D&D 5E Some thoughts on skills.

[iserith]

"There's a pit on the floor. What DC do I choose to give the nimble and strong fighter leap it as long as he doesn't roll bad but require the frail and clumsy life cleric to be lucky to make the same jump?"

That's not a consideration the DM has to take into account.

First, there is no ability check to jump in D&D 5e. It's just a matter of movement based on your Strength score. If your Strength is 20, you jump 20 feet if you move at least 10 feet first. If it's 10, you jump 10.

Second, let's be generous and say you're asking them to roll because each of them are trying to pull off some kind of stunt midjump (which is actually in the rules). The DC is the same for both. The "nimble and strong fighter" would inherently have a higher chance of success, presuming they have a higher Strength score than the cleric and/or proficiency in Athletics. So, this is already baked in.

If it bothers you that the "frail and clumsy" cleric can succeed where the "nimble and strong" fighter fails due to the swing of the d20, then you might consider using the Variant: Automatic Success option on DMG page 239.

 

[Krachek]

"There's a pit on the floor. What DC do I choose to give the nimble and strong fighter leap it as long as he doesn't roll bad but require the frail and clumsy life cleric to be lucky to make the same jump?"

is it important to succeed a check?
the floor may collapse under the fighter feet making him fail to jump, and then in the bottom of the pit the fighter may face new challenge.

succeeding a check in DnD is not a tactical challenge for a player. It’s a basic roll with some bonus, there is no pride to have succeeding a check.
the real fun is to handle where the success and fail lead the story.

 

[ph0rk]

in a game where the DM need only choose between 3 numbers (10, 15, or 20) for the entirety of game play.

The DMG lists DCs of 25 and 30 - so perhaps 5e is not that game.

 

[iserith]

The DMG lists DCs of 25 and 30 - so perhaps 5e is not that game.

D&D 5e DMG page 238: "If the only DCs you ever use are 10, 15, and 20, your game will run just fine."

So if for some reason that eludes me the DM is mystified about which DC to use for a given task with an uncertain outcome, they can stick with just those three, ignoring all others, and everything will work out.

 

[tetrasodium]

Oh so Players can narrate locations into existence and call for super jumps now?

lol

I don't know what @Krachek was describing but there are things players can do to make running the session easier for the gm without overstepping their role. For example they can remind bob that going to visit a particular NPC would be a bad idea given $reason or that the whole reason X is a problem is because the bridge Alice would need to cross to go to hypothetical was washed out by the flood caused by the elementals she is trying to avoid dealing with instead of the GM needing to constantly remind one or two players what had repeatedly been made clear.

 

[Minigiant]

That's not a consideration the DM has to take into account.

First, there is no ability check to jump in D&D 5e. It's just a matter of movement based on your Strength score. If your Strength is 20, you jump 20 feet if you move at least 10 feet first. If it's 10, you jump 10.

Second, let's be generous and say you're asking them to roll because each of them are trying to pull off some kind of stunt midjump (which is actually in the rules). The DC is the same for both. The "nimble and strong fighter" would inherently have a higher chance of success, presuming they have a higher Strength score than the cleric and/or proficiency in Athletics. So, this is already baked in.

If it bothers you that the "frail and clumsy" cleric can succeed where the "nimble and strong" fighter fails due to the swing of the d20, then you might consider using the Variant: Automatic Success option on DMG page 239.

The point is the stunt would be Hard for the Cleric but Easy for the Fighter.

Which DC do I choose?
DC 10 for Easy?
DC 15 for Medium?
Or DC 20 for Hard?

The game doesn't even tell you the percentage of success is for each PC. It doesn't tell a starting DM how many of the PCs will fail a DC 15 so don't make failure a major consequence unless your desire is to have to a daunting game.

is it important to succeed a check?
the floor may collapse under the fighter feet making him fail to jump, and then in the bottom of the pit the fighter may face new challenge.

succeeding a check in DnD is not a tactical challenge for a player. It’s a basic roll with some bonus, there is no pride to have succeeding a check.
the real fun is to handle where the success and fail lead the story.

How can you place importance of you don't know the difficulty of the action?

Unless accidentally maiming, killing, or some other major consequence is part of your vibe. Or in contrast your game is very forgiving by design.

 

[iserith]

The point is the stunt would be Hard for the Cleric but Easy for the Fighter.

Which DC do I choose?
DC 10 for Easy?
DC 15 for Medium?
Or DC 20 for Hard?

The game doesn't even tell you the percentage of success is for each PC. It doesn't tell a starting DM how many of the PCs will fail a DC 15 so don't make failure a major consequence unless your desire is to have to a daunting game.

