|
I'm opposed to skill DC's scaling exactly with level (+1 per level). If you disagree, please at least hear me out before passing judgment.
When I put a rank into a skill, I want to get better at that skill. By 'better' I mean 'attaining success more reliably'. By this yardstick, it's easy to measure whether I'm really getting better at anything. If my chance of success goes up, I'm getting better. If my chance of success goes down, I'm getting worse.
So if we're talking about a set DC 15 skill check, I'm going to get better every time I put a rank into that skill. If my check is +5, then one more rank gives me +6, which makes me 5% more likely to succeed on that check. I like this. It gives me a sense that I'm making progress. Furthermore, it means I don't have to specialize in order to have a meaningful check; I can put a rank into this skill every other level or so and it'll improve just fine.
Contrast this with a skill check that is DC (14 + level). Every time I level up, I need to put a rank into this skill just to stay the same. If I don't put a rank into this skill for one level, then my chance of success decreases by 5% - I get worse every time. The only way to improve is if, in addition to specializing, I also get an additional modifier (such as skill-boosting gear, spells, etc.) This is less than ideal, because it shifts the focus away from the character and towards the toys they have.
Now, I need to make a concession here. Obviously, it doesn't go for every skill in the book - some are contested skills. As your opponents scale in HD, they will get better at defending against or defeating your skills (such as the Social Skills, Stealth, Acrobatics, Sense Motive, and maybe UMD), and you'll need to put skill ranks into them often in order to be effective at all. I understand that, and for some skills, especially those intended for specialists, it can work just fine.
But for the most part? If your difficulty goes up every time you level, your character gets worse at everything he does, except his specialties. And that is a depressing thought. Do not want.
Thoughts?
Skill DCs should only increase in level when the challenge is greater. Opening a simple lock should always be the same DC, but if you are dealing with smarter, richer and more skilled opponents, you should expect them to use better locks.
I am OK with the challenge going up as the opposition increases. I'm not OK with the same activity changing DC just because the character leveled up.
If that means that you only maintain viability in your chosen skill sets, well, that makes sense too. If you don't put ranks in stealth, you should find more powerful opponents harder to sneak past.
I can't think of a single skill that does that in Pathfinder. I know 4e did that with some of their stuff, but their skills work entirely differently.
There are some checks that are X + Level but all of the ones that I can think of relate to spells, and the "level" is usually spell level.
Can you clarify which checks you are having a problem with, or is it just the concept (that isn't used in the game)?
Contrast this with a skill check that is DC (14 + level).
I'm pretty sure neither Pathfinder nor D&D 3.0/3.5 have any such skill check DCs (excepting the mechanics for the Truenamer class, which I think was errata'd).
Do you have an example of a skill check that works like that?
I look at this in several part.
1. The skill DC for doing a specific task should never go up. Picking a simple lock should always be the same DC.
2. As you level, doing easy task should no longer be as important. If you are still having to pick simple locks at level 15,then something is not right. The difficulty should go up, but it should be done by changing the encounter, not arbitrarily upping DCs.
3. The reward should be relative challenge. If you pick a moderate lock at level 1, that should be pretty rewarding for your level(say 10% of party wealth). At level 15, you should be trying to pick an hard locks with 3 traps attached to it to get something worth 10% of your party wealth.
Another good example would be swimming. At level 1, swimming is difficult. At level 15, some characters will be swimming through white water rapids while wearing armor with orcs shooting arrows at your from the banks.
Wait. This happens?
Is this a 4e transition mishap?
I'm cool with the challenges actually being harder for higher level PCs, but a cliff is going to have the same climb DC regardless of whether the climber is 3rd or 20th level.
Anything else is weird and wrong unless there's a very good reason for it.
|
|
I know it's not Pathfinder RAW to do this with anything (except perhaps Intimidate and Acrobatics).
Just a tendency I've noticed in some of my local players. They expect skill DC's to arbitrarily go up just because their characters are higher level. They max out skills so that they can 'be competitive' or 'have a worthwhile check for this level'. I find the practice stinky.
I wanted to speak of it to the boards to see if you fellow Pathfinders felt the same way about it as I do.
It appears that is precisely the case.
This makes me happy.
There are a number of skills that I'll only put as many ranks as needed to reliably (or guarantee) success on certain applications.
The ones I can think of off the top of my head:
Knowledge skills (at least 1 rank just so I can make checks higher than DC 10)
Heal skill has a lot of flat DCs
UMD for wand use, etc
Handle Animal skill is mostly flat rate for training purposes
I'm sure there's others..
Usually, when rolling a 1 still means success on a skill check for anything I want to do with it, I tend to put my points elsewhere after that.
My character's sheet typically has a large variance of ranks among all the skills (not just 0 or =level).
I know it's not Pathfinder RAW to do this with anything (except perhaps Intimidate and Acrobatics).
Just a tendency I've noticed in some of my local players. They expect skill DC's to arbitrarily go up just because their characters are higher level. They max out skills so that they can 'be competitive' or 'have a worthwhile check for this level'. I find the practice stinky.
I wanted to speak of it to the boards to see if you fellow Pathfinders felt the same way about it as I do.
It appears that is precisely the case.This makes me happy.
In most games the DC's do go up, but not for arbitrary reasons. It is because better enemies have better defenses. As an adventurer it only makes sense to try to get better at what you do.