Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6651939" data-attributes="member: 82106">I can see it both ways. I could easily see, particularly WRT STR, a sort of 'threshold' which says you simply can't break an iron door down with a 12 STR. Now, maybe there's an additional rule that says "well, you can, if you're willing to expend some resource to go into 'superhuman mode'" (IE like the guy that lifted the car off his kid or something, but its not something you do 10% of the time, its something you do once in a lifetime). OTOH if there are things like that which simply cannot be done, then its clear that's the case and the GM needs to build adventures accordingly. I'm not sure exactly what the ideal is, but I'd think the best overall design is one where all this range of possibilities can be expressed in a fairly succinct way. In 5e, by raw, all characters in a party probably have SOME chance at making all but a very few ability checks, even if they differ a lot in levels. You can't set a DC that gets around that, unless its almost impossible for everyone to do the thing (and lets face it, if its even 50% likely that nobody can force the door, then forcing the door cannot possibly be a mandatory obstacle). At that point you might as well just say "yeah, its impossible for the wizard, but he's got knock." A wider DC range system would open up the chance to have the low bonus guy simply unable to do something, and the high bonus guy able to do it easily enough that it can be counted on. Then of course its pretty much mandatory that every obstacle have another way around, or there's that "spent a point to do it" kind of mechanic. I think the wider DC range system is a little simpler in principle. It doesn't need ability score minimum cutoffs or something to avoid the problems described above. Overall it almost seems like maybe there are some abilities/skills that fit better with one model, and others that fit better with the other model. I mean anyone might figure out a puzzle, even if they're 'stupid'. Only a trained person can possibly play a piano concerto, and only a strong enough person can lift a huge weight. Then the question I guess becomes whether its really worth having such a complicated system. Neither 4e nor 5e wanted that, they're both trying to be quick and easy to run at the table. They both largely succeed at that, they each just have slightly different edge cases. I like the wider range system a little better myself.</blockquote>

Verification