"Why do you need to complicate things and change a DC for something that has become trivial."
Why do you need to complicate things and set a DC for something so trivial, or something they may never even do?
If they are not even approaching the wall, either the DC is in the module and it's just there, or you have not foreseen it and you will just never set a DC because the task of "getting over the wall' is never undertaken.
At the end of the day, these two approaches are mechanically identical until you consider advantage/disadvantage, which can be applied either way. There is no difference between deciding climbing a wall is DC 20, then giving them a +15 to their roll because they brought a ladder, and waiting to see how they plan to climb the wall and deciding it should be a DC 5. In that case, you have waited to see exactly what action they want to take (in this case, climb a wall by hand or place a ladder against it and climb that) before deciding whether it has a chance of failure and, therefore, calling for an ability check.
Taking this even further: You know there is a wall for them to get past, and have decided in advance that it is a DC 15 to get to the other side. They then talk to a local band of mercenaries and have them use a catapult to knock the wall down. When you get there... You've already fixed the DC at 15 to get to the other side of the wall, so it's a DC 15 and always will be... even though the wall no longer stands and they can just walk across the rubble.
Again, see how absurd you have to make the examples ? the DC 15 would be for the task "get over the wall". If there is no wall, why would there be a task ?
Once again, this is not about the quality of roleplay or anything like that. This is deciding the difficulty of what the player chooses to do.
Deciding the difficulty is NOT the same thing as the Difficulty Class of the task. I will make it simple. Let's say that you have taken into account the player's actions and set a DC based on this. Do we agree that the difficulty will not be the same to the barbarian who has advantage on his athletics check and for the wizard who has not ? Or simply not the same for a barbarian who has +8 and a wizard who has +2 ? In that case are you modifying the DC ? No, you are just applying modifiers, which change the difficulty of succeeding at the task but you are (I hope) not changing the DC !
What are we talking about here? Are we talking about getting over the wall, or are we talking about climbing the wall?
If we are talking about climbing the wall specifically, the DC is the same for everyone (assuming the conditions are the same for everyone, of course).
if we are talking about getting over the wall, the DC will potentially be different for everyone who chooses a different approach. The Barbarian using nothing but his bare hands and feet might have a DC 15, the Rogue with his grappling hook might have a DC 10, and Wizard using magic to fly over it won’t have to roll at all.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Setting the DC is DM dependent RAW. Period. You can change it at will if you want and there is nothing wrong with that.
That's your opinion, and it obviously is fine in your game if your players are happy with it, however, my opinion is different, I think that setting the DC based on players actions is bad for the players and I've written at length why I think it is. You can hammer your opinion like this all you want, it does not make it more true or more justified.
In particular, I think a number of us agree that it is really bad to set the DC based on the quality of the roleplaying of a given player. Of course, as a DM you can do this, but I happen to think that it's unfair to your players, and I've explained why.
Not opinion as its written as such in the book. You can choose to do whatever with it but please do not shame people for following the book.
I am not shaming anyone, I am merely pointing out the good reasons not to set a DC based on the actions of a player, and at the same time pointing out that the book exactly supports that view (but again, you are absolutely free not to follow the book, nothing wrong in this).
It does not say that.....it simply says the DM sets the DC that's it. [REDACTED]
If we are talking about climbing the wall specifically, the DC is the same for everyone (assuming the conditions are the same for everyone, of course).
if we are talking about getting over the wall, the DC will potentially be different for everyone who chooses a different approach. The Barbarian using nothing but his bare hands and feet might have a DC 15, the Rogue with his grappling hook might have a DC 10, and Wizard using magic to fly over it won’t have to roll at all.
Exactly my point. What a player decides their character is going to do determines the action their character is going to take, which is what the DM decides the DC based on.
1) The problem is that you are atomising the task too much for me, and I think for 5e in general. The task should simply be "getting over the wall". That's it. It does not change according to anything, it's just an inherent characteristic of the wall. This is the way it is presented in all publications and modules, and, once more, 5e NEVER tells you to modify the DC.
2) The DM should be thinking things like "They were clever enough to bring a ladder, good for them ! I will make sure to point out how great an idea that was and how simpler it made it for them to infiltrate the palace".
1) DMG p. 244, Tracking DCs: +5/day since the creature passed, -5 if it left a trail.
1) Perfectly fine, this has nothing to do with players' actions, it's just helping the DM set the initail DC for tracking.
Also p. 244, a creature’s attitude determines the DC for getting a reaction, and players can change that attitude over the course of a conversation “if the adventurers say or do the right thing”.
2) They change the attitude, that's fine, the NEXT task will be easier with a different DC. But it certainly does not retroactively modify the DC of changing the attitude in the first place.
1) Yes, but it shows that the DMG specifically suggests changing the DC based on circumstances. You claimed 5E never does that.
1) Nope. I wrote: "Show me any place in the rules where the DC is modified due to players actions"
It is NOT the same thing at all. Setting a DC due to external circumstances if of course fine, no one has ever said the contrary.
2) So DCs can be changed, and the official 5E ruleset explains this. That’s the point. Whether it does so retroactively or not isn’t pertinent to whether it does in the first place.
2) They are NOT changed, they are set at the beginning of the action that has a chance to fail. And because there are TWO tasks there, it's still fine, no DC change.
1) I literally quoted the exact words you wrote.
2) the “changing attitude” part of resolving interactions doesn’t call for a roll. “Determining characteristics” does, but not “changing attitude”. There are no two rolls for determining the reaction, just one. And the DC for that one can be modified by the course of a conversation. It’s roleplay affecting a DC.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Setting the DC is DM dependent RAW. Period. You can change it at will if you want and there is nothing wrong with that.
That's your opinion, and it obviously is fine in your game if your players are happy with it, however, my opinion is different, I think that setting the DC based on players actions is bad for the players and I've written at length why I think it is. You can hammer your opinion like this all you want, it does not make it more true or more justified.
In particular, I think a number of us agree that it is really bad to set the DC based on the quality of the roleplaying of a given player. Of course, as a DM you can do this, but I happen to think that it's unfair to your players, and I've explained why.
Not opinion as its written as such in the book. You can choose to do whatever with it but please do not shame people for following the book.
I am not shaming anyone, I am merely pointing out the good reasons not to set a DC based on the actions of a player, and at the same time pointing out that the book exactly supports that view (but again, you are absolutely free not to follow the book, nothing wrong in this).
It does not say that.....it simply says the DM sets the DC that's it. Adding your own spin to it and calling that RAW is purposefully deceiving.
It does, just read the PH and the correct sequence for doing ability checks.
"An ability check tests a character's or monster's innate talent and training in an effort to overcome a challenge. The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results.
For every ability check, the DM decides which of the six abilities is relevant to the task at hand and the difficulty of the task, represented by a Difficulty Class. The more difficult a task, the higher its DC. The Typical Difficulty Classes table shows the most common DCs.
DM decides what the DC is....period...thats it...nothing else stated.
Setting the DC is DM dependent RAW. Period. You can change it at will if you want and there is nothing wrong with that.
That's your opinion, and it obviously is fine in your game if your players are happy with it, however, my opinion is different, I think that setting the DC based on players actions is bad for the players and I've written at length why I think it is. You can hammer your opinion like this all you want, it does not make it more true or more justified.
In particular, I think a number of us agree that it is really bad to set the DC based on the quality of the roleplaying of a given player. Of course, as a DM you can do this, but I happen to think that it's unfair to your players, and I've explained why.
Not opinion as its written as such in the book. You can choose to do whatever with it but please do not shame people for following the book.
I am not shaming anyone, I am merely pointing out the good reasons not to set a DC based on the actions of a player, and at the same time pointing out that the book exactly supports that view (but again, you are absolutely free not to follow the book, nothing wrong in this).
It does not say that.....it simply says the DM sets the DC that's it. [REDACTED]
And then it says that, once set, and the ability chosen, you do a roll with modifiers pertaining the character's actions, for example:
Consider granting advantage when …
Circumstances not related to a creature’s inherent capabilities provide it with an edge.
Some aspect of the environment contributes to the character’s chance of success.
A player shows exceptional creativity or cunning in attempting or describing a task.
Previous actions (whether taken by the character making the attempt or some other creature) improve the chances of success.
Consider imposing disadvantage when …
Circumstances hinder success in some way.
Some aspect of the environment makes success less likely (assuming that aspect doesn’t already impose a penalty to the roll being made).
An element of the plan or description of an action makes success less likely.
It does NOT say to modify the DC because the character did specific actions. QED.
A lot of opinions and examples and all kinds of info here, BUT a lot of mindless semantics games going on too. Anyone who is saying adding a +2 bonus to an ability check is different to dropping the DC by 2 has zero understanding of how numbers work and might consider using tools to track these things. There are a lot of opinions as well, as to RP being allowed to adjust a DC, which are attacked from both sides. TO get back to RP "benefits" maybe the order of events is important, mechanically, to follow this.
A homebrew setup has the guard at a 15 DC to persuade him to allow you into the Keep. The players approach and discuss with the guard their recent activities (doing good for the town and such) and then, after extolling their helpfulness, try to gain access. If the players presented their accomplishments reasonably well, and kept the conversations polite and respectful, sir Guard would be a bit more willing to allow them access (I am now forcing Human behavior on my NPC) As DM, I decide they were quite convincing and require only a 13 to pass this DC, because their speech convinced me, the DM that they were doing good for the town and should be a little more trusted than some scrub from nowhere. Now to semantic play, someone here will tell me that's BS and I need to add 2 to their roll, because RAW (or their interpretation of it) To claim adding 2 to a roll is ANY different from deducting 2 from the DC is.........insert your own term for insanity.
