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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7160346" data-attributes="member: 996">Which is why it's called Difficulty Rating instead of Challenge Rating?  5e doesn't have quite so precise a jargon as all that.   The concept of 'challenging characters' probably feels (metaphorically) that you are.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  Even if you do only have an issue with the phrasing rather than the actual concept of the character's abilities mattering to the resolution, rather than the player's abilities (as opposed to the player's skill at playing the game, which'll inevitably matter). Which is more important would depend on the system and the style of the GM, of course.  Eliminating either isn't somewhere that D&D has ever gone as a system, nor is it something DMs or players do merely by using resolution methods that take the character into account. I hope so.  Success should also be more plausible when the character is established as being good at the action undertaken.   So it's a coincidence?  OK, coincidences happen. Characterizing 'gaming the DM' is black-and-white 'wrong' is like claiming that 'optimizing' is black-and-white wrong.  It's a facile way to excuse a system's vulnerability to the tactic, but in no way helpful in remedying that vulnerability.  And it defames styles of play and promotes divisiveness.  If you're running 3.x, you should be aware it heavily rewards system mastery, if you're running 5e, you should be aware of your responsibility in using all that Empowerment.</blockquote>

Verification