skills or calls for checks that are uninteresting better than the 2014 text does. Frex, consequences resolution is shifted from the DMG into the PHB. Some posters are vexed to have skills less tightly defined: I read that same light touch as a conscious choice aimed at encouraging less hyper-narrow application. I intended my words to be understood as meaning that instead of the contribution from the d20 being +1 to +20, it becomes +10 to +20 (ignoring the distribution, as I did throughout.) Agreed, but my point is to show what a party might well have. I take it you do not disagree that those mechanics are available to player characters and do factually represent the [I]possible [/I](regardless of how common) range? I'm running a short campaign right now to understand the 2024 rules. [I]Guidance [/I]features prominently, but we have no bard, ranger or rogue so no one has expertise. I suspect that you are taking my numbers to be the modifier: they're not, they're the rollable result. Hence the missing "+"... I literally intended (and in fact typed) "-4 to 52". [INDENT]+1 to +20 for the d20 (which becomes +10 to +20 with Reliable Talent, so does not change the top end)[/INDENT] [INDENT]+2 to +6 for proficiency[/INDENT] [INDENT]+2 to +6 for expertise[/INDENT] [INDENT]+1 to +12 for Bardic Inspiration or Psi-Bolstered Knack (I assume only one can apply)[/INDENT] [INDENT]+1 to +4 for guidance[/INDENT] [INDENT]-4 to +5 for ability score (player characters cannot have 1 or 2, ordinarily)[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] The lowest number I can roll is +1 -4 = -3. Throwing in the kitchen sink yields up to 53. So the range of rollable result is -3 to 53. The range of modifiers is -4 to +33. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Should Bounded Accuracy apply to skill checks? Thoughts on an old Alexandrian article
Top