The whole wall setup, is another case of the DC should be adjusted. It is a 15 DC to climb the wall. It would be a 12 if the player has a rope and grapple and a 5 if they find a ladder tall enough to accomplish it. To placate those who view a DC as the Holy Grail that shall never be touched, adjusted or changed, by all means, add 3 to the player's roll for the rope and 10 for the ladder. All told, the difficulty in performing a task is DIRECTLY related to the method employed. This is from someone who has worked with his hands his whole life and is a life lesson, not a RAW lesson. A task would have base difficulty for a naked dude, but be easier for someone with an appropriate tool for the job.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure.
So, it is up to the DM to decide when the character/monster is attempting something which could fail. DM's choice.
For every ability check, the DM decides which of the six abilities is relevant to the task at hand and the difficulty of the task, represented by a Difficulty Class.
The DM chooses the ability and DC. DM's choice.
To make an ability check, roll a d20 and add the relevant ability modifier. As with other d20 rolls, apply bonuses and penalties, and compare the total to the DC. If the total equals or exceeds the DC, the ability check is a success
None of that restricts you to deciding the DC for the vague, generic action. Back to the wall, if there is a ladder there and the PC decides to use it, the DM could very well decide there is no chance of failure, so never call for a check or set a DC, or he may think it's really easy but still has a chance of failure, so call for a check with a low DC. If the PC decides to show off and climb the wall bare handed, or do a Dob from the Oxventurers and backflip to the top of the wall, the action is different and the DC will be different. It isn't about modifying the DC, it's about choosing when to set it, and setting it based on what is happening.
If the player just says his character climbs to the top of the wall, it's reasonable to assume he uses the ladder.
This is exactly the same when trying to talk your way past the guard. If you just say you want to talk your way past, the DM has to calculate a DC which involves both the PC coming up with a convincing story, telling it in a convincing way and how likely the NPC would be to accept a reasonable story. If, instead, the player describes the story he wants to tell, the DC only involves whether the NPC is convinced by this particular story and telling. The action is different, because the player chose this for his character rather than letting the dice decide.
In an epic game, unless there is a real story element, I'm absolutely not interested in a contest about climbing the wall. It is much more interesting for me to set a general task of getting over the wall, that players can accomplish in many many ways, including climbing it, but that is only one of the options.
If you want to atomise it to smaller tasks, it's fine as well, for me just not as epic, open and streamlined, but again each table has its own take.
You may not be, but what if your players are? If your player says that he is going to climb the wall with one hand, using the other to hold a rope which is tied to each of the other characters in the party and pull them all to the top. If he has described that, it's a really difficult task. Are you still going to go with the original DC you set for just getting over the wall, and ignore the player's choices for his character?
Setting the DC is DM dependent RAW. Period. You can change it at will if you want and there is nothing wrong with that.
That's your opinion, and it obviously is fine in your game if your players are happy with it, however, my opinion is different, I think that setting the DC based on players actions is bad for the players and I've written at length why I think it is. You can hammer your opinion like this all you want, it does not make it more true or more justified.
In particular, I think a number of us agree that it is really bad to set the DC based on the quality of the roleplaying of a given player. Of course, as a DM you can do this, but I happen to think that it's unfair to your players, and I've explained why.
Not opinion as its written as such in the book. You can choose to do whatever with it but please do not shame people for following the book.
I am not shaming anyone, I am merely pointing out the good reasons not to set a DC based on the actions of a player, and at the same time pointing out that the book exactly supports that view (but again, you are absolutely free not to follow the book, nothing wrong in this).
It does not say that.....it simply says the DM sets the DC that's it. [REDACTED]
And then it says that, once set, and the ability chosen, you do a roll with modifiers pertaining the character's actions, for example:
Consider granting advantage when …
Circumstances not related to a creature’s inherent capabilities provide it with an edge.
Some aspect of the environment contributes to the character’s chance of success.
A player shows exceptional creativity or cunning in attempting or describing a task.
Previous actions (whether taken by the character making the attempt or some other creature) improve the chances of success.
Consider imposing disadvantage when …
Circumstances hinder success in some way.
Some aspect of the environment makes success less likely (assuming that aspect doesn’t already impose a penalty to the roll being made).
An element of the plan or description of an action makes success less likely.
It does NOT say to modify the DC because the character did specific actions. QED.
Where does it say the DM cannot reset a DC?
