Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7345708" data-attributes="member: 82106">I don't think his math is actually super RELEVANT. He is correct, to an extent, in math terms, but I'd first note that this is an OLD article and the updates to the SC system continued long after it was written, so all the DCs changed again (and their rate of change changed too), the +5 for using a skill disappeared, and a few other things. Now, those alone would only move you around on his chart, but the problem is he doesn't seem to grasp how it all fits together.PCs (players really) are intended to have a good number of options at their disposal. This is a lot like combat, where a PC could spend Second Wind and burn an HS, or not, or spend a Daily, or not, or an AP, or not, etc. You have a LOT of choices of resource use in combat. You also have most of the same kinds of choices in an SC, its just that they have to fit appropriately into the fictional positioning. Since an SC can cover ANY sort of activity (outside of a fight presumably) its not as highly specified as to how, when, or where you can do what. This is no worse than in any other system in that respect, most D&D is no more specific IN combat than 4e is out of it, so I don't see it as an ACTUAL issue.In other words, by the RC system you've probably got something in the 70-90% success rate on SCs of your level. In really adverse conditions that might drop, and of course there could be higher than party level SCs too, which clearly get RAPIDLY harder (but then you probably just burn more resources to bring the success rate back in line). Additionally SCs are often less than life-and-death. They may, and should, have significant stakes, but its usually not quite so necessary to have the party so likely to win each one. Honestly the 4e DMG1 seems to assume that SCs will be more 'plot decision points' and not likely to be lethal in and of themselves.I think anyone who's played and talked about 4e much has had this same discussion though with people who are both less than knowledgeable on the subject and uninterested in actually discussing the actual game vs some warped nonsense version they heard about 3rd hand. There's no reason you SHOULD be familiar with it, but you did, IMNSHO opinion seem to misstate it. Anyway, now its all clear <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=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification