Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Swarmkeeper" data-source="post: 9262241" data-attributes="member: 6921763">Yep - the guidance in the DMG on setting DCs is pretty decent.IMO, the adventures probably should not list DCs at all - it goes against the whole premise of Ability Checks.&nbsp; For example, the DC of a locked door should depend on the approach the characters are taking to attempt to bypass said locked door.&nbsp; By giving the door a DC, the adventure has essentially told the DM &quot;do not allow an auto-success on this one regardless of what the players propose as a course of action&quot;.&nbsp; Smashing the door down vs burning the door down vs picking the lock vs disabling the hinges vs something else... should not all be a DC X.&nbsp; To be fair, I believe that sometimes the adventures give two DCs - one for lockpicking, one for smashing down.&nbsp; Still... each approach proposed by the players should be evaluated by the DM on their own merits given the details of the situation.&nbsp; Not to mention, sometimes that very door is the path to continuing the adventure and failure will... er... lock the players out of the adventure - in that vain, it would be nice to see a little sidebar now and then about employing the concept that Failing an Ability Check can be adjudicated as Success with a Setback. I think at least some of these restrictive DMs are channeling their past edition &quot;skill check&quot; experience rather than following the advice in the DMG on 5e Ability Checks.PS - my apologies to the OP, this is a bit of a tangent...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Swarmkeeper, post: 9262241, member: 6921763"] Yep - the guidance in the DMG on setting DCs is pretty decent. IMO, the adventures probably should not list DCs at all - it goes against the whole premise of Ability Checks. For example, the DC of a locked door should depend on the approach the characters are taking to attempt to bypass said locked door. By giving the door a DC, the adventure has essentially told the DM "do not allow an auto-success on this one regardless of what the players propose as a course of action". Smashing the door down vs burning the door down vs picking the lock vs disabling the hinges vs something else... should not all be a DC X. To be fair, I believe that sometimes the adventures give two DCs - one for lockpicking, one for smashing down. Still... each approach proposed by the players should be evaluated by the DM on their own merits given the details of the situation. Not to mention, sometimes that very door is the path to continuing the adventure and failure will... er... lock the players out of the adventure - in that vain, it would be nice to see a little sidebar now and then about employing the concept that Failing an Ability Check can be adjudicated as Success with a Setback. I think at least some of these restrictive DMs are channeling their past edition "skill check" experience rather than following the advice in the DMG on 5e Ability Checks. PS - my apologies to the OP, this is a bit of a tangent... [/QUOTE]

Verification