Again, as a DM at your own table, you are free to do whatever you want. The rules do not tell you not to change the AC of a monster. Same with a DC. You can decide to change it, after all, you are the DM, I'm just pointing out that in my book it's not the right thing to do as well as pointing out that the sequence in the PH is pretty clear about when you set it up. So RAW, it's clear.
It absolutely tells you to adjust the AC of monsters....in fact there is an entire section of the DMG talking about Modifying Monsters.
You should actually read the DMG sometime as it has lots of good stuff in there.
Also you stated that its says "once set".....that language never appears in the PHB section so you are incorrect there as well.
What are we talking about here? Are we talking about getting over the wall, or are we talking about climbing the wall?
1) As I wrote to Urth, that is the core of the problem. In an epic game, unless there is a real story element, I'm absolutely not interested in a contest about climbing the wall. It is much more interesting for me to set a general task of getting over the wall, that players can accomplish in many many ways, including climbing it, but that is only one of the options.
If you want to atomise it to smaller tasks, it's fine as well, for me just not as epic, open and streamlined, but again each table has its own take.
If we are talking about climbing the wall specifically, the DC is the same for everyone (assuming the conditions are the same for everyone, of course).
2) And what happens if a player pulls out climbing gear ? Do you change the DC ? Or do you simply give a modifier ? And what if it's a rope and grapple ? It's still climbing the wall...
if we are talking about getting over the wall, the DC will potentially be different for everyone who chooses a different approach. The Barbarian using nothing but his bare hands and feet might have a DC 15, the Rogue with his grappling hook might have a DC 10, and Wizard using magic to fly over it won’t have to roll at all.
3) That is because you decided to atomise the task "getting over the wall" into "getting over the wall with a grappling hook" and my perspective is that it is cheating a bit from the DM's side, and possibly frustrating players just for being clever and/or prepared.
In the end, as said a number of times, technically it does not change much, but I prefer not changing the rules I've set when players get creative, and in particular I prefer not changing the rules to penalise them just because the player was not up to my standards, which is what I've been discussing all along.
1) See, no, that isn’t the problem, or even a problem. That’s a matter of preference. You should absolutely do what you want at your table, but what you do at your table doesn’t change how things are done by the book.
2) Does it matter? I already explained a modifier is functionally the same as changing the DC. The point is that the difficulty is determined by the action, the task itself is not a factor. I could decide my character walks around the wall until they find a door and try to get in through there, I could use magic, I could use alchemy to weaken the wall, I could attempt to leap over it or to do a vertical run. No published adventure module will tell me it’s a DC X to get to the other side of a wall. It’ll likely tell me the DC to climb the wall, yes (and possibly even suggest modifiers for some likely circumstances), but it will not tell me that regardless of how they do it, PCs need to succeed in a DC X check if they want to get to the other side. That isn’t even possible, because checks don’t just have a DC. Checks need to specify an ability and often a skill to be used, and those depend on what exactly you’re attempting. There is no “get over the wall” check. There’s a “climb the wall” check if that’s what you want to do, or a “break down the wall” check, or a “jump over the wall” check, but no “get from one side of the wall to the other side” check.
3) I, as the DM, didn’t atomise anything. The players do that when the decide what they want to do. I just told them there’s a wall in the way of their plans.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
You choose one, you apply the DC. Simple, straightforward, there is no room to consider that that DC is anything other than the one that was set in the paragraph just above.
But the point is that you don't have to choose that for the generic action "get to the top of the wall", although of course you can if that's all the player says. You can wait until the player has decided what he is going to do, and set the DC for "climb the wall without a rope", "use a grappling hook, then climb the rope", "climb the ladder to the top of the wall", "do a backflip, landing on the top of the wall", or whatever they have decided to do.
I will take into account all the player's choice in the modifiers to HIS roll. Again, this is what the rules tell you.
They also tell you to call for a check and set a DC when the player "attempts an action... that has a chance of failure".
If a player said to me, "I'm going to try to get to the top of that wall", I wouldn't immediately consider that an action. It's so vague that it's more of an intention than an action. I'd ask how he planned to do so to find out what action he wanted to take to accomplish that intention.
1) The problem is that you are atomising the task too much for me, and I think for 5e in general. The task should simply be "getting over the wall". That's it. It does not change according to anything, it's just an inherent characteristic of the wall. This is the way it is presented in all publications and modules, and, once more, 5e NEVER tells you to modify the DC.
2) The DM should be thinking things like "They were clever enough to bring a ladder, good for them ! I will make sure to point out how great an idea that was and how simpler it made it for them to infiltrate the palace".
1) DMG p. 244, Tracking DCs: +5/day since the creature passed, -5 if it left a trail.
1) Perfectly fine, this has nothing to do with players' actions, it's just helping the DM set the initail DC for tracking.
Also p. 244, a creature’s attitude determines the DC for getting a reaction, and players can change that attitude over the course of a conversation “if the adventurers say or do the right thing”.
2) They change the attitude, that's fine, the NEXT task will be easier with a different DC. But it certainly does not retroactively modify the DC of changing the attitude in the first place.
1) Yes, but it shows that the DMG specifically suggests changing the DC based on circumstances. You claimed 5E never does that.
1) Nope. I wrote: "Show me any place in the rules where the DC is modified due to players actions"
It is NOT the same thing at all. Setting a DC due to external circumstances if of course fine, no one has ever said the contrary.
2) So DCs can be changed, and the official 5E ruleset explains this. That’s the point. Whether it does so retroactively or not isn’t pertinent to whether it does in the first place.
2) They are NOT changed, they are set at the beginning of the action that has a chance to fail. And because there are TWO tasks there, it's still fine, no DC change.
1) I literally quoted the exact words you wrote.
1) Show me.
2) the “changing attitude” part of resolving interactions doesn’t call for a roll. “Determining characteristics” does, but not “changing attitude”. There are no two rolls for determining the reaction, just one. And the DC for that one can be modified by the course of a conversation. It’s roleplay affecting a DC.
2) I don't see it saying this. What is the task that you are doing that has a chance of failure ? When does it start ? And, in particular, where does it say that the DC changes ?
Because, once more, you only set the DC when THAT attempts starts, not before. And this is exactly what the DMG says: "When the adventurers get to the point of their request, demand, or suggestion — or if you decide the conversation has run its course — call for a Charisma check."
When you do this, and not before do you set the DC based on the attitude. The DC was NOT set before, because there was no task.
1) It’s literally still there in the quote thread.
2) the task is getting a reaction from the NPC. When the PCs strike up a conversation with a guard, it’s to try and get inside. When they start talking to the local magistrate, it’s to try and get acquitted from the crimes they may or may not have committed. When they start talking to the barkeep, it’s to try and get some sensitive info he doesn’t normally share with strangers. When they start talking to the wealthy merchant, it’s to try and convince him to hire them. And so on. Of course there is a task, and there was one all along. And of course you set the DC when you determine the check - you don’t know what kind of check they will attempt until they explain what they attempt. They could try lying, or arguing, or bullying, etc. You don’t know until they do. Nonetheless, the NPC had a starting attitude and has potentially a different attitude after the conversation/roleplaying part, no rolling required. A different attitude likely means a different DC. If the players failed to change the attitude, it’s DC X. If they changed the attitude for the better it’ll be DC Y, if they made it worse it’ll be DC Z (with Y < X < Z). The no rolls needed roleplaying potentially changes the DC for the Charisma check. The specifics of how the PCs choose to try the check will almost certainly change the check itself (even if only be determining the skill involved), and possibly the DC as well - on top of the attitude factor.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Lyxen’s complete refusal to engage with the fact that the DMG explicitly tells you to adjust social DCs based on player actions shifting NPC attitudes is hilarious.
Lyxen’s complete refusal to engage with the fact that the DMG explicitly tells you to adjust social DCs based on player actions shifting NPC attitudes is hilarious.
Well, you know, opening a door and speaking are also the same thing so.... 🤷♂️
What are we talking about here? Are we talking about getting over the wall, or are we talking about climbing the wall?
1) As I wrote to Urth, that is the core of the problem. In an epic game, unless there is a real story element, I'm absolutely not interested in a contest about climbing the wall. It is much more interesting for me to set a general task of getting over the wall, that players can accomplish in many many ways, including climbing it, but that is only one of the options.
If you want to atomise it to smaller tasks, it's fine as well, for me just not as epic, open and streamlined, but again each table has its own take.
If we are talking about climbing the wall specifically, the DC is the same for everyone (assuming the conditions are the same for everyone, of course).
2) And what happens if a player pulls out climbing gear ? Do you change the DC ? Or do you simply give a modifier ? And what if it's a rope and grapple ? It's still climbing the wall...
if we are talking about getting over the wall, the DC will potentially be different for everyone who chooses a different approach. The Barbarian using nothing but his bare hands and feet might have a DC 15, the Rogue with his grappling hook might have a DC 10, and Wizard using magic to fly over it won’t have to roll at all.
3) That is because you decided to atomise the task "getting over the wall" into "getting over the wall with a grappling hook" and my perspective is that it is cheating a bit from the DM's side, and possibly frustrating players just for being clever and/or prepared.
In the end, as said a number of times, technically it does not change much, but I prefer not changing the rules I've set when players get creative, and in particular I prefer not changing the rules to penalise them just because the player was not up to my standards, which is what I've been discussing all along.
1) See, no, that isn’t the problem, or even a problem. That’s a matter of preference. You should absolutely do what you want at your table, but what you do at your table doesn’t change how things are done by the book.