Assuming the characters are attempting the same task with largely the same approach, the DC is the same. Choose whichever DC makes the most sense to you, given the fictional context and what the players propose. The fighter will tend to be more successful than the cleric on average, but not always. You don't have to come up with a DC for the cleric and a DC for the fighter. You don't have to know the percentage chance of success either. If you share the DC with the players prior to the attempt, they can work out themselves if it's too risky or not, perhaps spending resources like guidance, Inspiration, or bardic inspiration to increase their odds of success.

The game does break down the difficulty classes and gives some guidance on what kinds of characters would succeed on what sorts of DCs (DMG, page 238).

 

[Minigiant]

Assuming the characters are attempting the same task with largely the same approach, the DC is the same. Choose whichever DC makes the most sense to you, given the fictional context and what the players propose. The fighter will tend to be more successful than the cleric on average, but not always. You don't have to come up with a DC for the cleric and a DC for the fighter. You don't have to know the percentage chance of success either. If you share the DC with the players prior to the attempt, they can work out themselves if it's too risky or not, perhaps spending resources like guidance, Inspiration, or bardic inspiration to increase their odds of success.

The game does break down the difficulty classes and gives some guidance on what kinds of characters would succeed on what sorts of DCs (DMG, page 238).

I think again you are missing my point.

I'm not saying that theDM chooses a different DC for each PC.

I am saying that the DMG doesn't inform you of what DV means in a arrucate way the DM can understand or use. In it does thinks a confusing way by framing it in the hands of a character with a 10 even through most Players won't have many 10s in 5e and will avoid actions that use a ability score with a 10.

And what world is a 75% failure chance Moderate and 50% Easy? Even under stress, I wouldn't call anything I can fail half the time at EASY.

So you end up with a situation where the DMG becomes Anti-DM because frankly many veteran DMs don't like being told what to do and thus frown upon giving new DMs clear rules in case the advice given is contradictory to how they themselves play.

And thus page 238 ends up not being actually useful for anything but the permission to make stuff up and not take the blame when the mechanics don't match the fantasy like editions before it.

 

[iserith]

I think again you are missing my point.

I'm not saying that theDM chooses a different DC for each PC.

I am saying that the DMG doesn't inform you of what DV means in a arrucate way the DM can understand or use. In it does thinks a confusing way by framing it in the hands of a character with a 10 even through most Players won't have many 10s in 5e and will avoid actions that use a ability score with a 10.

And I'm saying DMs don't have to know a great deal about the underlying math because DCs are pretty constrained in this version of the game, which actually makes it more approachable. Pick 10, 15, or 20 and move on.

And what world is a 75% failure chance Moderate and 50% Easy? Even under stress, I wouldn't call anything I can fail half the time at EASY.

You seem to be undermining your previous criticism about framing the guidance with a character with a 10 ability score. If you are correct in your assertion that "most players won't have many 10s in 5e and will avoid actions that use an ability score with a 10," which is somewhat reasonable, then it actually will be Easy, relatively speaking, since characters will have higher scores than 10 and/or will tend to focus on those related tasks (as you say). So that 50% chance of failure drops. Also, don't forget advantage, plus other bonuses players can apply to further increase the odds of success. Clearly, the DMG is just trying to get DMs a ballpark idea of what the odds are, given certain assumptions, rather than a primer on probability and statistics.

So you end up with a situation where the DMG becomes Anti-DM because frankly many veteran DMs don't like being told what to do and thus frown upon giving new DMs clear rules in case the advice given is contradictory to how they themselves play.

And thus page 238 ends up not being actually useful for anything but the permission to make stuff up and not take the blame when the mechanics don't match the fantasy like editions before it.

I'm not sure how you leap to "the DMG becomes Anti-DM" or how that relates at all to many veteran DMs "don't like being told what to do." I'm a veteran DM, and I do like being told what to do. And what the DMG tells me is that picking 10, 15, and 20 is just fine - so I do that, and it actually works!

It is good to see, however, something of an admission that your thinking on this matter appears to be influenced by previous editions. I still run and play D&D 4e. I don't run and play it the same way as D&D 5e. That would not be a good idea in my view, nor is carrying one's expectations about how one game works into another game. They're not the same thing, so thinking about it the same way is not productive in my experience.

 

[MichaelSomething]

And thus page 238 ends up not being actually useful for anything but the permission to make stuff up and not take the blame when the mechanics don't match the fantasy like editions before it.

And many would rather have that instead of a fantasy they don't like being imposed upon them.