D&D 5E What rule(s) is 5e missing?

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
With a slightly different approach, achieving the result you want, in that very same table, is described as an easy DC 10 check.

The creature offers no help but does no harm.




And not every table wants challenges that are always trivial. Nailing that DC 20 check at level 2 might be considered an epic moment. So?



Sure, a DM should present challenges that are appropriate for the in-world location and not for the party level. I don’t see anything in the Social Interaction tables that precludes any character of any level from attempting to parlay.

A good DM should balance the approach of the PCs in the scene against whether a roll is appropriate or whether to grant auto-success or auto-failure. I’ve seen all three in play.

ETA: while possibly unlikely, a DC 20 check is not beyond the reach of low level characters who have at least a 10 Charisma.
Look this all started because someone made a comment to the effect of "well the social rules say you can do this with a DC 20".

I am well aware of and have noted that those same rules give you opportunities to lower the DC.

But the presented scenario was that your character was looking a DC 20 in the face to do something that doesn't seem unreasonable to me, and I am simply reiterating, I think that the DC itself is unreasonable for characters.

And since there are very vocal DM's who refuse to even consider the use of Guidance during negotiations on these forums, I don't tend to assume it's available to skew the math more favorably.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
You're assuming this would result in a roll at all. I don't think that is necessarily the case. Obviously this is a hypothetical without a lot of context, but I imagine it working out in one of two ways:

a) The minions are fanatically loyal, in which case there is no roll needed because there is no chance of success.
or
2) The GM decides the minions do in fact not want to die and don't particularly like their boss, so they let the PCs pass. They may or may not jump them after, depending on how beat up the PCs look after the boss fight, though.

I don't think I would leave such a thing up to chance, instead of looking at the situation and the NPCs involved and making a GM call. But then, I HATE the "persuasion as mind control" mentality that a lot of people seem to have.
I didn't assume it! Hriston said the following:

"Social Interaction rules are in the DMG, starting on p 244. They suggest a DC 20 Charisma check to get hostile creatures to cooperate as long as they aren't taking a risk or sacrificing anything by doing so."

And my response was "wow, a DC 20, that's totally worth attempting."
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
And not every table wants challenges that are always trivial. Nailing that DC 20 check at level 2 might be considered an epic moment. So?
This is why my game has degrees of success and the ability to either spend an atribute point (your primary limited resource that powers almost every special ability) or accept a complication in order to Push the result one step up the ladder.
 

It depends on the magic item. At level 10, I had a character with a Ise Rune from Storm King's Thunder that gave me resistance to cold and let me use Sleet Storm on a short rest, which was pretty sweet and stayed grafted to my character sheet forever. A few levels later I had a Broom of Flying and a Robe of Eyes and those really gave the DM headaches, lol.
I suppose, but I can't imagine a broom of flying or robe of eyes at 10th level really giving me too much complication. I'm sure the context warranted it and what have you, but the Broom of Flying I especially don't think is all that nuts.
 

Look this all started because someone made a comment to the effect of "well the social rules say you can do this with a DC 20".

I am well aware of and have noted that those same rules give you opportunities to lower the DC.

But the presented scenario was that your character was looking a DC 20 in the face to do something that doesn't seem unreasonable to me, and I am simply reiterating, I think that the DC itself is unreasonable for characters.

And since there are very vocal DM's who refuse to even consider the use of Guidance during negotiations on these forums, I don't tend to assume it's available to skew the math more favorably.
I'm just not sure I follow. You are threatening people with violence and death if they don't give you their stuff, and they don't know you. They don't know if you'll kill them after you take the stuff or not. They don't know if this is part of a trap, a bigger ploy, if you have allies coming up, or anything. So yes, its a DC 20 to convince someone that is hostile to you to help you. And if you do something, like spare their life and then ask, or help them first, then you lower the DC down to 15 or 10.

If you think you can walk up to me with a gun and I also have a gun and we're both pointing at each other and you tell me "Give me your phone and I'll let you go," it is going to be really hard for me to believe you. Now replace gun with sword, spellcasting focus, or even just an open hand in a D&D universe, and suddenly people are a lot less likely to participate in negotiations with a hostile enemy.
 

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
I didn't think it was either, but the DM seemed irritated that I could be wherever I wanted to be on the battlefield, and could easily find places to avoid being beat up by his monsters, lol.

The Robe was a different story, since I was already great at Perception, but the most useful (and frustrating to him) thing was my ability to see invisible creatures.

This was an AL game, and one encounter had us be ambushed by sneaky Duergar. Just as the DM started rolling attacks I asked him "uh, sorry Mike, I hate to interrupt, but how did they get close enough to attack us in melee?".

"Oh they have invisibility."

hands him my Robe of Eyes notecard

Mike visibly winces "Ok, uh, let's go back."

And before anyone says "well how would he know you have it in an AL game", lol, I got it while he was running SKT. : )
 

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
I'm just not sure I follow. You are threatening people with violence and death if they don't give you their stuff, and they don't know you. They don't know if you'll kill them after you take the stuff or not. They don't know if this is part of a trap, a bigger ploy, if you have allies coming up, or anything. So yes, its a DC 20 to convince someone that is hostile to you to help you. And if you do something, like spare their life and then ask, or help them first, then you lower the DC down to 15 or 10.