1) Hmmm, the thing is that it's exactly the opposite. The rules tell you to set one DC, choose an ability and roll with modifiers. This is exactly what I'm doing, as per the book. If your preference goes to modifying DCs, that's fine, but please don't claim it's what the book says.
2) Does it matter? I already explained a modifier is functionally the same as changing the DC.
2) First, no, technically it's not, if you use the Adv/Dis mechanic.
Second, even if you are only using modifiers, it's not the same thing psychologically to the player. So yes, it matters.
The point is that the difficulty is determined by the action, the task itself is not a factor.
3) Wrong, as per the PH: "For every ability check, the DM decides which of the six abilities is relevant to the task at hand and the difficulty of the task, represented by a Difficulty Class. The more difficult a task, the higher its DC. The Typical Difficulty Classes table shows the most common DCs."
It does not depend on the action. However: "Consider imposing disadvantage when … An element of the plan or description of an action makes success less likely." The ROLL depends on the action.
I could decide my character walks around the wall until they find a door and try to get in through there, I could use magic, I could use alchemy to weaken the wall, I could attempt to leap over it or to do a vertical run. No published adventure module will tell me it’s a DC X to get to the other side of a wall. It’ll likely tell me the DC to climb the wall, yes (and possibly even suggest modifiers for some likely circumstances), but it will not tell me that regardless of how they do it, PCs need to succeed in a DC X check if they want to get to the other side. That isn’t even possible, because checks don’t just have a DC. Checks need to specify an ability and often a skill to be used, and those depend on what exactly you’re attempting. There is no “get over the wall” check. There’s a “climb the wall” check if that’s what you want to do, or a “break down the wall” check, or a “jump over the wall” check, but no “get from one side of the wall to the other side” check.
4) Is getting over the wall an action that has a chance of failure ? So yes, there is a check for this. Obviously, if you are finding another path, it's a different action, obviously.
1) Setting the DC and modifying it are functionally the same thing.
Second, because it is the same it shouldn’t matter to the player. Telling them the DC is lower because they were smart/well prepared/chose the right approach/their patron deity is with them/whatever should not have a different psychological effect than telling them they get a bonus because they were smart/well prepared/chose the right approach/their patron deity is with them/whatever.
3) You assume the PHB uses the word “task” for the exact same thing you do. It doesn’t.
Again, you can’t determine a DC without knowing what the check involved is. There is no “getting to the other side of the wall” check, so you can’t set a DC for it. You need to know what kind of roll it’ll be. Dex/Acrobatics because they try to climb over it? Str/Athletics because they try to break through it? Con/Athletics because they try to dig under it? Whatever you decide, you need to decide before you can set the DC. And you can’t decide until you know exactly what the PCs try.
4) A different action for the same task.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
"for how many posts have I been telling you that it's absolutely fine to atomise the task and to create specific DCs for every single task"
Erm, I have seen you mention this once, while continuing to claim that waiting for a player to finish describing the actual task they wish to accomplish is wrong and not RAW.
"I happen to think that there are more important things to do in the game than nitpicking about these things just to go over a wall"
And I happen to think that the choices a player makes for their character is one of the most important parts of the game, so waiting for them to be made before deciding what to do is more important than it being "epic" or "streamlined", but everyone has their own style.
"As an added bonus, the players know exactly what they are getting for their effort"
Fair enough, I can see that point. That said, I find a comment of "nice, that should make this easier" or "oooh, I'm not sure he's buying that" works well enough.
Heck, if an assassin tells me "I will infiltrate the castle" and I know that he is probably good enough to do this, without problem I will do that in a simple roll based on stealth. I will not even count how many DC 15 walls he has to climb to get there, I know he is prepared for that with climbing gear, padded grappling hook, etc.
That's the point, though: If he did start describing climbing walls, checking for guards, looking for the best route etc, you can't just say to him "You've infiltrated the castle, now stop slowing down my epic, streamlined campaign". It also wouldn't seem right to have him just make a single stealth check for all of it and give him modifiers for his detailed descriptions of each wall he scaled, guard post he passed, etc. What is described by the player makes a massive difference.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What are we talking about here? Are we talking about getting over the wall, or are we talking about climbing the wall?
If we are talking about climbing the wall specifically, the DC is the same for everyone (assuming the conditions are the same for everyone, of course).
if we are talking about getting over the wall, the DC will potentially be different for everyone who chooses a different approach. The Barbarian using nothing but his bare hands and feet might have a DC 15, the Rogue with his grappling hook might have a DC 10, and Wizard using magic to fly over it won’t have to roll at all.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
It does not say that.....it simply says the DM sets the DC that's it. [REDACTED]
Exactly my point. What a player decides their character is going to do determines the action their character is going to take, which is what the DM decides the DC based on.
1) I literally quoted the exact words you wrote.
