Which is perfectly fine and reasonable. But as you level up, weird things happen. Let's say you have this thing you are good at and so have a 75% chance of success and that makes for a reasonable test. At low levels of play, probably every member of the party has a 40-50% chance of being able to succeed in that same task, so whatever the task is you can face it together or work on it together - your character just probably gets more spotlight during that challenge because that's "the thing you are good at" whether it is combat, parkour, evasion, investigation, or whatever. But as you level up, any test you have a 75% chance of succeeding at, your colleagues now have like a 5% chance of succeeding at.4e and 5e both have tried to deal with this math by making everyone level up at everything, but one consequence of that is that you never get really good at something even if it is the thing you do. This is more observable in non-combat challenges in those systems than in combat challenges. For combat, both 4e and 5e usually do reasonably well albeit get grindy (the topic of this thread). For non-combat verisimilitude often demands "I have a 95% chance to craft a masterwork sword and you have a 0% chance to do it."
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7prrWqKmlnF6kv6h706GpnpmUqHyptdNmp6ihnqnAbrDInWRsZWBivLN5kmZsZp%2BVqXqqwIyroKCgpGOEcX6Rb21oqJ%2BowW6FkW5qb2xg