I just wanted to point out that in D&D5 the impact of a roll with your D20 is way to important for the outcome of your actions and therefore it seems that it doesn't matter what you plan for ... or what you decide to do ... or how you resolve a conflict ... because all your plans can fall apart with 1 roll of a die. The random factor is just too big because you will only have a few points to add to your roll (except for the one or two attributes in which you excell). And this for most of your skills, saving throws and attributes.
I think you're correct (see my previous post about bounded accuracy and the swingy-ness of the d20). The gaming groups I play with also have plenty of experience (generally) in other systems, and also tend to get annoyed with the d20. But D&D seems unlikely to change in this regard, and at least bounded accuracy keeps the game from scaling too far.
If you really need a "fix" for this, probably the easiest would be to try to adapt https://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/bellCurveRolls.htm to 5e. It would be work (especially finding all the places where class/subclass rules would need to be adjusted for different crit probabilities), and you'd probably need a whole new way of adjusting CRs, or a more conservative mindset about high-CR encounters.
We just started a D&D5 campaign with first level characters. I use 'aurora' which is great... BUT ...
This idea of not using the attributes for tests but modifying a D-20 roll with only a few points (depending on the attribute) is in my opinion such a bad idea! This way you make D&D a game of chance instead of a serious RPG in which you can actually make a difference with your attributes. There always is chance-factor in tabletop RPG's ... off course ... but the impact of what you roll with your D20 is way bigger (too big) then the small modifications you get from most of your attributes (except those few in which you specialize). And it doesn't seem to be changing very fast when you evolve too. So I don't understand why somebody thought this was a good idea. What am I missing here?
I agree completely. We had for a while a homebrewed system where all skill checks were made with a d10 instead of a d20. The modifier contributions were adjusted to compensate. Meaning if you had the stats + proficiency/expertise you were much better at the skill than someone with no training in the same skill.
DC 15 with a total modifier of +5 is 55% chance of success. With a total modifier of +0 that's 30%. +5 is lv 5 proficiency and a 14 in the applicable stat. Honestly, proficiency and a decent ability already make you much better than someone without proficiency and only middling ability as is.
So you are always looking at a 25% better chance of succeeding at moderate or higher difficulty. Which this seems good the fact they invested a proficiency and a stat to it to just get 25% better result seems a bit lackluster.
Granted if you use a skill based on your main stat then you have less to worry about as that will increase your odds even more....but failure chance is still there.
55% is basically a coin flip that you will be successful at a moderate challenge that you are supposed to be good at....I can see the issue here.
The answer is the variant rule:
Variant: Automatic Success
Sometimes the randomness of a d20 roll leads to ludicrous results. Let’s say a door requires a successful DC 15 Strength check to be battered down. A fighter with a Strength of 20 might helplessly flail against the door because of bad die rolls. Meanwhile, the rogue with a Strength of 10 rolls a 20 and knocks the door from its hinges.
If such results bother you, consider allowing automatic success on certain checks. Under this optional rule, a character automatically succeeds on any ability check with a DC less than or equal to the relevant ability score minus 5. So in the example above, the fighter would automatically kick in the door.
If you dislike the swingy nature of the d20 I would go with this as you would automatically succeed on moderate tasks with a 20 in the relevant ability.
Granted if you use a skill based on your main stat then you have less to worry about as that will increase your odds even more....but failure chance is still there.
55% is basically a coin flip that you will be successful at a moderate challenge that you are supposed to be good at....I can see the issue here.
The answer is the variant rule:
Variant: Automatic Success
Sometimes the randomness of a d20 roll leads to ludicrous results. Let’s say a door requires a successful DC 15 Strength check to be battered down. A fighter with a Strength of 20 might helplessly flail against the door because of bad die rolls. Meanwhile, the rogue with a Strength of 10 rolls a 20 and knocks the door from its hinges.
If such results bother you, consider allowing automatic success on certain checks. Under this optional rule, a character automatically succeeds on any ability check with a DC less than or equal to the relevant ability score minus 5. So in the example above, the fighter would automatically kick in the door.
If you dislike the swingy nature of the d20 I would go with this as you would automatically succeed on moderate tasks with a 20 in the relevant ability.
The real question is why you'd need a check for this in the first place. In most cases the fact that a closed door may or may not be opened doesn't make things more interesting (in my opinion at least). I could definitely ask for a check in order to pick the lock quietly, or for a check to see how long it takes to break down the door, but a check to see if the door can be broken down at all seems a little dumb.
The DMG has some guidelines for this too, and depending on your playstyle suggests keeping checks to a minimum. That's not something I've seen in a lot of other RPGs.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The dice are to represent randomness and the chance to fail. You could be the worlds best expert at something and it can still make a mistake. You could plan everything out but one mistake or something random you didn't expect can happen and ruin the whole thing. This is much like real life. In D&D it's a fun way to make surprises and twists happen so everyone, even the DM, can be surprised by something. Most D&D enthusiasts find this exciting and it's a core element of what makes D&D so great for us.
But it isn't entirely a game of chance. Your plans and setup should make some DCs become less or not even require a roll at all. What would have been a DC 20 Persuasion check could become a DC 13 if you ply favours, bribes or such as. You can also do things that grant advantage to your checks. In some cases a useful spell or good prep could entirely mitigate any need for checks at all: I mean why try to make athletic checks to climb a difficult 20 ft wall when you can just Misty Step to the top? Why make Survival checks to forage for food if you could buy rations in advance or cast Create Food and Water?
And not everything requires checks. Some things you do or conversations you have may achieve results without any checks being needed. I've gone whole sessions without a single die being rolled and it was incredibly fun. I've had sessions where it's lots of checks and these were also fun. Many encounters were made more tense and enjoyable by rolling a 1 and plans failing. Some bad rolls meant we had to retreat from a big fight, nearly dying, and I enjoyed the roleplay of playing that defeat and what impact it has to one's confidence and pride.
D&D does have chance, but you get to influence that chance and what chance you get enhances the narrative and roleplay aspects. All Roleplay games have this, too. That's literally what makes it a game. Without some mechanism of chance and being able to just say "I succeed" whenever you want isn't a game, it's just telling a story.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Granted if you use a skill based on your main stat then you have less to worry about as that will increase your odds even more....but failure chance is still there.
55% is basically a coin flip that you will be successful at a moderate challenge that you are supposed to be good at....I can see the issue here.
The answer is the variant rule:
Variant: Automatic Success
Sometimes the randomness of a d20 roll leads to ludicrous results. Let’s say a door requires a successful DC 15 Strength check to be battered down. A fighter with a Strength of 20 might helplessly flail against the door because of bad die rolls. Meanwhile, the rogue with a Strength of 10 rolls a 20 and knocks the door from its hinges.
If such results bother you, consider allowing automatic success on certain checks. Under this optional rule, a character automatically succeeds on any ability check with a DC less than or equal to the relevant ability score minus 5. So in the example above, the fighter would automatically kick in the door.
If you dislike the swingy nature of the d20 I would go with this as you would automatically succeed on moderate tasks with a 20 in the relevant ability.
The real question is why you'd need a check for this in the first place. In most cases the fact that a closed door may or may not be opened doesn't make things more interesting (in my opinion at least). I could definitely ask for a check in order to pick the lock quietly, or for a check to see how long it takes to break down the door, but a check to see if the door can be broken down at all seems a little dumb.
The DMG has some guidelines for this too, and depending on your playstyle suggests keeping checks to a minimum. That's not something I've seen in a lot of other RPGs.
Yeah I do not like the example they use but I am sure that example comes up a lot considering expertise with rogue.
You can have a 5'0" rogue with 8 STR who took expertise in ATH who can reliably shove, trip, climb, and break down doors much better than the 16 STR fighter with double the ability score.
The ability score method at least lets you tie it to the underlying ability so that things like expertise are somewhat nullified if they chose to dump the base stat.
Yeah I do not like the example they use but I am sure that example comes up a lot considering expertise with rogue.
You can have a 5'0" rogue with 8 STR who took expertise in ATH who can reliably shove, trip, climb, and break down doors much better than the 16 STR fighter with double the ability score.
The ability score method at least lets you tie it to the underlying ability so that things like expertise are somewhat nullified if they chose to dump the base stat.
It really shouldn't:
Athletics
Your Strength (Athletics) check covers difficult situations you encounter while climbing, jumping, or swimming. Examples include the following activities:
You attempt to climb a sheer or slippery cliff, avoid hazards while scaling a wall, or cling to a surface while something is trying to knock you off.
You try to jump an unusually long distance or pull off a stunt midjump.
You struggle to swim or stay afloat in treacherous currents, storm-tossed waves, or areas of thick seaweed. Or another creature tries to push or pull you underwater or otherwise interfere with your swimming.