2) the “changing attitude” part of resolving interactions doesn’t call for a roll. “Determining characteristics” does, but not “changing attitude”. There are no two rolls for determining the reaction, just one. And the DC for that one can be modified by the course of a conversation. It’s roleplay affecting a DC.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
"An ability check tests a character's or monster's innate talent and training in an effort to overcome a challenge. The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results.
For every ability check, the DM decides which of the six abilities is relevant to the task at hand and the difficulty of the task, represented by a Difficulty Class. The more difficult a task, the higher its DC. The Typical Difficulty Classes table shows the most common DCs.
DM decides what the DC is....period...thats it...nothing else stated.
Where does it say the DM cannot reset a DC?
You are simply wrong.
Also it literally never says "Once set"
That language is not present at all so you are incorrrect again.
A lot of opinions and examples and all kinds of info here, BUT a lot of mindless semantics games going on too. Anyone who is saying adding a +2 bonus to an ability check is different to dropping the DC by 2 has zero understanding of how numbers work and might consider using tools to track these things. There are a lot of opinions as well, as to RP being allowed to adjust a DC, which are attacked from both sides. TO get back to RP "benefits" maybe the order of events is important, mechanically, to follow this.
A homebrew setup has the guard at a 15 DC to persuade him to allow you into the Keep. The players approach and discuss with the guard their recent activities (doing good for the town and such) and then, after extolling their helpfulness, try to gain access. If the players presented their accomplishments reasonably well, and kept the conversations polite and respectful, sir Guard would be a bit more willing to allow them access (I am now forcing Human behavior on my NPC) As DM, I decide they were quite convincing and require only a 13 to pass this DC, because their speech convinced me, the DM that they were doing good for the town and should be a little more trusted than some scrub from nowhere. Now to semantic play, someone here will tell me that's BS and I need to add 2 to their roll, because RAW (or their interpretation of it) To claim adding 2 to a roll is ANY different from deducting 2 from the DC is.........insert your own term for insanity.
The whole wall setup, is another case of the DC should be adjusted. It is a 15 DC to climb the wall. It would be a 12 if the player has a rope and grapple and a 5 if they find a ladder tall enough to accomplish it. To placate those who view a DC as the Holy Grail that shall never be touched, adjusted or changed, by all means, add 3 to the player's roll for the rope and 10 for the ladder. All told, the difficulty in performing a task is DIRECTLY related to the method employed. This is from someone who has worked with his hands his whole life and is a life lesson, not a RAW lesson. A task would have base difficulty for a naked dude, but be easier for someone with an appropriate tool for the job.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
So, it is up to the DM to decide when the character/monster is attempting something which could fail. DM's choice.
The DM chooses the ability and DC. DM's choice.
None of that restricts you to deciding the DC for the vague, generic action. Back to the wall, if there is a ladder there and the PC decides to use it, the DM could very well decide there is no chance of failure, so never call for a check or set a DC, or he may think it's really easy but still has a chance of failure, so call for a check with a low DC. If the PC decides to show off and climb the wall bare handed, or do a Dob from the Oxventurers and backflip to the top of the wall, the action is different and the DC will be different. It isn't about modifying the DC, it's about choosing when to set it, and setting it based on what is happening.
If the player just says his character climbs to the top of the wall, it's reasonable to assume he uses the ladder.
This is exactly the same when trying to talk your way past the guard. If you just say you want to talk your way past, the DM has to calculate a DC which involves both the PC coming up with a convincing story, telling it in a convincing way and how likely the NPC would be to accept a reasonable story. If, instead, the player describes the story he wants to tell, the DC only involves whether the NPC is convinced by this particular story and telling. The action is different, because the player chose this for his character rather than letting the dice decide.
You may not be, but what if your players are? If your player says that he is going to climb the wall with one hand, using the other to hold a rope which is tied to each of the other characters in the party and pull them all to the top. If he has described that, it's a really difficult task. Are you still going to go with the original DC you set for just getting over the wall, and ignore the player's choices for his character?
It absolutely tells you to adjust the AC of monsters....in fact there is an entire section of the DMG talking about Modifying Monsters.
You should actually read the DMG sometime as it has lots of good stuff in there.
Also you stated that its says "once set".....that language never appears in the PHB section so you are incorrect there as well.
1) See, no, that isn’t the problem, or even a problem. That’s a matter of preference. You should absolutely do what you want at your table, but what you do at your table doesn’t change how things are done by the book.
