I love when you do these kinds of videos that really exposes the true mechanics. This is the stuff that anyone who DMs should love. Reduces all the overhead and simplifies it down to it's core allowing the game to move quicker and smoother.
Unfortunately some my D&D group LOVES the overhead because they're math nerds and will lose it if I try to simplify, but this technique works great with my young cousins.
I have to disappoint you, but this is not the "true math" behind it, but a very simplyfied view on it, which is only true in a very specific scenario...
This is like how Cypher System is based on "pick any number, 1-10, now multiply by 3. that's the DC" Though since Monte Cook left D&D part way through making 5E I'm sure there's no association...
"Nigel Tufnel: The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and... Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten? Nigel Tufnel: Exactly. Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder? Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where? Marty DiBergi: I don't know. Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do? Marty DiBergi: Put it up to eleven. Nigel Tufnel: Eleven. Exactly. One louder. Marty DiBergi: Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder? Nigel Tufnel: [pause] These go to eleven."
The more I see rpg's evolving, but understanding the underlying base mechanic, the more I feel that they are a placation for the players in order to provide shinny bits to distract them, which sometimes detracts from the overall group story experience when they focus more on the next character 'treat' they are reaching for than the interaction of the group. Eh, or maybe I am just on old Grognard telling players to stay of my grass. Either way, the hobby is growing, and that is a good thing. Keep up the good hacking Deathbringer, villages don't burn themselves!
From that perspective the only difference I see between RPGs and real life is that you get the shinnies faster and more often in RPGs… …I’ve now come to the conclusion that I need to have a conversation with my life GM about the progression speed in their game. 😂 Time to level up. Grab your ketchup and crunch away my friends.
Nah, you're not that grognardy (grognardly? whatever). While rules can point a game in a particular genre direction, you don't NEED any of them. Or rather, you need just enough. If you're a Dungeon Craft Patron, you see some really great play with minimal rules in PDM's Spy Hard game.
@@rontalkstabletop Thanks again for the support! BTW--I'm answering your question about the D&D RU-vid channel on the Live show and in summer "front porch lecture."
WHAT! As a newbie to TTRPGs you have been my main source of GM knowledge and you have inspired how i run my games. But for once i am ahead of the curve on this one. I made a monster maker table with values, and i discovered that monster AC and spell DC were aproximately 8+ the players attack bonus. so i have used this for a long time. So validating to have you confirm my crazy. thanks.
I remember playing old school DnD, it was like 1984 and we were 1st level and fighting kobolds. The fight took 45 minutes because neither the party nor the kobolds could hit the broad side of a barn. Fun times.
This is one of my favorite videos you have done! Such a useful video for DM's and aspiring ones. I love your videos that focus on mechanics. This is why I started watching your channel in the first place. You definitely earn the "Professor" part of your name.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 that's such a drag that the algorithm is built this way. I remember you polled your patrons and they preferred content like this but your RU-vid income is tied to clickbaitey titles and videos about WotC. That's a tough spot to be in.
This is a great way to run a more loose version of the game for people who care less about the simulation of the world and its challenges and more for a plug an play experience. I started out D&D where when we wanted to do something we would roll a d20 ourselves against the DM's secret d20 and we had those small +1's or +2's from our stats and overall we progressed a story and goofed in the world. As me and my friends got more into the game we found ourselves wanting more consitency from the system and feeling more that the choices we made in character creation had weight. Overall, we found all these numbers to be more fun for us in 5e.
Fun fact with advantage/disadvantage: the difference is actually a little over 5 (along with nearly double odds of a nat 20/nat 1). I recall the +3/-3 was mostly because that's what Hankerin' Ferinale felt was sufficient to be considered statistically significant (about a 15% difference in either direction, or 30% from easy to hard).
I've always known that RPGs are, at the end of the day, a number treadmill, but wow I never expected them to be so consistent about it. Its kind of incredible to be honest just how well they've hidden it behind DCs and bonuses and all that.
To be fair, this does sort of depend on the RPG *and* it doesn't account particularly well for the more intangible stuff outside of just straight forward rolls, but yeah, it's pretty common. The games that don't are the ones that people tend to think of as unbalanced in some range. Reason why is simple. Let's say that we're making a game and we determine through play testing that we have an optimum set of numbers to make a combat encounter feel good and balanced. I.E. It's just where our game feels the best it can. Adding bonuses to the players *or* making the game harder will then actively work to the game's detriment. There is an out but I'm not so sure that people would be down with it in general.