Other Strength Checks
The DM might also call for a Strength check when you try to accomplish tasks like the following:
Force open a stuck, locked, or barred door
Break free of bonds
Push through a tunnel that is too small
Hang on to a wagon while being dragged behind it
Tip over a statue
Keep a boulder from rolling
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Yeah I do not like the example they use but I am sure that example comes up a lot considering expertise with rogue.
You can have a 5'0" rogue with 8 STR who took expertise in ATH who can reliably shove, trip, climb, and break down doors much better than the 16 STR fighter with double the ability score.
The ability score method at least lets you tie it to the underlying ability so that things like expertise are somewhat nullified if they chose to dump the base stat.
It really shouldn't:
Athletics
Your Strength (Athletics) check covers difficult situations you encounter while climbing, jumping, or swimming. Examples include the following activities:
You attempt to climb a sheer or slippery cliff, avoid hazards while scaling a wall, or cling to a surface while something is trying to knock you off.
You try to jump an unusually long distance or pull off a stunt midjump.
You struggle to swim or stay afloat in treacherous currents, storm-tossed waves, or areas of thick seaweed. Or another creature tries to push or pull you underwater or otherwise interfere with your swimming.
Other Strength Checks
The DM might also call for a Strength check when you try to accomplish tasks like the following:
Force open a stuck, locked, or barred door
Break free of bonds
Push through a tunnel that is too small
Hang on to a wagon while being dragged behind it
Tip over a statue
Keep a boulder from rolling
Doesn't help when they use it in the example! Yeah I agree though I rarely see straight ability checks ever. Maybe its because players like to lean towards a skill they are good at.
Also a fair amount of the books use ATH for stuff like doors....which doesn't help.
From Dragon Heist for example:
"Breaking down the barred door requires a successful DC 18 Strength (Athletics) check"
First of all ... a lot of the reactions here aren't really to the (my) point. I never disputed the fact that RPG's must have a random factor, nor that an RPG should be about roleplaying, nor that the DM's effort is indeed imperative for a nice evening of roleplaying ...
I just wanted to point out that in D&D5 the impact of a roll with your D20 is way to important for the outcome of your actions and therefore it seems that it doesn't matter what you plan for ... or what you decide to do ... or how you resolve a conflict ... because all your plans can fall apart with 1 roll of a die. The random factor is just too big because you will only have a few points to add to your roll (except for the one or two attributes in which you excell). And this for most of your skills, saving throws and attributes.
D&D5 isn't my first game. I am 49 years old and played since childhood games like AD&D, Shadowrun, Toon, Slaine, GURPS, Star Wars (D6-system), Vampire, the Dark Eye ... and all of them (seems to me) have far better game mechanics then D&D5. I even prefer AD&D where you at least you can make a roll against the attribute itself, which I prefer. I just don't think that this change in game mecanics is an improvement.
A few things:
All your plans shouldn't fall apart with one roll. That is a failure on the DM's part. That's not how combat works, and it shouldn't be how non-combat works either. You should have multiple failure states or ways to recover.
Dice provide tension. If you're rolling against an attribute (I'm assuming you mean if you have an 18, you'd roll a d20 and anything lower than a 19 would be a success), at high levels you have very little chance of failure, which makes rolling at all kind of silly. And then the game loses all tension as you just game every challenge to roll against your auto-win attributes.
Your attributes are internal. Rolling against them doesn't reflect the varying difficulties of challenges in front of you. If you face something that is supposed to be very difficult, the DM needs to modify it anyway.
There are many, many ways in 5e to hedge your bets when you really want to succeed at something. Advantage, spell bonuses like Bless, magic item bonuses, class features like Expertise and Reliable Talent can all be combined to minimize your chance of failure.
To be frank, 5e is by far the most popular edition of the game to date. It makes sense for fans of old editions to want things to stay the same, but 5e was designed to appeal to the broadest demographic possible and it has enjoyed massive success. People actually watch others play D&D. Like, for hours and hours. Its a system that is designed to provide drama, tension, and resolution through a simple mechanic that anyone can learn in a few minutes, and it does that very well.
I think you're correct (see my previous post about bounded accuracy and the swingy-ness of the d20). The gaming groups I play with also have plenty of experience (generally) in other systems, and also tend to get annoyed with the d20. But D&D seems unlikely to change in this regard, and at least bounded accuracy keeps the game from scaling too far.
If you really need a "fix" for this, probably the easiest would be to try to adapt https://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/bellCurveRolls.htm to 5e. It would be work (especially finding all the places where class/subclass rules would need to be adjusted for different crit probabilities), and you'd probably need a whole new way of adjusting CRs, or a more conservative mindset about high-CR encounters.
