iserith
Magic Wordsmith
From my own experience (with 4 DMs, myself included) this is what happens.. most DCs are in the 10-15 Range, harder ones push towards 20, and we will always describe the level of challenge 1st. eg the wall is dry and there are plenty of cracks that can be used as handholds (DC 10), or the wall is fairly smooth, what handholds there are are quite well spaced (DC 15), or even it is smooth, slick, damp and covered in Lichen (DC 20).
We don't give the exact DC beforehand, just a description. And we often don't rule as a simple yes/no pass or fail, we tend to take into account near misses for example - depending on the type of check required though.
Right, I think that good description is the minimum required and, in many cases, all that is required to convey difficulty. Sharing the DCs is just another way of conveying the same information.
For me, it's a combination of doubt about the DC and a relative paucity of player resources.
From your posts that I have read on these boards, you are probably at the more generous end in awarding inspiration (which is the generic player resource for checks in 5e) and the most "indie"-like in establishing clear stakes and DCs for resolution. When I talk about "drifting" 5e in a 4e-ish (or DW-ish, etc) direction that is the sort of thing I have in mind (both in the abstract, and your posts in particular). I'm not meaning at all to be derisive in calling it "drifting" and hope I'm not taken in that way - it's just that based on the posts I read yours is one fairly distinctive way of playing 5e and I think maybe less common or "mainstream" then the more 2nd ed AD&D approach which I think I would see as the default (to the extent that there is a default).
I don't know [MENTION=59096]thecasualoblivion[/MENTION] outside the context of these boards, but I think an approach to 5e that combined your style with that of [MENTION=5834]Celtavian[/MENTION] might well allay many of the concerns expressed in the OP. (I don't think positing that combination is quite calling for a mixing of oil and water.)
I ask players to "claim" Inspiration rather than award it myself. So if a player plays to his or her character's personality trait, that player can say "I'm claiming Inspiration for X..." where X is how the personality trait relates to what's going on. The player may not claim Inspiration for the personality trait again until he or she has portrayed and claimed Inspiration for the character's ideal, bond, or flaw. This keeps things more varied and interesting. What you'll tend to see as a result is that players claim Inspiration in this scene and spend it in the next, repeat. So every other scene has players rolling with advantage at least one time. This also saves me from having to keep track of a list of 16 traits, ideals, bonds, and flaws. The assumption is also that the player is playing in good faith when claiming they are portraying his or her character's trait, ideal, bond, or flaw.
I get what you mean by "drifting," and I'll agree that my approach is not all that common, though it's catching on in some circles. I'm not sure the AD&D 2e approach as you define it is all that common either. I think lots of people let their experience with other games or other editions of this game color how they play D&D 5e. The most common approach I've been seeing, both in actual play and as reported on the forums is D&D 5e through the lens of D&D 3.Xe or D&D 4e, chiefly in how the players asks to make checks or the like.