Insight
Adventurer
Gloomblade will definitely do Endurance.
Siege Of Bordrin's Watch OOC
- Thread starter DEFCON 1
- Start date
Gloomblade will definitely do Endurance.
renau1g
First Post
With the new skill challenge:
Skill Check Three: Diplomacy, Perception, Stealth
Tregar isn't trained in any of them, although he has a +5 to Perception, which is better than Henry's +2.
I suggest Henry aid another (maybe on Tregar's Perception roll)? Dorn make the Diplomacy and the other three go for either Stealth or Perception?
Thoughts?
Skill Check Three: Diplomacy, Perception, Stealth
Tregar isn't trained in any of them, although he has a +5 to Perception, which is better than Henry's +2.
I suggest Henry aid another (maybe on Tregar's Perception roll)? Dorn make the Diplomacy and the other three go for either Stealth or Perception?
Thoughts?
That sounds good. Gala is trained in perception, Dorn in Diplomacy, and two others have Stealth training. Henry aiding tregar seems a reasonable investment.
KS
KS
EvolutionKB
First Post
Yep, I'll take Stealth.
stonegod
Spawn of Khyber/LEB Judge
Another one w/ no Dorn primaries. 
I'm thinking Dorn can aid on history for this (at +4)... but I don't think anyone is actually trained in history. So maybe our boy should lead on it and get at least one assist from someone (how many aids can we get, DEFCON?). We have natural candidates for Nature and Perception (Gala and Wendigo respectively).
I'm thinking Dorn can aid on history for this (at +4)... but I don't think anyone is actually trained in history. So maybe our boy should lead on it and get at least one assist from someone (how many aids can we get, DEFCON?). We have natural candidates for Nature and Perception (Gala and Wendigo respectively).
EvolutionKB
First Post
Well I can roll a perception, and Gala do a nature. Maybe Tregar and Henry can both aid Dorn's history?
Edit: Ninja'd!
Edit: Ninja'd!
Last edited:
Nature it is. Let's hope the history is only difficulty 5! 
Only 1 can Aid, the other five have to make the rolls. And yes, I know this particular one has the least number of characters who are trained in one of the three stats. It was designed this way. They can't all be cakewalks. 
And on that note, I really have to say... although I realize why WotC did the errata for the DC check table on page 42 of the DMG... I think they went too far in the opposite direction. The original chart had for 1st to 3rd level the DCs of 10 for Easy, 15 for Moderate, 20 for Hard, and you were supposed to add 5 to those when making skill checks. The theory being... a person trained in a skill that is based off of one of their main attributes would have usually a +8 to +12 skill modifier (average of +10). Thus to make the Easy checks you'd need a 5+, Mods were 10+ and Hards were 15+. This is pretty much how you'd want it.
However, once the books got released and people started trying to make these checks with non-trained skills whose attributes did not line up... they found that they were needing to make like 10+, 15+, 20+ on the rolls... a statistical improbability when you needed to make 6 or 8 successes before 3 failures.
Thus, they printed the errata that lowered the DCs to Easy 5, Mod 10, Hard 15, and (which is the biggest problem) they removed the +5 to these numbers you add for when its skill checks rather than ability checks! For a 1st to 3rd character to make skill checks, they now only needed a 5, 10 or 15. Now this is fine for those times when the characters doesn't have them trained and/or their ability score is low, because even Hard skill checks are still possible to make... but for the trained skills on high attributes, it's virtually impossible to fail rolls, even on theoretically Hard skill checks. They basically lowered all DCs by 10 points and made things way too easy.
Despite the note in the errata to ignore the subscript note on the DC chart, I think I am going to start adding in the +5 for skill checks in my own games. DCs of 10, 15 & 20 are good solid numbers that are workable/possible for both ends of the spectrum... the non-trained/unmatched attribute skills, and the trained/matched attribute skills (i.e +0 and +10).
Anyone else worked with these charts before? How did you feel about them both pre and post-errata?
And on that note, I really have to say... although I realize why WotC did the errata for the DC check table on page 42 of the DMG... I think they went too far in the opposite direction. The original chart had for 1st to 3rd level the DCs of 10 for Easy, 15 for Moderate, 20 for Hard, and you were supposed to add 5 to those when making skill checks. The theory being... a person trained in a skill that is based off of one of their main attributes would have usually a +8 to +12 skill modifier (average of +10). Thus to make the Easy checks you'd need a 5+, Mods were 10+ and Hards were 15+. This is pretty much how you'd want it.
However, once the books got released and people started trying to make these checks with non-trained skills whose attributes did not line up... they found that they were needing to make like 10+, 15+, 20+ on the rolls... a statistical improbability when you needed to make 6 or 8 successes before 3 failures.
Thus, they printed the errata that lowered the DCs to Easy 5, Mod 10, Hard 15, and (which is the biggest problem) they removed the +5 to these numbers you add for when its skill checks rather than ability checks! For a 1st to 3rd character to make skill checks, they now only needed a 5, 10 or 15. Now this is fine for those times when the characters doesn't have them trained and/or their ability score is low, because even Hard skill checks are still possible to make... but for the trained skills on high attributes, it's virtually impossible to fail rolls, even on theoretically Hard skill checks. They basically lowered all DCs by 10 points and made things way too easy.
Despite the note in the errata to ignore the subscript note on the DC chart, I think I am going to start adding in the +5 for skill checks in my own games. DCs of 10, 15 & 20 are good solid numbers that are workable/possible for both ends of the spectrum... the non-trained/unmatched attribute skills, and the trained/matched attribute skills (i.e +0 and +10).
Anyone else worked with these charts before? How did you feel about them both pre and post-errata?
stonegod
Spawn of Khyber/LEB Judge
The DCs are too low. Folks at WotC seem to agree w/ this (as seen on the podcasts and articles), though officially it seems they still use that base. The guidlines in the latest Skill Challenges pod cast says something like: Figure out who would need to succeed half the time on this check at that level and make the hard DC that.
I'm still experimenting w/ DCs in my game.
Similar Threads