So you are always looking at a 25% better chance of succeeding at moderate or higher difficulty. Which this seems good the fact they invested a proficiency and a stat to it to just get 25% better result seems a bit lackluster.
Granted if you use a skill based on your main stat then you have less to worry about as that will increase your odds even more....but failure chance is still there.
55% is basically a coin flip that you will be successful at a moderate challenge that you are supposed to be good at....I can see the issue here.
The answer is the variant rule:
Variant: Automatic Success
Sometimes the randomness of a d20 roll leads to ludicrous results. Let’s say a door requires a successful DC 15 Strength check to be battered down. A fighter with a Strength of 20 might helplessly flail against the door because of bad die rolls. Meanwhile, the rogue with a Strength of 10 rolls a 20 and knocks the door from its hinges.
If such results bother you, consider allowing automatic success on certain checks. Under this optional rule, a character automatically succeeds on any ability check with a DC less than or equal to the relevant ability score minus 5. So in the example above, the fighter would automatically kick in the door.
If you dislike the swingy nature of the d20 I would go with this as you would automatically succeed on moderate tasks with a 20 in the relevant ability.
The real question is why you'd need a check for this in the first place. In most cases the fact that a closed door may or may not be opened doesn't make things more interesting (in my opinion at least). I could definitely ask for a check in order to pick the lock quietly, or for a check to see how long it takes to break down the door, but a check to see if the door can be broken down at all seems a little dumb.
The DMG has some guidelines for this too, and depending on your playstyle suggests keeping checks to a minimum. That's not something I've seen in a lot of other RPGs.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The dice are to represent randomness and the chance to fail. You could be the worlds best expert at something and it can still make a mistake. You could plan everything out but one mistake or something random you didn't expect can happen and ruin the whole thing. This is much like real life. In D&D it's a fun way to make surprises and twists happen so everyone, even the DM, can be surprised by something. Most D&D enthusiasts find this exciting and it's a core element of what makes D&D so great for us.
But it isn't entirely a game of chance. Your plans and setup should make some DCs become less or not even require a roll at all. What would have been a DC 20 Persuasion check could become a DC 13 if you ply favours, bribes or such as. You can also do things that grant advantage to your checks. In some cases a useful spell or good prep could entirely mitigate any need for checks at all: I mean why try to make athletic checks to climb a difficult 20 ft wall when you can just Misty Step to the top? Why make Survival checks to forage for food if you could buy rations in advance or cast Create Food and Water?
And not everything requires checks. Some things you do or conversations you have may achieve results without any checks being needed. I've gone whole sessions without a single die being rolled and it was incredibly fun. I've had sessions where it's lots of checks and these were also fun. Many encounters were made more tense and enjoyable by rolling a 1 and plans failing. Some bad rolls meant we had to retreat from a big fight, nearly dying, and I enjoyed the roleplay of playing that defeat and what impact it has to one's confidence and pride.
D&D does have chance, but you get to influence that chance and what chance you get enhances the narrative and roleplay aspects. All Roleplay games have this, too. That's literally what makes it a game. Without some mechanism of chance and being able to just say "I succeed" whenever you want isn't a game, it's just telling a story.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Yeah I do not like the example they use but I am sure that example comes up a lot considering expertise with rogue.
You can have a 5'0" rogue with 8 STR who took expertise in ATH who can reliably shove, trip, climb, and break down doors much better than the 16 STR fighter with double the ability score.
The ability score method at least lets you tie it to the underlying ability so that things like expertise are somewhat nullified if they chose to dump the base stat.
It really shouldn't:
Athletics
Your Strength (Athletics) check covers difficult situations you encounter while climbing, jumping, or swimming. Examples include the following activities:
Other Strength Checks
The DM might also call for a Strength check when you try to accomplish tasks like the following:
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Doesn't help when they use it in the example! Yeah I agree though I rarely see straight ability checks ever. Maybe its because players like to lean towards a skill they are good at.
Also a fair amount of the books use ATH for stuff like doors....which doesn't help.
From Dragon Heist for example:
"Breaking down the barred door requires a successful DC 18 Strength (Athletics) check"
A few things:
To be frank, 5e is by far the most popular edition of the game to date. It makes sense for fans of old editions to want things to stay the same, but 5e was designed to appeal to the broadest demographic possible and it has enjoyed massive success. People actually watch others play D&D. Like, for hours and hours. Its a system that is designed to provide drama, tension, and resolution through a simple mechanic that anyone can learn in a few minutes, and it does that very well.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm