| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It feels to me like the label of 'level' in this table is causing confusion. I propose instead of 'level' use 'CR'. We are all used to challenge rating as it regards enemies, traps, and hazards. Use the term when dealing with skills also.
So as an example, a CR 5 wall that a character wants to climb: Climbing a wall is not terribly difficult. It can be done untrained. So I'll use a medium DC for that. That gives it a DC of 18 to climb that wall.
No matter who is climbing it.
So a level 2 character would likely struggle to climb that wall, but it would be possible. A level 15 character would not see it as a challenge at all.
But it is the same wall with the same climb DC. And I think changing the label on the table makes that more obvious.
It should also make it easier for the players to push back against a DM that is scaling the difficulty of a climb check arbitrarily. A player can simply ask, 'why is this a CR 15 wall? When we were here way earlier in the adventure it was a CR 5 wall.'
Without CR being used for other things (like monsters) it doesn't make sense to use it for this table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe call it "Skills DC by task level and difficulty"
Short and simple, and mentioning in the title it's based on the task not just "level" which can refer to several different things.And if people still doesn't pick up on it call it: "Skills DC by task level (Not player level!) and difficulty. Wait... Just read the chapter please it should solve the confusion, please!". Not the most elegant title for a table but might get the message across :)
Maybe we could get the designers to weigh in so they can tell us what name would stop them from misusing the table ;)
I've turned against this table but if any version of it sticks around it should just be expected bonuses for minimally invested, partially invested, and maximally invested as a function of level. That way it could still be useful for determing NPC bonuses and DCs but is more limited in scope.