A forum for discussing and organizing recreational softball and baseball games and leagues in the greater Halifax area.
The Dice Giveth...
-
If you can't fail a skill check, there should be no roll. Same as most DMs won't make you do a skill check for "I sit down on a chair". Rolling dice implies that there's a chance of failure. > Failed skill checks on 1 break d&d by making skilled people fail regularly just as less skilled people do. Nope. 1/20 is much less regular than 5/20 or even 19/20. More skill doesn't mean it always works, only that your chances are higher. And if you are skilled enough that it always works, then there should be no roll.The problem with this argument is that first off, the GM can't know your character sheet front-to-back because they're not playing your character, so they probably don't know if even a 1 will pass the DC they've set. > 1/20 is much less regular than 5/20 or even 19/20 *It's still far more common than is reasonable.*
-
The problem with this argument is that first off, the GM can't know your character sheet front-to-back because they're not playing your character, so they probably don't know if even a 1 will pass the DC they've set. > 1/20 is much less regular than 5/20 or even 19/20 *It's still far more common than is reasonable.*> The problem with this argument is that first off, the GM can’t know your character sheet front-to-back because they’re not playing your character, so they probably don’t know if even a 1 will pass the DC they’ve set. The GM should know exceptional stats of their player. Yes, I might not know some rarely relevant stat of my players, I but surely know how well the rogue stealths, how well the elf bowman arches, how well the mage spells and how hard the barbarian hits. And even if I don't, the players can tell me the stat before a potential check.
-
> The problem with this argument is that first off, the GM can’t know your character sheet front-to-back because they’re not playing your character, so they probably don’t know if even a 1 will pass the DC they’ve set. The GM should know exceptional stats of their player. Yes, I might not know some rarely relevant stat of my players, I but surely know how well the rogue stealths, how well the elf bowman arches, how well the mage spells and how hard the barbarian hits. And even if I don't, the players can tell me the stat before a potential check.
-
I just think whether or not each and every player here has an outrageously high stat and what those stats are is a bit of an unnecessary hassle to add to the already long list of things the GM needs to keep track of.
-
If you can't fail a skill check, there should be no roll. Same as most DMs won't make you do a skill check for "I sit down on a chair". Rolling dice implies that there's a chance of failure. > Failed skill checks on 1 break d&d by making skilled people fail regularly just as less skilled people do. Nope. 1/20 is much less regular than 5/20 or even 19/20. More skill doesn't mean it always works, only that your chances are higher. And if you are skilled enough that it always works, then there should be no roll.Isn't that right foot easy stuff? Skilled characters also see harder challenges, disarming a dc20 trap for example Why should they fail to tie a simple knot on a +5, dc5 use rope check 1 in 20 times?
-
Isn't that right foot easy stuff? Skilled characters also see harder challenges, disarming a dc20 trap for example Why should they fail to tie a simple knot on a +5, dc5 use rope check 1 in 20 times?> Isn’t that right foot easy stuff? Sorry, don't know if I understand what you mean with that. > Why should they fail to tie a simple knot on a +5, dc5 use rope check 1 in 20 times? Why should they roll for something as simple as tieing a simple knot? I don't make my players roll whether they manage to tie their shoes either.
-
> Isn’t that right foot easy stuff? Sorry, don't know if I understand what you mean with that. > Why should they fail to tie a simple knot on a +5, dc5 use rope check 1 in 20 times? Why should they roll for something as simple as tieing a simple knot? I don't make my players roll whether they manage to tie their shoes either.Swipe typo. Corrected now
-
> Isn’t that right foot easy stuff? Sorry, don't know if I understand what you mean with that. > Why should they fail to tie a simple knot on a +5, dc5 use rope check 1 in 20 times? Why should they roll for something as simple as tieing a simple knot? I don't make my players roll whether they manage to tie their shoes either.A simple knot like the bowline you'd tie around a sturdy tree before descending by rope into a hole That's exactly the sort of thing a DM would set as DC10
-
A simple knot like the bowline you'd tie around a sturdy tree before descending by rope into a hole That's exactly the sort of thing a DM would set as DC10
-
When you're +12 to stealth a 1 isn't that critical
-
That's the only way I'm willing to house rule this. If 1 fails regardless, 20 succeeds regardless But I prefer to call things easy or impossible
-
If you can't fail a skill check, there should be no roll. Same as most DMs won't make you do a skill check for "I sit down on a chair". Rolling dice implies that there's a chance of failure. > Failed skill checks on 1 break d&d by making skilled people fail regularly just as less skilled people do. Nope. 1/20 is much less regular than 5/20 or even 19/20. More skill doesn't mean it always works, only that your chances are higher. And if you are skilled enough that it always works, then there should be no roll.>Nope. 1/20 is much less regular than 5/20 or even 19/20. What do you mean here? Any roll is as likely as any other Do you mean 2-20 is more likely than rolling a 1? Of course it is, but an invisible rogue sneaking at +15 shouldn't be seen by the monster who's -4 to spot 1 in 20 events, or if 20s are also special, 1 in 10 events (one for the rogue getting a 1, one for monster getting a 20)
-
If the sneaking person rolls a 13 +12, yeah it would be DC25 to see them. If they rolled a 1 the DC would be 13
-
If your skill level would guarantee a win if you ignore the concept of a natural 1 auto-failing, then there should be no roll.If everyone is aware. If the player knows the DC and the GM knows the players character sheet
-
>Nope. 1/20 is much less regular than 5/20 or even 19/20. What do you mean here? Any roll is as likely as any other Do you mean 2-20 is more likely than rolling a 1? Of course it is, but an invisible rogue sneaking at +15 shouldn't be seen by the monster who's -4 to spot 1 in 20 events, or if 20s are also special, 1 in 10 events (one for the rogue getting a 1, one for monster getting a 20)
-
If the sneaking person rolls a 13 +12, yeah it would be DC25 to see them. If they rolled a 1 the DC would be 13
-
>Nope. 1/20 is much less regular than 5/20 or even 19/20. What do you mean here? Any roll is as likely as any other Do you mean 2-20 is more likely than rolling a 1? Of course it is, but an invisible rogue sneaking at +15 shouldn't be seen by the monster who's -4 to spot 1 in 20 events, or if 20s are also special, 1 in 10 events (one for the rogue getting a 1, one for monster getting a 20)They're talking the probability of failure, not the specific number on the die. If your skill bonus meets the DC, you have a 1/20 chance of failing, assuming a natural one equates to an auto-fail. If your bonus doesn't meet the DC, you have a higher chance of failing.