Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cadfan" data-source="post: 3811394" data-attributes="member: 40961">Celebrim is right that in 3.x the DCs for group challenges should be set to the lowest players.  If a particular fight requires the players to climb a wall to get to the badguys who are shooting at them from above (or whatever reason you've cobbled together, point is a group challenge involving the climb skill) you have basically two choices.  Make the DC challenging to the best climber, or to the worst climber.  In the first option, the DC is "interesting" to the best climber, and impossible for everyone else.  In the second option, the DC is interesting to the majority of the players, and the player who invested heavily in the climb skill gets to rocket straight up the wall without hindrance- which is its own reward and is "interesting" in its own way.But Mustrum Ridcully is right about opposed checks.  This sort of DM management fails once those become involved.In any case, from a flavor perspective I don't mind the idea of characters getting generally more athletic as they go up in levels.  Lets say that a level 1 wizard has a climb bonus of +0 in 4e (no strength penalty, no ranks).  He can climb a DC 0 challenge,with confidence.  Lets advance him 30 levels.  He now has a climb bonus of +15 at level 30 (no strength penalty, half level in ranks).  This lets him climb a DC 15 challenge,with confidence.  I don't think there's anything wrong with this.  The typical player has been out and about adventuring for 30 levels now, I'm glad he's figured out how to climb a tree.The only problems I can see with the system are1)  sometimes its nice to have a character who is just plain supernaturally good at a skill.  It looks like the highest difference between the skill checks is going to be the difference between ability scores, +5 for trained, and +5 for skill focus.  I like the idea that a level 20 fighter might be able to do some basic animal tracking in a pinch, but that the ranger can be better.  But sometimes I want the ranger to be ridiculously, fantastically better- the archetypal ranger with almost preternatural senses who can track a butterfly across the Serengeti.  That doesn't seem well represented by a difference of 10+wis.2) Multiclassing will be awkward.  I'm interested in how this will be handled.3) If skills are pared down to only adventure related ones, I'm going to miss the possibility of putting 5 ranks in Profession: Lawyer.  Nobody ever used it, but it was nice knowing it was there.</blockquote>

Verification