New Skill DC Table from Essentials DM's Kit

[Jhaelen]

I think this is something that's worth its own thread.

As you may have noticed already, the (almost complete) new table was 'leaked' by WotC posting a photo of the DM's Kit contents, showing the new DM screen in the background. Here's the accompanying thread, and a direct link to the photo.

I've attached the new table with some guesstimated values for levels 1 to 5 which aren't shown on the photo.

I'm really happy about the new values, especially considering they're quite close to the houseruled values I wanted to use in my game.

I had posted this idea a while ago in the house-rule forum (here's the original post).

Basically, my idea was that fixed skill DCs should ideally be identical to the DCs of opposed checks. Thus, they should be derived from monster ability scores!
Since the DMG includes guidelines for setting monster abilities they can be used as a basis.

I've attached an expanded table (showing the calculated DCs for level 1 to 30) for the sake of comparison. As you can see, the values calculated using this method are really close for most levels.

What do you think?

 

[Markn]

So , these are the DCs that you would assign for a skill challenge then?

 

[dragnsteph]

I think this makes me very happy. No more telling my level 8 players, we're using the level 13 DCs, deal with it

 

[Aegeri]

A hard DC of 42 might actually be difficult for my epic tier PCs to actually do! I've been screwing around with DCs for ages now trying to get something I'm happy with. These numbers look a lot better from what I can see.

 

[Joshua Randall]

Throwing out some random smell-test numbers...

Level 1 rogue, 20 Dex, trained, with racial mod, +12 Stealth. Auto-success on easy and moderate checks (as it should be), 75% success on hard checks.

Level 1 fighter, 16 Con, trained, no racial mod, +8 Endurance. Auto-success on easy check, 85% on moderate, 55% on hard.

Level 1 wizard, 10 Str, not trained, no racial mod, +0 Athletics. 65% easy, 50% moderate, 15% hard.

That smells (or feels) about right to me. PCs that are really focused on one skill can still do very well at low levels, but PCs that are merely trained in a skill (like the fighter in the example) still have reason to fear hard checks.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think this works pretty well. The low level DCs weren't too bad and haven't gone up a lot, while the high epic numbers really did need to increase, and got a solid 9 point bump. Untrained epic PCs may find themselves in some trouble at times, but ah well. I really think the table should be extended up to level 35 though to allow for over level challenges for epic PCs.

 

[babinro]

So , these are the DCs that you would assign for a skill challenge then?

While I do not know the official answer to this, I suspect these are the skill challenge DC's as well. Where as the DMG recommends adding +5 for skill checks..doing so here would make a skill challenge all but unbeatable without constant Aid Another optimization.

 

[JohnnyO]

Excellent! I am currently running King of the Trollhaunt Warrens, and these will come in very handy for the remaining skill challenges

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

Too fiddly. I agree the DCs generally needed adjustment to be more level appropriate. But I can keep ~10 lines in my head, not 30.

I have a similar criticism of the "rules updated" damage tables.

Does that much about PCs really change from level 2 to level 3 that they both need their own line in each table?

 

[mach1.9pants]

Umm I am confused? You only have to memorise (if you want, I'd never bother DM screen FTW) the DCs and stuff for the few levels either side of your PCs levels. And just keep those few lines 'updated' in your head.

No way do you have to know them all rote to pass your DM exam