Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9164384" data-attributes="member: 29398">True; they'd need to be re-set by the DM if the game was to be mostly set in a non-temperate environment.  I kinda default to mid-latitude temperate, where mounts are common and boating/swimming can be learned on lakes and rivers as well as on the sea.And even a dead-broke peasant might well have had experience riding mounts on the farm.  That's what the random roll is for.An attitude I'll do everything in my power to attempt to change. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Why?  In this specific case, because not ramdonizing it opens the door for players to simply declare their characters are expert [insert required-at-the-moment-skill here] whenever they like; and while some pro-player-entitlement types might like that, for me it's just an exploit that shouldn't be there, and that can be easily closed off by making it a random thing.You're lucky with your players then. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  I come from a more competitive set-up, where it's expected players will push the envelope and where it's the DM's (or the game's) job to push back.When you're trying to use the stat as a peg point, with a higher stat being better, roll-under skips the step of having to do any math to the die roll to invert the results, which you'd have to do on a roll-high system.That's a whole different conversation; and oddly enough I think the one place it shouldn't apply is combat.  I absolutely don't want any sort of damage-on-a-miss creeping into this; people hit far too often in 5e combat as it is already, and we already have criticals (and IMO should have fumbles) to deal with the extremes.But for many other types of check, very much yes; and this should be up-front in the advice to DMs as to how to narrate check results.  If you're trying to cross a rickety wobbly bridge over a canyon at DC 12, rolling (on a roll-high system) a 20 means you dance across and make it look easy, rolling a 15 means you got across without incident, rolling a 12 means you barely got across or got across with a problem e.g. maybe you broke some bits and made it harder for the next guy to cross.  Rolling anything 11 or lower means you didn't make it (fail is fail, period; none of this fail-forward crap); with how bad the roll was determining the narration of the consequences.  On an 11 you might have put a leg through but are otherwise safe - if stuck - where you are; while on a 1 it's down the canyon you go, nice knowin' ya. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification