Can we get some more solid guidelines for common action / skill use DCs?


Running the Game

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm talking about things like climbing a cliff with a rope, having a wall to brace against, swimming in calm water vs stormy water, breaking a wood vs metal door down, etc.

Tables 10-3 through 10-6 list the level some of these ordinary tasks should be and at what level they become trivial, but make no mention of their starting Difficulty, just some factors that can affect their difficulty.

Also, the table is completely missing any guidelines on how to handle using Athletics to Break Open doors, chests, etc. It would be really nice to have example DCs or at least level/difficulty for things like "Flimsy Wooden Door", "Solid Wooden Door", "Solid Iron Door", "Adamantine Lockbox" etc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think they're trying to give the game back to the GM, but I'd prefer some guidance also.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes, they need more static DCs in the skill section, similar to PF1.

Please, no more page flipping, when I got to the skills section, I expect everything to be there to adjudicate the skill use.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Breaking down doors and climbing walls actually has more detailed material in the playtest bestiary. On mobile, so no further details at hand, though.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Well upon checking there are more in depth actually guidelines for climbing and breaking down doors in the bestiary of all places.

However, they have some serious issues.

The climb examples contradict the ones in the CRB by being significantly higher. Climbing wooden slats probably shouldn't be DC 21 for example.

Also confusing, the break open DC for doors is equal to the Thievery DC+5 which seems very strange. A wooden door is still a wooden door regardless of how good of a lock you put on it.

Edit: Going to make this issue it's own thread for visibility.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
I think they're trying to give the game back to the GM

The best of intentions pave the way to hell. Without more guidelines, GMs will simply use the guidelines they have which for most things amount to "use the PC level appropriate DC" which is not good IMO and contrary to what Paizo says they want.

Ignoring the rules in the bestiary (I don't have them on hand and wouldn't expect to look there as a GM) I would use the following guidelines.

Jurassic Pratt wrote:
I'm talking about things like climbing a cliff with a rope

Climbing an easy cliff face (level 1 high): DC 14

Climbing a easy cliff face with rope (level 1 high): DC 12
Climbing an easy surface with a wall to brace against (level 1): DC 10
Climbing a hard cliff face (level 6 high): DC DC 22
Climbing a hard cliff face with rope (level 6 high): DC 19
Climbing a hard surface with a wall to brace against (level 6): DC 15

In the above examples rope is reducing the difficulty by 1 step while the wall is reducing it by 2 steps.

This is a different paradigm to PF1e where tools or circumstances give you a flat modifier to the DC. I don't think it's a worse one, just different.

Jurassic Pratt wrote:
swimming in calm water vs stormy water

Swimming in calm water: DC 10 (level 1 trivial)

Swimming in stormy water: DC 21 (level 5 high)

Here I'm just using different levels like I did with an easy cliff face vs hard cliff face.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

The issue with that is that climbing a rope is already a lvl 1 task. The surface you're using it to climb up shouldn't suddenly make it a lvl 6 task.

It just doesn't make sense. Flat DCs were infinitely better than giving everything a level imo.


Jurassic Pratt wrote:

The issue with that is that climbing a rope is already a lvl 1 task. The surface you're using it to climb up shouldn't suddenly make it a lvl 6 task.

It just doesn't make sense. Flat DCs were infinitely better than giving everything a level imo.

Fair enough. I was seeing rope as being a modifier (like a climbing kit) rather than it's own DC. In that case it'd be a trivial level 1 DC.

Grand Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.

See, that kind of ambiguity is exactly my issue.

As an example, let's say a GM is designing an adventure and wants to put a mountain that the PCs have to get up. He decides that this is quite a substantial mountain and that it's crumbling, sloped, and slick so he makes it a lvl 6 DC.

Now when the players get there, they toss a grappling hook up to the top with a rope attached and decide to climb up. The GM thinks this makes it 1 category easier, so he shifts the DC from 22 (High) to 19 (low).

A player makes a 17 climb check and is shocked when the GM tells him he failed. He reminds him that climbing a rope is a lvl 1 task and he has the cliff to brace against, so the DC should be 12 or perhaps 14 or 15 since it is in such poor condition.

Who is right in this scenario? As the rules are currently written, I'm genuinely unsure.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jurassic Pratt wrote:
See, that kind of ambiguity is exactly my issue.

I completely agree with you.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

The whole reason I GM this game instead of 5e or OSR is that I don't have to concoct DCs for basic elements of the world--every dang door, fog bank, cliff, sleight of hand check etc. etc. I'm not able to consistently remember my calls over months and years for something this boring. I want a chart on my screen that I can glance at and say, that's a DC30 lock. That is what a really good lock is in this world.

As long as the DCs are set (and not level dependent), I'm totally fine if they're in the skills section, or if they're in a separate section for GM eyes only.

But the chart as provided is not helpful in any situation except creating a level-dependent obstacle when designing an adventure. That's a useful thing to have--but it does not suffice for setting baseline expectations in the game world.

Having stable DCs for common obstacles and activities keeps the world consistent and real.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think a possible solution would be, as stated in other similar threads, is to have a small table with samplse of stactic DCs for each skill use,. Then have the DC by level and difficulty table as an addon to judge things that fall outisde the scope of common DCs or to help judging a particular situation.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Yolande d'Bar wrote:

But the chart as provided is not helpful in any situation except creating a level-dependent obstacle when designing an adventure. That's a useful thing to have--but it does not suffice for setting baseline expectations in the game world.

Having stable DCs for common obstacles and activities keeps the world consistent and real.

Exactly, the chart is helpful in adventure design (to know how much the challenge is to the party) but we need static DCs for consistency to make the world feel real.

If the same task increases in difficulty every time you gain a level, gaining a level becomes kind of pointless.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jason S wrote:
Yolande d'Bar wrote:

But the chart as provided is not helpful in any situation except creating a level-dependent obstacle when designing an adventure. That's a useful thing to have--but it does not suffice for setting baseline expectations in the game world.

Having stable DCs for common obstacles and activities keeps the world consistent and real.

Exactly, the chart is helpful in adventure design (to know how much the challenge is to the party) but we need static DCs for consistency to make the world feel real.

If the same task increases in difficulty every time you gain a level, gaining a level becomes kind of pointless.

I agree: there is a big distinction between designing an adventure and running one. As a GM, I shouldn't have to look at the "how to design a challenge" section while running it.

The logic of "look at the design conditions" when running a game fails especially when the design condition for monsters have been removed.


Just look at 10-2 table in the Rulebook at p.337. As long as a GM can establish what is trivial/low/high/severe and extreme then you are all set. The rest just scales up due to the +1/lvl to everything.

Trivial tasks should not even be rolled.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Game Master Rules / Running the Game / Can we get some more solid guidelines for common action / skill use DCs? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Running the Game