If you think you can walk up to me with a gun and I also have a gun and we're both pointing at each other and you tell me "Give me your phone and I'll let you go," it is going to be really hard for me to believe you. Now replace gun with sword, spellcasting focus, or even just an open hand in a D&D universe, and suddenly people are a lot less likely to participate in negotiations with a hostile enemy.
I wasn't even going that far, my example was "you got guns, I got guns, this could get messy, why don't you just pretend we were never here?"

Also my examples are using Persuasion. I've learned that Intimidation never works in D&D, lol.
 

I wasn't even going that far, my example was "you got guns, I got guns, this could get messy, why don't you just pretend we were never here?"

Also my examples are using Persuasion. I've learned that Intimidation never works in D&D, lol.
Its just, how could they know you're telling the truth? That you won't double back on them and kill them in their sleep? That you aren't part of a bigger force and they're going into an ambush? There's so many logic possibilities when you meet someone dangerous on the road or in the wilds that if someone is already hostile towards you, its unlikely you can defuse the situation without a good amount of difficulty.

Also, this is for hostile DCs. If you show up and they aren't hostile but just normal and wary, the DC goes down, but even then, I think a hostile DC should be 25 and the wary should be 20. D&D worlds are dangerous!
 

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
And if that is how you see social interaction in D&D, that's fine as long as you and your players agree.

I, however, don't like seeing very high DC's in a game with bounded accuracy applying to skill checks, for one, and for two, I like games where social interaction is possible without having to convince the DM that your arguments are exceptionally valid.

Because if players routinely encounter large chances of failure at attempting a thing, that teaches them not to do that thing.

I made the comment about Intimidation. People don't like to be intimidated. And will generally resent you for doing so. So not only are most NPC's going to be resistant to that line of social interaction, other versions of the game have gone so far as to say that after the encounter, they will be hostile towards you afterwards (which is simply counterproductive).

In fact, during a 4e adventure, I was once in a skill challenge to convince a powerful NPC not to screw over the party due to an incident we were enmired, through no fault of our own.

One of the options presented was Intimidation. A player roll a natural 20, but we didn't get a success or a bonus on other checks. When I asked about this, the adventure itself states the the NPC is immune to Intimidation.

As a result, I have learned to always use diplomacy and Persuasion. Every. Single. Time.

This is how players learn to play the game. If it can't be done, it won't be done. I've often listened to DM's wax lyrical about "why don't players try interesting things in combat? why is there no swinging on chandeliers or using the environment creatively?".

Because typically, you don't know what the impact of those kinds of tactics will be. You don't know what DC the DM will assign, or if the result is worth it.

You know what players do know? What their attack bonus is and what happens when they hit. And it doesn't take a genius to figure out what the AC of the target is.

And DM's don't get crazy ideas if the Cleric casts Bless to make it easier to hit high AC opponents- but using Guidance to affect checks all the time outside of combat, let alone during negotiations? They totally do, and there are threads on this forum that prove it.

You don't agree with my assessment of the game's difficulty, that's fine. But I want to point out how this worked in 2e, to give you an example.

If you have a Non-Weapon Proficiency in 2e, it has a check. It might be Intelligence -1. If your Int is 14, you succeed on any roll of 13 or less (ie, a 65% chance of success).

In 5e, a 1st level character would have a +5 bonus to an equivalent skill. To have a 65% chance of success, the DC would need to be 12.

Can you get a DC down to 12 using the social interaction rules? Well if the NPC is friendly, or if they are indifferent and you can present the DM a good argument. Even better if the DM rules someone else's argument/actions are worth a Help action.

Or maybe you have a Bardic Inspiration die, or the DM actually allows Guidance.

But that's a lot of if's and maybes to get a reasonable DC for a check.

Now, it's been said that there are times a check isn't required- that's great. But a scenario was presented:

You can do this if you roll a DC 20.

I objected that said DC 20 was a reasonable DC for player characters.

All this other "well maybe this or possibly that or no roll should be required" is irrelevant to my objection. The DC was set, I said what I thought about being asked to roll at that DC.

I'll reiterate, just so we're clear- if you're fine with the skill system the way it is, great.

I'm not, I gave reasons why. You can agree or disagree with my notions. I'm not really a maths guy, but I know there's a difference between having to roll a 15 at 1st level and a 9 at 20th.

And you shouldn't require outside factors or a rules kludge like Expertise to make those odds better. Either unbind skills or lower DC's. Or don't, but don't be surprised if the reaction is that some players stick to what they know will work.
 

JiffyPopTart

Bree-Yark
and that same DC 20 with a party with no one prof (let alone expertise and in a situation that the DM rules can't benefit from help or guidance) you could have the best roll be +4 vs DC 20...
So an individual not particularly skilled at diplomacy and on their own has a difficult time succeeding on a hard challenge. I'm not understanding the disconnect.

You still have failing forward in the toolbox to move past the situation.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top