Dark Sun returns

[mandrake]

Yeah, pretty much I think the 4E concept was that they actually didn't want skills to ever get any better, but they disguised this by having the skills increase and the skill challenge DCs increase with them, instead of just having a static skill bonus.

The DC is just basically dynamically altered based on your level anyway, so as to just cancel out any bonus you'd get from having your skill better than what a level 1 commoner would have.

Its just illusionism to make a scaling system into a nonscaling one.

This is pretty much exactly how they worked in 3e as well, except it was possible to make skill checks harder by spreading your points around.

[Username17]

This is pretty much exactly how they worked in 3e as well, except it was possible to make skill checks harder by spreading your points around.

No. In 3e the DCs are fixed, and as you go up in level your bonuses increase. This allows you to get stuff done at higher levels that you were not able to do at lower levels. In an explicit and world effecting manner.

Now, a lot of people think that the diplomancy rules give too much story power to the players, but there's no argument to be had that the rules don't give real and level scaling world affecting abilities to the PCs.

-Username17

[mandrake]

There's a table in the DMG of skill checks by level and what you should be using to challenge your players. The 3rd ed. one, mind you. It's the same thing.

If you're saying that 4E doesn't have fixed DCs, well... 4E would like to disagree with you.

[souran]

Well, we were talking about the ability in terms of Necromunda, where in the downtime phase you are allowed to roll for the availability of rare items for purchase. The black market connections allow you to roll an extra die and then drop the lowest to see if a particular item is available. It's simple, it's pretty good, and it's more of an ability than anything in 4e.

The downtime in necromunda is designed to let all players have an equal turn. Infact, downtime is done as turns. Which is radically different from dnd. In necromunda the primary way of GETTING new equipment is through the black market. You don't have other options. Infact you can't even really use the regular market as all the things that are important to a necromunda gang are illegal in their hive world.

So yes that game has an eleborate system to tell you what your gangers can buy. Its also very strickly controlled so that your gangers cannot get out of hand.

Yes one of your goons is your groups face and he is better at getting you crap outside of the combat portion of the game. This means that other players target that goon in the combat portion.

Unless your dm is a jerk the monsters should not always go striaght for the money man in your D&D game. Although if we played dnd with a class that could get us whatever we wanted without adventuring that might be about the only reason for us to adventure.

There are other examples like Shadowrun where your contacts have a connectedness rating, and that acts as a dicepool modifier to your rolls against Availability Ratings to attempt to get access to restricted items. That too is a defined ability that you can write on your sheet and have real effects from. But let's focus on Necromunda because it is more insulting to 4rries and also because it is frankly a more similar game to 4e D&D than an actual RPG is.

Again, shadowrun has an elborate system for using the black market because its designed to capure the feel of a certain type of world. The players get most of their equipment from the black market. Second edition shadow run didn't even list "market" prices for weapons. It just gave you the dice/cost forumla.

The thing about shadowrun contacts is everybody gets them. They are as much a part of your character as your attributes. Additionally, there value fluxuates based on the magic hand of the dm. If your game master plays a game where you usually steal your new weapons your contacts are crap. If you dm plays that you have to buy everything through your contacts not having max ranks from creation is crap.

Again this system is so easly abused. Its designed so that players sit down and roll dice to determine if they get new treasure or not. The gamemaster doesn't even need to be there.
Players roll dice and add new items and equipment to their character sheet.

See as Titanium Dragon was quick to point out, characters in 4e have a Streetwise check. That could have been the basis of a set of abilities involving information gathering and black market trading and stuff. But it's not, because there are no DCs written down anywhere o do any of that stuff. You can generate a black market dealings number, but that number doesn't mean anything. Is a 14 a good number for buying and selling poisons? What about a 32? Who knows? No one knows.

Actually, considering that there are charts indicating what is an easy/moderate/hard challenge for a character by their level this is all moot.

Your shadowrun example falls into this trap as well. The gamemaster determnies the difficulty and the penalties. You roll dice.

Here the gamemaster can see what you are trying to do. Say sell poison. Ok are you a first level thief or a 30th level. Are you in a big city or a tiny village. Cross reference the chart and boom you have a number relevant to the game to act as a DC. Note that like all parts of the skill system this is a hold over from 3e. So if your argument is that streetwise can't sell poison in 4e then it also cannot do it in 3e. However we both know thats silly.

Now 4e does do something arbitrary. It sets the economy aginst the players. it does take away the ability to make money by rolling skill dice. All of those methods no longer work. Why? Because the game assumes that as adventurers you make your money by fighting and slaying monsters and the foul evils of the world.

Because Bill Slavicsek specifically said that worrying about or tying down any of that information was badwrongfun. You know, in the same essay where he explained how cool it was that he was taking crafts and professions out of the game entirely. Right before the essay where he told us about his epiphany that removing all the abilities from monsters that affected the world outside of combat would somehow be a good thing because they didn't need to interact with the plot, only the combat mini-game.

Differenace between you and me: I think bill was right. If the encounter is set up such that the players have to think of a way to escape the locked room before the smash-o-taur breaks through the 4 walls in the way and gets to the party are you really going to sit their as the dm and just let the smash-o-taur fail at his break walls down checks?

Plot monsters do their plot thing. If they can fail at their plot thing then that sucks as the dm. Its funny maybe once.

Did you really read all those stupid ecology paragraphs in the 2nd ed monster manual? Are flumph mating rituals that important?

Personally, I am much happier with a book that gives me ready to go monsters than one that spends page after page telling me how low on the totem pole demon x is and how he has to clean up Garguantaon's spittle in the 8th layer of the abyss. Instead spend that space giving me another variation of that guy. Honestly, when my players kill it they won't care anymore. When they summon it they won't care in the first place.


You never really provided evidence of how "black market contacts" should work in dnd. You pointed to two games that use the black market as the primary means of getting new equipment and said "these games do it" on the other hand those games have to come up with reasons why the players don't just pull magic swords out of stones to gear up. D&D has no such problem.

Whats more as you pointed out streetwise could do this easily and without the hassle of making it a class ability.

Finally, we both know that as a class abiilty "black market contacts" would suck for a dnd character. It either is a ticket to access magical items you shouldn't be able to afford or it doesn't do anything useful enough to justify taking it.

Explain again why dnd SHOULD have this as a class ability. Its something we both agree can be basically done with an existing skill. Does this ability give a +2, +4 hell even a +10 bonus to that check? Are you really saying that you would give up an extra spell at ANY level for that ability?

I am willing to admit that 4e characters might be better rounded if the power scheme was at will/encounter/daily/out of combat. However, it doesn't need that. Additionally, making the 3e choice of one of these out of combat powers and losing something that could be used in combat is ALWAYS a bad choice.

[souran]

No. In 3e the DCs are fixed, and as you go up in level your bonuses increase. This allows you to get stuff done at higher levels that you were not able to do at lower levels. In an explicit and world effecting manner.

DCs are not fixed except for the small number of tasks identified in the skill itself. Whats more if you owned the DMG even those were not fixed as it explictly says that those tasks should get progressively harder based on the level of the pcs.

Again, those DCs were only set in the DMs mind. What 3e did was make it impossible to come up with things that were remotely fairly challenging to multiple characters beyond level 1.

If the task was set up so that a person with less than max or no skills ranks could succeed a skilled character never fails. Conversly skilled characters could easily be the only ones who stood any kind of chance against something.

This really means that skills remained 90% in magical tea party land. Just like in White Wolf. Just like in shadowrun.

Now, a lot of people think that the diplomancy rules give too much story power to the players, but there's no argument to be had that the rules don't give real and level scaling world affecting abilities to the PCs.

Diplomacy required a health dose of don't be stupid to even come close to working right. They held over the basic adjustment table from second edition and then were confused why in a game where you could finally level diplomacy and get more than a +4 to the stupid chart people were diplomancing their way through the game.

[Username17]

The downtime in necromunda is designed to let all players have an equal turn. Infact, downtime is done as turns. Which is radically different from dnd. In necromunda the primary way of GETTING new equipment is through the black market. You don't have other options. Infact you can't even really use the regular market as all the things that are important to a necromunda gang are illegal in their hive world.

I'm going to make a confession: this is your first paragraph and I stopped reading after it because you're a dumbass. Necromunda has an entire section of common items that you can purchase standardly without sending anyone to work the black market. What the fuck do you think you're going to accomplish telling such incredibly transparent falsehoods.

If you're saying that 4E doesn't have fixed DCs, well... 4E would like to disagree with you.

Ah! Now we're in burden of proof land. Please tell me the page number where the DCs for Diplomacy are. There's an unfriendly magistrate, what is the DC to use diplomacy to get him to be helpful?

See, you just made a falsifiable claim which is subject to evidence based argument. Diplomacy DCs. Now. Pics or it didn't happen.

-Username17

[violence in the media]

3.x has balance issues, 4e has rail roading issues. Again no one is really disagreeing.

Ironically I find 3.x has more railroading issues, not because of character abilities but because of the massive amount of DM prep required, and the inability to create NPCs on the fly effectively. It's not so mcuh that you can't teleport to waterdeep randomly and start doing stuff, it's just that your DM has literally nothing prepared there, and can't wing it.

You know, I can never really tell what level of obsessive detail you're operating from in these "3.x is too complex!" rants of yours. Are you tracking which donut shop is at which intersection in Waterdeep? Are you grousing that the level 10 party is going to be mostly interacting with 1st-3rd level people? Nothing prepared and an inability to wing things? WTF is this person doing in the DM seat in the first place?

So while it's easy to go off the rails in 3E, doing so is basically being a dick.

How so? Because the party might not go on the adventure that you wrote up? So what? I'm sure everyone here who has ever DMed a game has had to scrap a dungeon or an adventure (or at least postpone it until it could be retooled and used in a different situation) when the party discovered a way, or simply elected, to bypass it. Get over it.

As an alternative to the players simply being dicks, them diving off the rails might just mean that your adventure is stupid.

What 3E really excels at is giving people strategic means to solve quests. It isn't so much that you can go abandon the quest and do something else easily. You can't. But as far as trying shit like scrying and teleporting to the end of the adventure, there's lots and lots of ways of doing that. Unfortunately due to the prep time involved in making adventures, a lot of these are really undesireable.

You know, for all the prep time you're supposedly putting into these adventures, maybe you could spare a few minutes to write in an amulet of nondetection or some wonderous architecture or something.

However, I will concede that there are many abilities that just lack a simple or obvious mechanical counter. Player/DM Gentlemen's Agreements to not Scry-and-Die (for example) each other are bad because they don't make any sense within the world.

Why is my wizard not assassinating the Orc Barbarian chieftain again? Oh, that's right, we told Tom we wouldn't pull any of that stuff.

MAD, or accessible countermeasures to abusive strategies, are much better to curtail things sensibly within the world.

Why is my wizard not assassinating the Orc Barbarian chieftain again? Because teleport wipes all spell buffs and Dazes you for 6 rounds at the landing zone. Plus, OBC probably warded his warcamp to scramble accurate scrying.

However, part of the higher level > lower level thing should, in addition to or instead of straight numeric superiority, be the one-sided access to brutally effective tactics. It's fine for a CR 15 hell-beast to be able to blasphemy-spam a 10th or 11th level party into oblivion should combat erupt, but it probably shouldn't be able to pull that same trick as effectively on a 12th-15th level party, and it should almost certainly fail against a 16th+ level group.

[Morzas]

Cool story, bro. I guess people who actually take the time to analyze the mathematical flaws of a system are nothing but useless powergaming fucktards who just don't understand how to ROLEPLAY instead of ROLLPLAY.

Could you have linked something where the guy doesn't say "it's too complex to completely map out mathematically? He fully admits that his math there is insufficient to describe skill challenges because each group is going to be different and each skill challenge is going to be different.

Where does he say that? I don't see that anywhere in the link I posted. Perhaps you don't understand the way the tables are laid out?

[mandrake]

Ah! Now we're in burden of proof land. Please tell me the page number where the DCs for Diplomacy are. There's an unfriendly magistrate, what is the DC to use diplomacy to get him to be helpful?

See, you just made a falsifiable claim which is subject to evidence based argument. Diplomacy DCs. Now. Pics or it didn't happen.

-Username17

I didn't say anything about diplomacy DCs. I don't know where you got the idea that I did, I even reread what was said to see if I had implied it anywhere.

I said 4E does have fixed DCs. Not that every situation ever has a set DC for one to use because (and this is key) those are the very definition of things that don't make sense to have a set DC for. How hard is it to convince an unfriendly magistrate? It depends. How unfriendly? Does he try to kill you when you walk in? Is he a little snippy with you? Did he burn down your house and tell your children that daddy doesn't love them? It would be bad design to have a set DC when any of these could be the case. Of course, DMs in your view should have what, no say over any of that?

Morzas, if you can't be bothered to read your own links, I don't have time for you.

[Morzas]

I've read it. Numerous times, in fact. The one here who hasn't is you. Now, go back to that link and find me proof that he says skill challenges are too complex to calculate. Man, with the content of your last few posts, it's becoming obvious that you're either REALLY FUCKING DENSE or a troll.

[RandomCasualty2]

You know, I can never really tell what level of obsessive detail you're operating from in these "3.x is too complex!" rants of yours. Are you tracking which donut shop is at which intersection in Waterdeep? Are you grousing that the level 10 party is going to be mostly interacting with 1st-3rd level people? Nothing prepared and an inability to wing things? WTF is this person doing in the DM seat in the first place?

It's not a level of obsessive detail. It's just " we attacked the temple of Bane in Zhentil Keep. What's the statblock of all the clerics we just chose to attack?"

3E cannot answer that question without a crap ton of preparation or by using pregens which is a ridiculously easy encounter, meanign that it's always in the PCs best interest to go off the rails for no reason other than to make the game ridiculously easy.

How so? Because the party might not go on the adventure that you wrote up? So what?

You're being a dick because the DM literally can't even run a game without a ton of preparation in 3E. You cannot create a 9th level wizard on the fly. You just can't. Encounter design takes so long that not doing whatever quest the DM planned is just telling him that he wasted 10+ hours of his life for no reason, and now he can't even run a game session because he doesn't have time midsession to create new NPCs.

Contrast this to 4E where you can write up a completely new NPC or monster from scratch in like maybe 2-3 minutes, and you see the obvious difference. It's pretty easy to go off the rails in 4E and do what you want. I honestly don't care if the PCs attack a merchant caravan that I never planned on them attacking, because I can easily get some stat blocks and run with it.

But in 3E, the rules are so clunky and slow that you literally outrun the rules as soon as you go off the rails. And that's just plain rule system failure. 2E rules let you create a fast NPC, as does 4E. 3E is the only edition where an NPC just isn't complete without a fuckton of magic items, feats and a bunch of other crap you have to choose because you make them like PCs.

I mean yes, you can run off the rails in social encounters and stuff. 3E can handle you going and talking to the king or whatever. But the moment you actually want to interact with anyone (liek cast charm person on the king), the DM needs statblocks, and because everything in 3E is so tied together, it means rulesfail. You need the king's will save, you need to know what his level is, what his wisdom is, what cloak of resistance he has and if he has iron will. that's basically writing up an entire character sheet.

Now you can do what most of us do, and that's just to say "fuck the rules, i'm pulling a number out of my ass."

But that just proves my point of how the rules fail.

However, I will concede that there are many abilities that just lack a simple or obvious mechanical counter. Player/DM Gentlemen's Agreements to not Scry-and-Die (for example) each other are bad because they don't make any sense within the world.

Yeah, the world is just not well thought out. I'd be okay with it if it had counters and actually went through with describing them to the DM, similar to the way Shadowrun does. "Here's what they do for magical security, matrix security, etc." That's cool. If they're going to go through and make a coherent intrusion/security system, that makes a good game.

But that's now how D&D works. D&D is just a game with a bunch of uber power strategic spells and no way to beat many of them. Hell, I mean you can't even stop a fighter from tunneling with an adamantine sword into your dungeon, and that's pretty sad.

The problem of teleport ambushes was a problem back in 1E. And they had several editions to fix that, and they never did. Inexcusable.

Having strategic powers is great. Having unbeatable strategies with no counter is just bad design.

I'd expect that shit out of a 1st or even 2nd edition game, but fuck man... they didn't even put the slightest bit of effort into fixing that and it's been there all along since 1E.

[mandrake]

Here you are Morzas:

The way he got butthurt over people talking about anal rape and Russian Roulette is making me a bit suspicious, but outside of places like 4chan I try to give people the benefit of the doubt. He could, after all, just be very dense.

Oh wait, that's why I'm not looking your shit up for you. Anyway, cool story bro.

[erik]

You're being a dick because the DM literally can't even run a game without a ton of preparation in 3E. You cannot create a 9th level wizard on the fly. You just can't. Encounter design takes so long that not doing whatever quest the DM planned is just telling him that he wasted 10+ hours of his life for no reason, and now he can't even run a game session because he doesn't have time midsession to create new NPCs.

RC, it doesn't take 10 hours to make a level 9 wizard. There is the NPC list in the DMG. Yes, they are weak, but you can tweak them, pick a couple signature spells and in less than 10 minutes have a working NPC.

I'm serious. Don't min/max the NPCs like crazy. It is not worth it. By just taking the sample NPCs, making minor adjustments and then tweaking the environment, you can make servicable encounters. Pregen does not always equal cakewalk. You give them a few powerful spells, give them advantageous terrain or throw in a few minor enemies to screen for them.

If your players are impromptu attacking places that you have not prepared, then you may need to remind them, "Hey guys, I haven't created the NPCs or any maps for this place, so it will take a while. Next time perhaps give me a little notice since taking 30 min to an hour out of playtime is probably not what you had in mind."

In 4e you will still be faced with the same problem of spending time getting NPCs and making the maps and terrains from scratch. Maybe it will take a few less minutes, and I would mark that as a point in favor of 4e, but it does not take 10 hours to make a single NPC or even a whole batch of NPCs who will be worthwhile foes.

I can TPK parties with a handful of NPC wizards and so can you. The trick isn't making them stronger, it is making sure you don't steam roll the players.

[Kaelik]

So in other words, Mandrake can't find it because it doesn't exist, and he refuses to actually demonstrate evidence for anything.

Seriously mandrake, you are a joke. You aren't looking it up for him, you are supposed to be providing evidence for your case.

When Frank says, "What is a fixed DC in 4e?" And you answer is "I'm not giving an example." You are a fucking retard. All you have to do is give an example and people will say, "Oh look, you are right" but instead, you don't give examples, and the only thing I have to go on is the statement that their are none, and the design article where the designer says there shouldn't be any, and my experience going through the DMG and PHB which found none.

I might have missed something, but unless you tell me "The fixed DCs for X are on page Y" I'm going to have to say, "No fixed DCs."

[mandrake]

So in other words, Mandrake can't find it because it doesn't exist, and he refuses to actually demonstrate evidence for anything.

Evidence for what? I'm not spending time looking up something for someone who refuses to act like a reasonable person and do something other than insult.

Seriously mandrake, you are a joke. You aren't looking it up for him, you are supposed to be providing evidence for your case.

He provided it. It's less than a page. He consistently acts like an ass. I'm not interested in arguing with him, he's pointless.

When Frank says, "What is a fixed DC in 4e?" And you answer is "I'm not giving an example." You are a fucking retard.

Frank said "you said diplomacy has set DCs" and I said that I didn't. He asked for a set DC to a specific thing which I never claimed existed.

All you have to do is give an example and people will say, "Oh look, you are right" but instead, you don't give examples, and the only thing I have to go on is the statement that their are none, and the design article where the designer says there shouldn't be any, and my experience going through the DMG and PHB which found none.

Yet, when Frank is proved wrong no one expects him to actually own up? Interesting. Again, I was proved to be wrong about something I never even said.

I might have missed something, but unless you tell me "The fixed DCs for X are on page Y" I'm going to have to say, "No fixed DCs."

Set DCs for various skills are on pages 179-189. Diplomacy skill DCs are not set. One last time: I never claimed that they were. I never claimed that anything like that.

[Username17]

Mandrake, welcome to the ignore bin: You are the weakest link, and a sad pathetic troll.

-Username17

[mandrake]

Thanks, Frank for admitting you have no argument.

[RandomCasualty2]

RC, it doesn't take 10 hours to make a level 9 wizard. There is the NPC list in the DMG. Yes, they are weak, but you can tweak them, pick a couple signature spells and in less than 10 minutes have a working NPC.

No it's not 10 hours for a single NPC, but if you wnat a party of NPCs, which hey, I mean it's a group game and based on rocket tag, so you almost always do.

As far as creating wizards, you have to also consider that after combat you're going to need to design a spellbook too since the PC wizard will almost certainl want to loot that.

The NPC tables are ineffective for a variety of reasons, the first is that the NPCs just plain suck. And yeah, you can say don't min/max and make them suck, but honestly at that point, the rules have failed. You can't make an effective fighter or even rogue without extensive min/maxing. I'm not talking about some 1500 damage monster, I'm talking about just a challenging encounter for your PCs, or even a semireasonable one. An NPC fighter is a pathetic speed bump without min/maxing. Past like level 4-5, pregens are crap. I mean you can get by at low levels, which is where most people play apparently, but high level is a joke. I mean look at the 11th level fighter pregen out of the DMG and try telling me that guy is anywhere remotely close to a CR 11 encounter. It's just laughable. To the point that any NPC encounter becomes a matter of "nuke the wizard" because they're the only NPC you give half a damn about.

So yes, as I said, you can create a shit encounter on the fly, but so what? If you want to create any NPC encounter worth having, it's going to take prep time. This is just straight up rules fail.

If your players are impromptu attacking places that you have not prepared, then you may need to remind them, "Hey guys, I haven't created the NPCs or any maps for this place, so it will take a while. Next time perhaps give me a little notice since taking 30 min to an hour out of playtime is probably not what you had in mind."

Right which is why I basically say that them going somewhere you hadn't intended basically makes them feel like dicks because they have to bring the session to a grinding halt. And that means the entire group sits around for an hour (whcih may well be 25% or more of your session time). For a game that's supposed to allow freeform adventuring, that's just unacceptable.

When I DM mid to high level 3E, my basic rule is, if you want to do anything special next session, let me know at the end of the current session so I can prepare. Otherwise, you ain't doing it.

I can TPK parties with a handful of NPC wizards and so can you. The trick isn't making them stronger, it is making sure you don't steam roll the players.

Yeah, really NPC wizard pregens are the only ones who don't require all that much prep to be deadly. I mean this assumes you skip building their spellbook or even choosing what spells they have prepared, since that takes a lot o ftime for a 9th level wizard, but you don't really care about their other stuffsince they're invisible or hiding behind an illusionary wall anyway.

Still it's a guarantee that they're always going to be the PC primary targets, since they're the only class worth worrying about in the hands of NPCs.

[Thymos]

If you find the tables to be too weak, then just use the characters a few levels higher.

Or grab a monster you think is correctly CR'd and use his statblock for npcs.

[Username17]

Yeah, I run all games freeform. If players want to go teleport to the frozen wilderness and have adventures there, I can totally do that. I can generate potential enemies on the fly while I'm describing scenery, so I totally don't get the idea that it would be in any way difficult to handle players going off the rails in any system. I straight up insult the creativity of any DM who can't handle that shit, and have little respect for them.

Which pretty much leaves the question of how easy it is to go off the rails in the first place. The combination of no real world abilities and the Points of Light bullshit setting combine to form Voltron to make it so that 4e characters can't really leave the rails even if you "let" them.

And that sucks.

-Username17

[TarkisFlux]

mandrake, the table you referenced, does it list DCs for specific tasks or does it give guidelines for DCs for characters of specific level?

The former would qualify as static DCs, as they are independent of character level and based only on external circumstances. The Diplomacy example Frank pulled out of his ass is a static DC in 3.x because the skill actually lists the DCs for taking an NPC of any initial mood and making him helpful to you. In that pulled from ass example, the DM retains the power to set the initial mood of the NPC, and even to apply that silly +2/-2 modifier that the rules mention if he feels the listed DCs and modifiers don't adequately represent the situation for some reason. What he's not supposed to do is pull a different DC out of thin air, or somehow increase it because the PCs are higher level and more likely to succeed at it.

If, as I believe, the list you reference is simply a guideline for DCs of easy, average, and difficult tasks for a character of level X, then it is a relative DC. It depends explicitly on the character level, in addition to whatever else, and there is no indication that any given task will be easier for a higher level character with a larger skill bonus than a lower level one. In which case your statement that 4e does have static DCs is simply incorrect, because it is possible (and perhaps encouraged) for the DC to increase just because the character has gained a few levels, not because the task itself has become more difficult.

[IGTN]

Don't use NPC wizards if you need to make them up quickly. Use classes like the Summoner, Warmage, and Beguiler instead. That way you don't need to make up a spell list or even really pick spells known, just open the book and go.

[Leress]

Question RC, why don't you make a NPC pregen chart like the DMG but custom for your needs?

[mandrake]

It's some of each, though where it scales it makes sense

Climb: Surface Athletics DC
Ladder 0
Rope 10
Uneven surface (cave wall) 15
Rough surface (brick wall) 20
Slippery surface +5
Unusually smooth surface +5

Task Insight DC
Sense motives, attitudes 10 + creature’s level
Sense outside influence 25 + effect’s level
Recognize effect as illusory 15 + effect’s level

Listen Perception DC
Battle 0
Normal conversation 10
Whispers 20
Through a door +5
Through a wall +10
More than 10 squares away +2
Spot or Search Perception DC
Barely hidden 10
Well hidden 25
More than 10 squares away +2
Find Tracks Perception DC
Soft ground (snow, loose dirt, mud) 15
Hard ground (wood or stone) 25
Rain or snow since tracks were made +10
Each day since tracks were made +2
Quarry obscured its tracks +5
Huge or larger creature –5
Group of ten or more –5

I can provide more examples or specific ones if you're interested.

Here's the entirety of the diplomacy section in skills: Diplomacy (Charisma)
You can influence others with your tact, subtlety,
and social grace. Make a Diplomacy check to change
opinions, to inspire good will, to haggle with a patron,
to demonstrate proper etiquette and decorum, or to
negotiate a deal in good faith.
A Diplomacy check is made against a DC set by the
DM. The target’s general attitude toward you (friendly
or unfriendly, peaceful or hostile) and other conditional
modifiers (such as what you might be seeking to
accomplish or what you’re asking for) might apply to
the DC. Diplomacy is usually used in a skill challenge
that requires a number of successes, but the DM might
call for a Diplomacy check in other situations.

[MGuy]

RC: most of your problem with encounter generation seems to be with the inherent balance problems in 3.x. I, as a person who prefers DMing, avoid any and all railroading. And honestly I like the encounter generation from 4e. I think it is true to assume it is a bit more difficult to design an encounter in 3.x than 4e but that more has to do with balance issues in 3.x. However, i don't think the problem is as extreme as you say it is. If I'm making a crapton of casters for a keep I can reasonably say that most of them had the same spell book and put every spell I gave each on of them into all of their spell books. I also know how to challenge a party without killing them or making things easy. These are all things that rely on the DM's ability to handle the game rather than legitimate pokes at 3.x's system. I will boldly state it is easier to generate an encounter in 4e but I'm not gonna say that it is a horrific nightmare that drains away all of my designing time in 3.x either.

That being said, at least in 3.x you CAN go off the rails and quite easily. In 4e doing so is decidedly more difficult and can be made nigh impossible without even resorting to house rules.I'm not saying one is better or worse than the other just that is how it seems to be.

Mandrake: I'm not sure what you are trying to say. The conversation seems to be going so many different ways I can't lock down your point. Could you please outline the specific points YOU are trying to get across (without the arguments against it) so I can better understand what you're trying to say.Also I too could not find the quote where he says he didn't show the numbers. I honestly cannot find it.