One thing that I've been thinking to implement our campaign its a battle variant system that I've found. In few words, it continues progress in battle even with a miss, so I can throw high AC enemies and cause less statements. The idea its to create a EC(Evasion Class), a value lower than AC, but not giving a 100% chance to hit, when the attack doesn't hit the AC it can hit the EC, but hitting EC does half damage or less. The way to the players and mobs not abuse to the system its to keep it working only for close combat and physical attacks, so magic still have its power and ranged attacks can still just zone the enemies.
I use just one ten sided for all rolls for all my non dnd ttrpgs. Rolled twice for percentage. GM controls all % success/failure. So much easier to understand but does take practice.
I always bump a single boss’s AC up a bunch instead of adding hit points. Since the characters usually hit around 60% of the time, suddenly missing a lot is very dramatic. This boss is tough and you sick solo compared to them. They get frustrated and fearful of their impending doom. So when they eventually defeat the baddie they are high diving each other and need an emotional recovery period. Drake makes fun. If it’s always 8 that just as boring. I make 4 swings and 2-3 of them hit. Making bosses counter your spells, teleport out of range just as you’re about to smite, all that is actually fun for players. I run 4 games and the nights they talk about later, the sessions they remember, are the times I make it really hard to do damage. This happens about every 6th session or so on average, maybe slightly less, and it works.
That’s why there has to be more to combat than just combat. Always present a sense of urgency to go along with that agency. This is how dynamics makes gameplay more fascinating, keeps combat from becoming magnetic chess, increases tactical options, and everyone gets something to do.
Great video. I've found lower the AC but raise the hit points from stock stats. Make the monsters easier to hit but have them be able to soak up some damage so they don't die too quickly. That makes the fights exciting because the players get to roll damage but also it doesn't feel like a pure steamroll because the monster actually gets to live long enough to hit back.
Videos that peel back the veil like this are always great to watch! It's easy to forget that even the DMG had some fluff in it to make DMs think there's some method to the madness.
This was incredible advice. I play Pathfinder 2e and I am playing with the variant rule to not include a players level with most of their dice rolls. I did this for a few reasons but most of all the math while easy just seemed so wrong. To hear something like my AC is a 35 and I have a +22 to hit, just seems wrong on so many levels. Now I know the magic number of 8 and can rule a LOT faster on the fly as well. Now I do also try and mix up monsters and events to help some of the characters shine a bit, and give resistances to monsters to make battles a bit unique as well. This advice is perfect now, as there are quite a few times where I get the question "Can I jump across that pit?" or some other skill and yes Pathfinder has a rule for that, one that I don't really want to look up. Now I can just quickly figure out that the pit would take someone who is very good at athletics (trained +2, Strength +4) a 65% chance of success. I can then set the roll to a 14 and as you said, it can be adjusted EASILY. Thanks again.
This video convinced me that the lack of NPC input on roll difficulty in Dungeon World is fine. Literally, you're just setting the DC so that someone doing what they do best needs an 8+ on a d20 (65% chance of success), which is slightly better than what you get in PbtA games, but the middle ground is the most fun anyway, so (58.5% chanvce of a 7 on 2d6, +3 = 10 so success 58.5% of the time at max ability, BUT 97.2% chance of a partial success, so all good)
Another great video, thanks! As a compulsory note from the resident DnD sceptic: this (not so?) common truth is the main reason why I keep preaching that DnD is too rule-fat. If it dared to replace the hundreds of specific monster, armor or item stats with a few simple tables of generic difficulty/bonus guidelines, anyone could remember them easily and there'd be no (well ok, less) pauses during the game to discuss exactly how do you roll for something, or how difficult a grey-wolf-with-a-purple-spot-on-its-butt should be to beat with a semi-automatic-gnome-hand-crossbow-with-a-magical-flashlight for a half-elf-rogue-star-druid-in-chalice-wildshape-with-a-guidance-spell, if they can use it in the dark and is turning the flashlight on a bonus action. But then, of course, it would be much harder to sell us new books or subscriptions to digital tools that remember all that for us... On a side note, I know some would argue having every single combination of player-monster-environment-item down in writing is how you avoid conflicts over the rules in the first place. I agree to a degree ;). Once you get over a certain size (and I feel like DND got there long ago, trampled on it and boldly went where no one has gone before), finding these rules stops being worth the time. I know GMs who limit the number of books that can be referenced in their game simply because they have a life. And others who, just like demonstrated in this video, adjust things a lot on the go to make the game fun and the difficulty levels applicable to circumstances and the story... because DnD is too rule-fat, you know ;D.
