D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

[UngeheuerLich]

As noted just above, IMO take-20 was one of the worst rules in 3e. Failure is in itself a consequence, as is "nothing happens" or "you're stuck, try something else".

It was one of the best. If there is no time pressure and no consequence of failure, why roll 20 times? 5e makes it simpler: just assume you eventually do it.

I don't disagree on letting the players just win sometimes, other than I'd add "when it makes sense" in there somewhere; because hard-coding it as a written rule invites situations where it doesn't make sense and then paints the DM as the bad guy for denying it in those cases.

It is not about letting players win. It is about the mindset of tryong to tell astory together. Which means even though you design challenges, you hope the players will not fail.

 

[Hriston]

I know a few people in the UK but the odds of me happening to bump into one of them by chance were I to suddenly find myself in London would be near-zero low.

Setting aside the fact that chance meetings do occur, why are they being brought into this? Presumably, if you know someone, you have a decent idea of where to look for them, yeah?

 

[James Gasik]

Setting aside the fact that chance meetings do occur, why are they being brought into this? Presumably, if you know someone, you have a decent idea of where to look for them, yeah?

Sometimes. But other times you lose track of people. People get busy, move away, you lose their number, they decided to get off facebook for good, you name it.

Being able to reliably contact someone 100% of the time, 24-7 isn't really realistic in most cases. That having been said, why are we comparing D&D to real life?

I don't generally have to worry about a random encounter with Orcs on my way to the doctor's office. My boss can't hit me with Sending to complain about me or call me into work. On the other hand, if my car breaks down, I can't just cast Mending or Make Whole, I have to pay 130 for a tow and 180-300 (or much more!) for a repair.

My fantasy life can be similar to my real one, but if it's too similar, it's not a fantasy any more!

 

[CreamCloud0]

Setting aside the fact that chance meetings do occur, why are they being brought into this? Presumably, if you know someone, you have a decent idea of where to look for them, yeah?

But it’s weird that I just so happen to know someone who lives there in basically every single location we visit right? It’s not that your character can go to London and know someone in the area, it’s that they can go to London, Paris, Belgium, New York, Toronto, Tokyo or even a space colony and i will apparently know someone in every one of those locations, somehow.

 

[Vaalingrade]

But it’s weird that I just so happen to know someone who lives there in basically every single location we visit right? It’s not that your character can go to London and know someone in the area, it’s that they can go to London, Paris, Belgium, New York, Toronto, Tokyo or even a space colony and i will apparently know someone in every one of those locations, somehow.

Again, the thing is, you're not going to go to London, Paris, Belgium, etc all at once in a short span.

This is a background that going to come up once in like 10 sessions and your character will only be using it when they need to know someone.

The mechanic isn't saying you literally know someone in every town, just that you happen to know someone in the places where it matters.

 

[Lanefan]

It was one of the best. If there is no time pressure and no consequence of failure, why roll 20 times? 5e makes it simpler: just assume you eventually do it.

Or don't do it, if the DC is higher than your 20 can achieve.

My preference is that you don't roll 20 times. You roll once, with that roll indicating the best you can do over however many tries in however long you have available.

It is not about letting players win. It is about the mindset of tryong to tell astory together. Which means even though you design challenges, you hope the players will not fail.

I'm not "trying to tell a story" in that sense. I'm running a campaign that has some story elements in it, and while I've certainly got some influence on what happens next I've still no real idea what story will emerge as time and play go on.

Which means I set up challenges with the mindset of "if they fail, they fail". I'm also not shy about - occasionally - setting up the sort of challenge where if they fail they either a) pretty much have to abandon the adventure or mission or b) will never realize there was potentially more to this than met the eye.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Or don't do it, if the DC is higher than your 20 can achieve.

My preference is that you don't roll 20 times. You roll once, with that roll indicating the best you can do over however many tries in however long you have available.

Which is not how the rules in 3e worked. But this is how many people played. It took me a while to realize that if you don't play like this, the whole DC tables made a lot more sense.

I'm not "trying to tell a story" in that sense. I'm running a campaign that has some story elements in it, and while I've certainly got some influence on what happens next I've still no real idea what story will emerge as time and play go on.

This was not what I meant. The story is not completely scripted before actual play. But if you run prewritten campaigns, yeah, the general plot is by default prewritten.

Which means I set up challenges with the mindset of "if they fail, they fail". I'm also not shy about - occasionally - setting up the sort of challenge where if they fail they either a) pretty much have to abandon the adventure or mission or b) will never realize there was potentially more to this than met the eye.

Which is a possible approach. I do prefer however the success at a cost approach most of the time. I used to do it like you once upon a time. But then I realized, that starting new adventures over and over again, just because someone rolled a 1 on a check is not a lot of fun.

 

[tetrasodium]

Or don't do it, if the DC is higher than your 20 can achieve.

My preference is that you don't roll 20 times. You roll once, with that roll indicating the best you can do over however many tries in however long you have available.

I'm not "trying to tell a story" in that sense. I'm running a campaign that has some story elements in it, and while I've certainly got some influence on what happens next I've still no real idea what story will emerge as time and play go on.

Which means I set up challenges with the mindset of "if they fail, they fail". I'm also not shy about - occasionally - setting up the sort of challenge where if they fail they either a) pretty much have to abandon the adventure or mission or b) will never realize there was potentially more to this than met the eye.

I think you might be misrenembering or using the SRD wording for taking 10/20. The actual phb rule was a lot more elaborate & nuanced than you make it out to be.
The SRD says

Spoiler: this

Taking 20​

When you have plenty of time (generally 2 minutes for a skill that can normally be checked in 1 round, one full-round action, or one standard action), you are faced with no threats or distractions, and the skill being attempted carries no penalties for failure, you can take 20. In other words, eventually you will get a 20 on 1d20 if you roll enough times. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, just calculate your result as if you had rolled a 20.

Taking 20 means you are trying until you get it right, and it assumes that you fail many times before succeeding. Taking 20 takes twenty times as long as making a single check would take.

Since taking 20 assumes that the character will fail many times before succeeding, if you did attempt to take 20 on a skill that carries penalties for failure, your character would automatically incur those penalties before he or she could complete the task. Common “take 20” skills include Escape Artist, Open Lock, and Search.

The PHB said

Spoiler: this

Taking 20: When you have plenty of time (generally 2 minutes
for a skill that can normally be checked in 1 round, one full-round
action, or one standard action), you are faced with no threats or
distractions, and the skill being attempted carries no penalties for
failure, you can take 20. In other words, eventually you will get a 20
on 1d20 if you roll enough times. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill
check, just calculate your result as if you had rolled a 20. Taking 20
means you are trying until you get it right, and it assumes that you
fail many times before succeeding. Taking 20 takes twenty times as
long as making a single check would take. Since taking 20 assumes
that the character will fail many times before succeeding, if you did
attempt to take 20 on a skill that carries penalties for failure (for
instance, a Disable Device check to disarm a trap), your character
would automatically incur those penalties before he or she could
complete the task (in this case, the character would most likely set
off the trap). Common “take 20” skills include Escape Artist, Open
Lock, and Search.
For example, Krusk comes to a cliff face. He attempts to take 10,
for a result of 16 (10 plus his +6 skill modifier), but the DC is 20, and
the DM tells him that he fails to make progress up the cliff. (His
check is at least high enough that he does not fall.) Krusk cannot
take 20 because there is a penalty associated with failure (falling, in
this case). He can try over and over, and eventually he may succeed,
but he might fall one or more times in the process. Later, Krusk
finds a cave in the cliff and searches it. The DM sees in the Search
skill description that each 5-foot-square area takes a full-round
action to search, and she secretly assigns a DC of 15 to the attempt.
She estimates that the floors, walls, and ceiling of the cave make up
about ten 5-foot squares, so she tells Krusk’s player that it takes 1
minute (10 rounds) to search the whole cave. Krusk’s player gets a
result of 12 on 1d20, adds no skill ranks because Krusk doesn’t have
the Search skill, and adds –1 because that is Krusk’s Intelligence
modifier. His roll fails. Now the player declares that Krusk is going
to search the cavern high and low, taking as long as it takes. The DM
takes the original time of 1 minutes and multiplies it by 20, for 20
minutes. That’s how long it takes for Krusk to search the whole cave
in exacting detail. Now Krusk’s player treats his roll as if it were 20,
for a result of 19. That’s good enough to beat the DC of 15, and
Krusk finds an old, bronze key discarded under a loose rock.

Sharing that page was

Spoiler: Taking 10

Checks without Rolls
A skill check represents an attempt to accomplish some goal, usually
while under some sort of time pressure or distraction. Sometimes,
though, a character can use a skill under more favorable conditions
and eliminate the luck factor.
Taking 10: When your character is not being threatened or dis-
tracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the
skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10. For many
routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Dis-
tractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a
character to take 10. In most cases, taking 10 is purely a safety
measure —you know (or expect) that an average roll will succeed
but fear that a poor roll might fail, so you elect to settle for the
average roll (a 10). Taking 10 is especially useful in situations where
a particularly high roll wouldn’t help (such as using Climb to ascend
a knotted rope, or using Heal to give a wounded PC long-term care).
For example, Krusk the barbarian has a Climb skill modifier of +6
(4 ranks, +3 Strength modifier, –1 penalty for wearing studded
leather armor). The steep, rocky slope he’s climbing has a Climb DC
of 10. With a little care, he can take 10 and succeed automatically.
But partway up the slope, a goblin scout begins pelting him with
sling stones. Krusk needs to make a Climb check to get up to the
goblin, and this time he can’t simply take 10. If his player rolls 4 or
higher on 1d20, he succeeds.

Spoiler: Time & skill checks

Time and Skill Checks
Using a skill might take a round, take no time, or take several
rounds or even longer. Most skill uses are standard actions, move
actions, or full-round actions. Types of actions define how long
activities take to perform within the framework of a combat round
(6 seconds) and how movement is treated with respect to the activity
(see Action Types, page 138). Some skill checks are instant and
represent reactions to an event, or are included as part of an action.
These skill checks are not actions. Other skill checks represent part
of movement. The distance you jump when making a Jump check,
for example, is part of your movement. Each skill description
specifies the time required to make a check.

Spoiler: Practically impossible tasks

Practically Impossible Tasks
Sometimes you want to do something that seems practically
impossible. In general, a task considered practically impossible has a
DC of 40, 60, or even higher (or it carries a modifier of +20 or more
to the DC).
Practically impossible tasks are hard to delineate ahead of time.
They’re the accomplishments that represent incredible, almost
logic-defying skill and luck. Picking a lock by giving it a single, swift
kick might entail a +20 modifier to the DC; swimming up a waterfall
could require a Swim check against DC 80; and balancing on a
fragile tree branch might have a DC of 90.
The DM decides what is actually impossible and what is merely
practically impossible. Characters with very high skill modifiers are
capable of accomplishing incredible, almost unbelievable tasks, just
as characters with very high combat bonuses are.

and a few related functional subsystems that provided the GM with a full box of tools to interact with things like the dmg's bonus types/dm's best friend & a much more flexible DC ladder based on who could do a given task.

Taking 20 got deployed after adventurers did things through play & action to pave the way for what players hope/expect will allow it. That collaborative brainstorming & playing process often involved resourse attrition and/or skill checks before it was even an option/

 

[mamba]

With regards to take 20. What this is intended to represent is the idea of spending time to gain success. Often times, there are rolls that there isn't a real reason not to allow a retry of. In AD&D, for example, there was often a "you tried once, you fail, you need to come back when you get better" present.

if you can just retry as often as needed, why even place the obstacle, just do not roll at all...

 

[mamba]

London, Paris, Belgium, New York, Toronto, Tokyo

one is not like the others