2) Does it matter? I already explained a modifier is functionally the same as changing the DC. The point is that the difficulty is determined by the action, the task itself is not a factor. I could decide my character walks around the wall until they find a door and try to get in through there, I could use magic, I could use alchemy to weaken the wall, I could attempt to leap over it or to do a vertical run. No published adventure module will tell me it’s a DC X to get to the other side of a wall. It’ll likely tell me the DC to climb the wall, yes (and possibly even suggest modifiers for some likely circumstances), but it will not tell me that regardless of how they do it, PCs need to succeed in a DC X check if they want to get to the other side. That isn’t even possible, because checks don’t just have a DC. Checks need to specify an ability and often a skill to be used, and those depend on what exactly you’re attempting. There is no “get over the wall” check. There’s a “climb the wall” check if that’s what you want to do, or a “break down the wall” check, or a “jump over the wall” check, but no “get from one side of the wall to the other side” check.
3) I, as the DM, didn’t atomise anything. The players do that when the decide what they want to do. I just told them there’s a wall in the way of their plans.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
But the point is that you don't have to choose that for the generic action "get to the top of the wall", although of course you can if that's all the player says. You can wait until the player has decided what he is going to do, and set the DC for "climb the wall without a rope", "use a grappling hook, then climb the rope", "climb the ladder to the top of the wall", "do a backflip, landing on the top of the wall", or whatever they have decided to do.
They also tell you to call for a check and set a DC when the player "attempts an action... that has a chance of failure".
If a player said to me, "I'm going to try to get to the top of that wall", I wouldn't immediately consider that an action. It's so vague that it's more of an intention than an action. I'd ask how he planned to do so to find out what action he wanted to take to accomplish that intention.
1) It’s literally still there in the quote thread.
2) the task is getting a reaction from the NPC. When the PCs strike up a conversation with a guard, it’s to try and get inside. When they start talking to the local magistrate, it’s to try and get acquitted from the crimes they may or may not have committed. When they start talking to the barkeep, it’s to try and get some sensitive info he doesn’t normally share with strangers. When they start talking to the wealthy merchant, it’s to try and convince him to hire them. And so on. Of course there is a task, and there was one all along. And of course you set the DC when you determine the check - you don’t know what kind of check they will attempt until they explain what they attempt. They could try lying, or arguing, or bullying, etc. You don’t know until they do. Nonetheless, the NPC had a starting attitude and has potentially a different attitude after the conversation/roleplaying part, no rolling required. A different attitude likely means a different DC. If the players failed to change the attitude, it’s DC X. If they changed the attitude for the better it’ll be DC Y, if they made it worse it’ll be DC Z (with Y < X < Z). The no rolls needed roleplaying potentially changes the DC for the Charisma check. The specifics of how the PCs choose to try the check will almost certainly change the check itself (even if only be determining the skill involved), and possibly the DC as well - on top of the attitude factor.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Lyxen’s complete refusal to engage with the fact that the DMG explicitly tells you to adjust social DCs based on player actions shifting NPC attitudes is hilarious.
Well, you know, opening a door and speaking are also the same thing so.... 🤷♂️
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
1) Setting the DC and modifying it are functionally the same thing.
2) First, yes, technically it is. https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/91318-dm-pushing-role-play?comment=114
Second, because it is the same it shouldn’t matter to the player. Telling them the DC is lower because they were smart/well prepared/chose the right approach/their patron deity is with them/whatever should not have a different psychological effect than telling them they get a bonus because they were smart/well prepared/chose the right approach/their patron deity is with them/whatever.
3) You assume the PHB uses the word “task” for the exact same thing you do. It doesn’t.
Again, you can’t determine a DC without knowing what the check involved is. There is no “getting to the other side of the wall” check, so you can’t set a DC for it. You need to know what kind of roll it’ll be. Dex/Acrobatics because they try to climb over it? Str/Athletics because they try to break through it? Con/Athletics because they try to dig under it? Whatever you decide, you need to decide before you can set the DC. And you can’t decide until you know exactly what the PCs try.
4) A different action for the same task.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
"for how many posts have I been telling you that it's absolutely fine to atomise the task and to create specific DCs for every single task"
Erm, I have seen you mention this once, while continuing to claim that waiting for a player to finish describing the actual task they wish to accomplish is wrong and not RAW.
"I happen to think that there are more important things to do in the game than nitpicking about these things just to go over a wall"
And I happen to think that the choices a player makes for their character is one of the most important parts of the game, so waiting for them to be made before deciding what to do is more important than it being "epic" or "streamlined", but everyone has their own style.
"As an added bonus, the players know exactly what they are getting for their effort"
Fair enough, I can see that point. That said, I find a comment of "nice, that should make this easier" or "oooh, I'm not sure he's buying that" works well enough.
That's the point, though: If he did start describing climbing walls, checking for guards, looking for the best route etc, you can't just say to him "You've infiltrated the castle, now stop slowing down my epic, streamlined campaign". It also wouldn't seem right to have him just make a single stealth check for all of it and give him modifiers for his detailed descriptions of each wall he scaled, guard post he passed, etc. What is described by the player makes a massive difference.