@@charles_pensamentocritico yes, but am I telling them roll 8 and they add their mods to the roll? Or am I telling them "mods included in DC, now roll 8"? It's important, it's one of those little details that matter :)
I'm getting ready to run my ten year old daughter through her first RPG and I chose Shadowdark for its stripped down rules light approach and in prepping her to go through B1-B2-B4 in that order. This approach will help me convert those modules quickly and easily. I want to make her first RPG experience challenging, fun and fast flowing. Thx Prof!
Im not sure why you are converting much. Just go play. Now if you are running a 5e campaign, there will be some work to do because the ACs are buffed so much and the buffs the monsters have in order that they may last a round or two vs all these superhero charactes running around. B1 kinda sucks. We can admit it among friends.
The main point to the numbers is to help make characters who specialize in something better than those who don't at a glance, or within a modular system where each DM doesn't need to adjust things. It's easier to port flat numbers in an adventure path, after all, or use as a reference point to set DC's at a glance. After crunching some numbers with Heath's Geekverse a while back, I reduced the DC's for skill tests by 5, and it does a good job of allowing characters who specialize in something to be consistently successful at average tasks out of the gate and improving to be reliable at Hard tasks when they level up, but still requiring Expertise to have a decent chance at pulling off the most daring feats of skill, which preserves the niche for Rogues and Bards.
Prof. DM does not believe in characters that specialise in things. If you have put a lot of points in Lockpicking, that just means that your difficulty will be that much higher at his table.
This reminds me of how casinos are often full of glitz, lights, and bright colors in order to distract the "marks" from realizing they are being taken for a ride, but in reverse. RPG is entertainment that doesn't involve money changing hands among it's participants (at least I hope so). The game companies make money , but the folks sitting around the table aren't unless they are trying to entertain an audience on line like Vox Machina. But casinos have worked out all the odds in their favor so that the "winners" feel they have accomplished something truly epic...and in away you could say they have because they have "beat the odds".
As with the majority of the concepts and rules alterations you discuss, I Dig this! I’ve always strived to run my games faster and more proficient and pick a number and run with it…. It’s the story that flows forth that is important for my players and myself
AC in old school games was high because modifiers and HP were low. If AC is low and modifiers high, then HP must be conversely high, or it becomes a game of rocket tag.
I stopped playing D&D after 3.5 but I suspected that most TTRPGs have a simple numerical range to determine difficulties. "The Rules are Arbitrary" has been a mantra of mine since my exodus from D&D, but I never thought too long on what this magical numeric was. But then the concept was solidified with PF2e, where I discovered that some of the math is 100% arbitrary and used only to make players feel better. It is a neat psychological trick that is used, but ultimately a meaningless one. I would argue the number isn't 8, but 7, but that is experiential. Some players need the extra cushion of ease due to play style. Other tables would range up to a 9 because they prefer grittier stuff and can handle it. D&D has cultivated play groups that err on easier difficulty, IMO, but again, this is experiential, and YMMV. Once I unlocked this understanding, I found that almost every system hides their simplistic mechanics behind a ton of arbitrary myths. Nowadays I prefer systems that either offer more inspiring opportunities for players to make interesting choices (or at least give me the tools to present them more efficiently), or don't hide behind the numbers... which invariably provides a system that hinges on inspiring players to make interesting choices (or give me the tools to present them more efficiently). My go to for this is Cypher System. The core book makes it clear that the mechanics are just smoke and mirrors to arrive at the Magic Number (which is 9 btw), but discloses this with the explanation that it created the illusion to make the GM's job of making a fun game easy. I allow PF2e as a second choice because even though the smoke is thick and the mirrors plenty, it has the best character customization for a fantasy system I have seen. I am willing to cut through the arbitrary rules to the core mechanic to afford myself and players such flexibility.
I think modifiers to the roll only make sense when you actually have control over those modifiers and there's an actual choice of not maxing those. If the best case scenario is always maxing your modifier, it doesn't matter at all. But games that tend to focus too much in the mathematics behind, tend to have one optimal solution.
Thank you for making this video. It just shows the truth about all RPG's, and that its the story and the collaboration between players/GM that makes the game.
I really like games that lean into this, so you know the number the that needs to show up on the die before you roll. It’s so much more dramatic that way!
I think this type of thinking where you boil it down to "what needs to come up on the d20?" is what really pulled me in about Modiphius's Fallout TTRPG. It takes the math out of the to hit roll and you just know what your dice should come up as. Fallout TTRPG is a 2d20 system where lower = better, and you're aiming to roll at or below a target number, with a 1 being 2 successes and 20 adding a complication (even if you succeed on the other dice, you just complicate the success which I find interesting). And then you just add together your attribute and skill. Making an attack with a club? Strength + Melee = your target number, roll the dice, see how many successes you get, difficulty of the task is based on how many successes are needed vs the number itself. I know a while back I used a system similar to your player facing rolls so that players would roll for their saving throw spells and enemy attacks instead of me, and rather than explain to them how it all worked, I just said "here's how the math works if you want to verify, but I'll just tell you what you need to roll" and it worked ok. Granted, I personally didn't like it because I like rolling dice, so taking that away from myself made it unfun for me, but it did make things a bit simpler just telling them a number to roll and taking the mid combat math out of the roll.
I like the idea of simplicity to hit numbers. Classic Traveler does something like this, to hit an enemy in combat you have a basic roll of 8+ on 2d6. Armor of the target provides modifiers if I recall correctly, and of course you get mods for your skills, but in Traveller you don’t have many of those and they’re just +1 maybe +2 or rarely +3. But it’s always tied to that generic “roll 8 or more.” No matter what the attack is.
One of the things I really like about pathfinder 2e is the fact that a lot of things add your level as proficiency bonus. Monsters add their level to AC, fighters to their to hit bonus and it basically disguises the fact that for most things you have a 55% chance to succeed baked in the core mechanics of the game.
This is also what lets pf2e have more consistent solo boss monsters, as they "bleed" the PCs actions with lower hit chances so it isn't just these flat math attrition based 65% always hits which side has more actions math.
I was reading the fallout Roleplaying game by Modiphius, when I discovered there pattern to using the D20. They would divide the D20 into 5 sections then each section being added for easier difficulty. 1-4 hardest, 1-8 hard, 1-12 normal, 1-16 moderate, 1-19 easy. 20 was reserved for Crit Fails.
Conveniently enough, 8 is the base number for calculating your own saving throws as a player!! Almost like the whole system was designed together around a 65% chance to hit. One caveat is that there are lots of ways to skew that eight even lower. I missed zero attacks (except nat 1s) until level 6 in my current campaign, because archery fighting style and racial features + lowDC enemies meant I hit on a nat 2. Or if you take the observant feat, you can bypass nearly every perception roll using your absurd passive.
You said it’s an illusion the PCs get more powerful over time because monster AC increases with CR. But that assumes the PCs’ encounters always are “balanced” to CR. If our adventuring party fights four goblins at level 1, the encounter will be far harder than if the same PCs fight four goblins at level 10. And that is because the PCs got more powerful over time, correct? In fact, it can be fun to have the party face the “same” encounter at different level precisely to show how much more powerful they have become. In any event, thanks for the video, Professor. Another good one!
Thanks for the tips. With our group, we're on our 2nd campaign. The group is still learning since I asked them to change races & classes & I've only DMed as long as they've played. In our 1st campaign we had a fight last for over an hour with 6 PCs & 3 goblins. Horrible rolls & low levels crippled us. I had to adjust or TPK them, one, but your strategy here would have made that a LOT simpler & will simplify our future games. THANK YOU!
My magic numbers are 7, 11 and 14. Pretty close to your chart. Or if were goinf with ICRPG style the magic bumber is 11, -4 to the Difficulty for Easy and +4 for Hard
I'd use a similar eyeballing technique whenever I would run Mutants & Masterminds for my players and they were either facing inferior foes, foes on equal footing, or superior foes. The beauty of that game is that you only used a d20 (including to determine damage effects), so I could quickly put together NPC villains with whatever superpowers they needed without having to actually build them with points like the PCs.
I understand that the way the bonuses work it can make the game feel kinda arbitrary. But I always felt that the challenge of the later parts of the game came from your skills, spells, abilities, and knowledge and not the bonus you get. Yeah sure, rolling an 8 at basically any point in the game might be a success for a skilled character, but the real challenge is knowing what situation to put yourself it to need to roll that 8. When you get more spells and higher level spells you open up more variety of options for how to solve problems, when you get skills and abilities you do the same thing. When you run into more enemies with more unique powers and abilities you have to make better decisions to put yourself in a situation to win. Thats where I always felt that challenge of the game is.
I played at a table DM'd by a mathematician who wasn't afraid to let the numbers scale into the stratosphere. We eventually called our group Task Force 31 referencing the 30+ on the difficulty chart. (And that we'd blown past that long ago.
Great video - I like this type of content. Understanding the game design/mechanics at play hidden behind all the bonuses really helps when you're running a game. Another example - when I understood 5e's concept of bounded accuracy it suddenly made sense to me why characters had such high hit points (even though I disagree with this game design, at least it made sense). Thanks again!
It's funny to hear a professor say "A 65% success rate feels satisfying." Educational standards in this country have really dropped. lol I'll bet Deathbringer's favorite school activity was cutting class.
Another amazing video Professor - I’d actually love to hear more about the stuff you’d change in Old School Dnd, I have been finding the AC way too high but didn’t feel like I could change that without breaking the game. If you’re looking for video idea I’d find that really interesting, you’d need that vest of protection tho! 😂
You know you can just tell players what they need to roll instead of giving them an AC. So at the start of the session say "Today we're doing things just a little different. I've taken notes on all your characters so I know all your bonuses, skills etc. Tonight I'm just going to tell you the number you need to roll to hit in combat with everything included. Buckle up because combats are going FAST tonight!" Using professor DMs scale: 7-8 For someone skilled (in combat that's a fighter or a thief backstabbing) 9-12 For someone for whom it's a secondary skill (in combat that's a cleric or thief) 13-14 for someone who is unskilled (in physical combat that's a magic user) If it's an easy monster you might go one below the bottom of the range. If it's a hard monster you might go one above the top. So for a fighter an easy monster would require a roll of 6 but a hard monster would require a roll of 9. Ultimately it doesn't matter. A 5% increase or decrease in percentage chance really doesn't change the percentages in any significant way. What makes more sense is to give players a better chance if they do something creative and cool. In other words, reward them for the kind of play you want to encourage.
6:00 - if you lower the armor class then that low health is really felt. Your enemies are going to be crumbling and if the players have parity with the monsters then it'll basically come down to initiative because whoever hits first will probably hit hard and kill the player.
@@nemooh Yeh. Having started playing in the early 80s with Basic D&D we fought everything in the first adventure we played until we found out that healing potions can't actually heal you when you're dead (our understanding of the rules was limited...lol). Once we knew that it was "how strong are these monsters. Is it time to run?" We ran from most things and tried to steal treasure. That can be more fun than straight hack and slash.
@nemooh 5E made it possible to go from “fly you fools” to “RUN RUN THE BATTLE’S ON ITS WIKILEAKS AND LEMMIWINKS RUN RUN THE BATTLE’S _OOOOOOOONNNNNN_ - GO LEMMIWINKS! STOP WIKILEAKS!”
Those kids had developed some pretty keen house rules, if a 1E Magic User was rolling a d20 to cast a spell. Took me well into 2E to start using ideas like that.
I have made a matrix for Expert, Skilled, and unskilled, With difficult medium and easy. I have now successful recreaded the attack matrix for basic dnd.😂
Yeah, an 18 only gave a +1 to hit, but then you rolled % dice, giving a much larger bonus, with a max of +3 to hit and +6 to damage. But that's not all. In AD&D the upper limit wasn't 20, but instead 25, which gave +7 to hit and +14 to damage. This was usually achievable by a belt of Giant str. So, the numbers are not really much higher in 5e.
I set my DCs to 15, including death saves. I also add +1 or +2 to all my monster's stats including AC. However, I often lower the HP by 25-50% for everything other then mini-bosses, or bosses. More whiffing, but more meaningful hits. Bosses and tougher encounters get a +4 to everything and max HP. Everything gets a legendary action or 3. Even goblins. I also tend to run more grittier content. Hard mode is the only mode at my table!
It used to frustrate me to no end watching the players miss the goblin repeatedly. It wasn’t heroic fantasy, it was a comedy of errors - and many choose to play that way. 🤷♂️
I think I just hit RPG gold: every player starts with 500 to 1000 hit points. They'll get so excited! Until later they realize most hits do 100-600 HP damage... :D
The math checks out, but I would suggest DMs keep it to themselves. Telling your players, "Yeah, it doesn't matter how you build your character or how much fancy gear you acquire, you still just need an 8" is a good way to suck all the fun out of things. Let the poor saps at least have the *illusion* that their choices matter.
HAHAHA! Great video Dan, very well done! While you have covered this before it bears repeating to the un-believers.... this REALLY is usable at the game table not just a snarky jab at the purists and over-thinkers.
Now that you mention it Prof, after my group's last session of OSE, AC14 has become notorious in my mind! A party of 6 laden with crossbows and slings vs 3 troglodytes could barely hit the side of a barn for all it mattered with all the 13s we rolled! Old school D&D balanced lower HPs with higher ACs but it's not very satisfying to spend 3 rounds rolling misses, I would rather have monsters with twice the HP and half the AC
I keep a framework of prep but make up creature stats, spells and thresholds on the fly. The only rule my players should know( I learned from this channel) is the only thing guaranteed is a die roll between them and causation, they always get a chance.
When making combat (D&D 5E), i usually take the stat block as a reference for what the creatures can do in terms of powers and actions, but throw away most of the numbers. Then, i use a roll expectation of "6-9-11" for players and a "9-12-15" for enemies. For players, i want them to roll 6+ for easy, 9+ for average and 11+ for hard. For enemies, i want them to roll 9+ for easy, 12+ for average and 15+ for hard. Then i take my players stats to create the status block based on the rolls i want. If the tank has 22 AC, minions should have a hard time hitting him. So i give my minions +7 to hit (22 - 15). The damage dealer has +7 to hit? So he should hit easyly the minions. So minions AC should be 13 (6 + 7). Now, the BBEG (for the same tank and DPS) would be hard to hit and good at hiting, so i would give him +13 to hit (22 - 9) and a AC of 18 (11 + 7). This way, minions would be more dangerous to PCs weaker in combat, while the BBEG would be extremely deadly, requiring more team work and good resource spending.
This is perhaps one of your best/most useful videos. I run Cypher System, but the math can be applied across systems. I'll take a break once in a while, and let one the players run a min-campaign for the table, and I've forwarded this to him (He's asked for advice on GMing, which is a lot harder to give than you would expect). This vid is an excellent peek-behind-the-curtain for GMs to absorb, and the principles can also be applied to skill-heavy games. I've bookmarked it, and will definitely watch it again, writing up a half-sheet cheatsheet to laminate and keep handy. After those numbers, all the other rules are really just trappings ...
What PDM has figured out is that anything that does not contribute to the fun of the game should be removed. Sitting there watching another player or DM make complex addition and subtraction is just not fun IMHO.
2:07 I thought I was watching a lot of the big names in the dungeons and dragons community, but I feel like all of them said they were not invited to the summit. I genuinely have no idea who made it
Set DCs and ACs for a proficient character to succeed at 8. That is the simplest advice I've ever heard regarding calling DCs. You can do that on the fly very easily
You know you could do away with that extra work and just tell the proficient character "you need to roll an 8. No adds...I already took yours into account." Then you only give them a better roll if they do something cool, clever or creative. "you're going to get the fighter to push you into the monster full force so you can stab it harder...you need to roll a 6. You're going to swing off a chandelier, drop on the monster with your sword out and use that momentum to drive the sword home...oh that's a 5. Definitely a 5!"
@johntheherbalistg8756 Now that you say that, this could make it easier for apprehensive players to try out DMing and really open up the hobby. Mein gott Professor, what hath thou wrought???
Love this concept. Generally though I tend to set my DCs around 15. Any DC lower than 10 doesn't seem worth rolling for. Some DMs make you roll for too many things and too often. If there is no time constraint then most times I don't make them roll for minor stuff.
