Unified DC's for faster resolution

[Sadrik]

I think he means that all rolls will be on the same scale. In 3e, a DC 25 is fairly easy for a skill roll, slightly harder for an attack roll, and very difficult for a saving throw. From the look of things, in 4e it'll be the same difficulty for all types of rolls.

I am mostly thinking of skill rolls that this would be useful for. Because the two other types of d20 rolls are either opposed or vs a defense (AC, fort, ref, will).

The rolls that are not opposed or vs. defense simplify make them as table lookup friendly as possible. CRPG's can get away with this kind of game design but table-top's advantage is that the DM and players can decide things on the fly, if they're strapped to a table for every skill with a different look up for each skill and how you determine their DC it is a little different than 1st and 2nd edition's ability score modifiers- all different.

 

[Oldtimer]

Wouldn't it be nice if we had a unified DC system in 4e. One where we wouldn't have to check the book for a DC for that specific skill's DC.
Something like:
Routine 10
Easy 15
Hard 20
Difficult 25
Impossible 30
Epic 40

No book lookup just assign a DC as the DM and wala!

So, three task resolutions: a DC based on above chart, an opposed roll or a roll vs a defense.

Oh that would be so nice.

You mean something like this?

 

[Najo]

I think he means that all rolls will be on the same scale. In 3e, a DC 25 is fairly easy for a skill roll, slightly harder for an attack roll, and very difficult for a saving throw. From the look of things, in 4e it'll be the same difficulty for all types of rolls.

In 4e, it looks like all numbers will be calculated by: 1 per 2 levels + attribute bonus + class bonus (and maybe + magic item bonus, though that's not certain).

I was always surprised how few people caught this about 3.0/3.5. It has always been my biggest pet peeve, because essentially the DM can never be "taught to fish" so to speak. It makes every rule feel like it has to looked up and makes on the fly rules hard to keep consistant if your a new DM.

I would love to see a baseline established for testing and setting difficulty numbers. I hope your right about 4e.

 

[Najo]

You mean something like this?

Now link the one for ability tests, combat, saving throws and character level tests. Because they all use different DCs for easy, medium, hard etc. He wants an unified testing system for all of the game's subsystems, instead of the mess 3.5 has.

EDIT: Ok, I thought that was what he was referring too. Well, at least he should be lol. anyrate, I missed the one post above that stated he wants skills to work that way.

 

[Storminator]

You mean something like this?

Nice.

Except Appraise has a DC 12 check.
Balance has 5 different modifiers that stack.
Knowledge has "really easy questions" = DC 10. Examples abound of things with varying levels of difficult given the same DC, or things with the same level of difficulty given different DCs.
Spellcraft has a DC of 13 and one of 19.

In short, they came up with a great general rule, and then basically ignored it.

PS

 

[Steely Dan]

In Saga there are set DCs for force powers effects, maybe we'll see something similar for powers/spells in 4th Ed.

 

[EvilDwarf]

Also, there's a mechanic (that's evident in modules) whereby DCs scale by CR. The DC for opening a lock, finding and disabling a trap, and finding a secret door is higher in an upper level adventure than in a lower level adventure.

Which always bugged me, and made me wonder about the need for the DC vs. Skill Point "arms race."

If DCs scale by CR, and Skill Levels scale with character level, why not just call it a wash and have a static set of DCs vs. a static set of Skill Bonuses? Not to eliminate the ability to increase skills bonuses altogether, but a great deal of book keeping could be eliminated by not having to scale skill bonus vs. scaling DC.

 

[Stalker0]

Since skills will be more uniform and scale smoother in 4e than in 3.5, it would be easier to set standard dcs.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I agree that it would be a good thing to have a unified set of DCs.. that way you can tell a player "That cliff looks like a difficult climb" which gives the player enough metagame knowledge to judge if the character is willing to risk it.

Of course, some skills would have to be adjusted somewhat. As mentioned above, Know: uses 10 as the base of 'easy', so perhaps have a 10 point penalty to Know checks in order to match the unified DCs.

Presuming we keep the 'DMs freind' of +/- 2 on the DCs, you can still have a task whose DC doesn't exactly match up to the multiple of 5s.

I use a HR for Climb and Swim where the DC is subtracted from the skill result to determine the distance moved. Works pretty good so far {only 2 years or so of use }

 

[Sadrik]

Nice.

Except Appraise has a DC 12 check.
Balance has 5 different modifiers that stack.
Knowledge has "really easy questions" = DC 10. Examples abound of things with varying levels of difficult given the same DC, or things with the same level of difficulty given different DCs.
Spellcraft has a DC of 13 and one of 19.

In short, they came up with a great general rule, and then basically ignored it.

PS

Precisely my point!

Good job actually bothering to actually table lookup some of that mess!


Oh and to scaling DC's depending on the level. (traps get harder the higher level the party is) That makes no logical sense but it has to in D&D because we have scaling skill check modifiers. In a perfect world (system) you can be a master blacksmith at 1st level and not have to wait until 20th level. It seems that they mitigated that problem a little bit by only providing 1/2 the level as a bonus...