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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Veteran Sergeant" data-source="post: 7446986" data-attributes="member: 6958498">I guess it just requires the believe that PCs are supposed to Auto Succeed at things at some point and that the possibility of failure is something to be avoided.  Seems like that removes any sense of jeopardy and renders the idea of making the check irrelevant in the first place, but hey. There may be some disconnect with how competent a Level 1 Character is supposed to be. Perhaps you just need to temper your perception of what an Easy task is.  None of those things you described as Easy should even require a skill check. Those things are routine.  Why are characters in your game making checks on routine actions?  The idea of the skill check is, by definition, something where there is a chance of failure. Rolling a Skill Check to drive to the store or changing a diaper would be silly, even at DC 5, since only the clumsiest character could be expected to fail even 5% of the time. That's the concession of D&D.  When the variance is only 5%, you just don't bother to roll for things with a failure rate of less than 5%.  On the other hand, checks in D&D should be challenging, otherwise why are you even bothering to roll?  Low level characters should struggle and fail from time to time, otherwise what's the point of leveling and getting better?  Heck, it's the whole reason for the Help action.  If my Str 8 Wizard needs to climb a wall or cross a chasm, somebody more competent than him should probably be helping tie the ropes and hammer the pitons. It shouldn't be just one character searching a room, etc. There's a Party for a reason.  Occasional failure isn't "Punishing" it's just adversity. /shrug</blockquote>

Verification