Skills?

OK, I'm foggy this AM, how do these new skills work?

I read them last night and cant grab them from work to re-read them?

It use to be stat+train+d20 (plus any skill lvl bonus)

Now its ??? 

"The turning of the tide always begins with one soldier's decision to head back into the fray"

1d20 + stat mod. If you have a skill that is applicable to the stat check, you can roll your skill die and add it to the result. Rogues have skill mastery, which allows them to roll two skill dice and add the higher roll. There is also a feat that allows 10 to become your lowest possible roll on the d20. I love it!
It use to be stat+train+d20


replace "train" with "skill die"
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
OK, that's what I was missing.  Thank you. 

Curious, is this a good thing?

At first it seems now its more variable, but it also has the potential to give you a higher bonus, for example the old 3+3+d20 was a max of 26.  But now (at lvl 2) you could get 3+(d6)+d20=29

 

"The turning of the tide always begins with one soldier's decision to head back into the fray"

With the December 2012 packet a skill check result = ability modifier + d20 + skill die.

Personally, I don't think using skill dice gives the right feeling for being trained in a skill.  A d20 already has a lot of randomness, but now a skill check can vary from 2 to 32 (+ ability mod).  With a static bonus, say +4 or +5, being trained in a skill means that you never fail horribly and you pretty consistently do better than an untrained person, but now being trained in skill means that you sometimes get lucky and do something of epic proportions and sometimes you do far worse than child?  I'd rather not have so much reliance on luck to determine when I am and am not good at something I'm trained in.
I tend to prefer dice to static bonuses, so yes I call it a good thing.

Keep in mind that the skill DCs are set without skill dice.  That they break the DC table is entirely the point.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition

I don't think they nailed it with skills, myself.


I prefer the die to the static advancement they had before but I still want masters to be able to do things that novices can't do. Rogue's skill mastery isn't hugely exciting but they've got a lot of stuff to look forward to besides so that's no big deal.

Just an initial, off-the-cuff idea. But why have a universal skill dice by level mechanic at all? Why not ranks in a skill? So you would get a number of dice (pick the highest) for having more invested in a particular skill?
Just an initial, off-the-cuff idea. But why have a universal skill dice by level mechanic at all? Why not ranks in a skill? So you would get a number of dice (pick the highest) for having more invested in a particular skill?



So rank translates into die value?


Kinda like Earthdawn (I keep saying that). I like that idea.

The DC guidelines have also changed. A nearly impossible skill check now has a DC of 35 (and it is, indeed, nearly impossible). Yes, I think it is a good thing. It keeps failure a possibility and never trivializes the roll (the way it was trivialized in the last packet). There are, however, a lot of abilities that you can use to boost your probability. With a feat you can never roll less than 10. With skill mastery you can roll your skill die twice and take the best result. That allows for a very decent probability of success on many skill checks without trivializing the truly hard ones...

With a static bonus, say +4 or +5, being trained in a skill means that you never fail horribly and you pretty consistently do better than an untrained person, but now being trained in skill means that you sometimes get lucky and do something of epic proportions and sometimes you do far worse than child?  I'd rather not have so much reliance on luck to determine when I am and am not good at something I'm trained in.



I am OK with this. Sometimes people just mess up, even with something they are REALLY good at. If you are attempting to do something that is difficult enough the DM calls for a check, then it isnt a mundane task, there is supposed to be an element of failure if you are called to make a check.

They have done it again. instead of adding stability and consistency with skill training they have made it worst than any other playtest.

skill training would be better if they turn d20 die to 2d12, minimum is same as d20+d4, maximum is same, average is same, but it's more consistent.

then skill training can be per level

  1st: 2d12
  5th: 3d10
10th: 3d12
15th: 4d10
20th: 4d12


The DC guidelines have also changed. A nearly impossible skill check now has a DC of 35 (and it is, indeed, nearly impossible). Yes, I think it is a good thing. It keeps failure a possibility and never trivializes the roll (the way it was trivialized in the last packet). There are, however, a lot of abilities that you can use to boost your probability. With a feat you can never roll less than 10. With skill mastery you can roll your skill die twice and take the best result. That allows for a very decent probability of success on many skill checks without trivializing the truly hard ones...




Wait so a character with training and a +5 from ability modifier will have (from Anydice.com):

Skill  Best        Commoner    Untrained +5
DC    Percent   Percent         Percent
        Chance   Chance          Chance
1      100        100               100
2      100        95                 100
3      100        90                 100
4      100        85                 100
5      100        80                 100(Trivial)
6      100        75                 100
7      100        70                 95
8      99.58     65                 90
9      98.75     60                 85
10    97.5       55                 80 (Easy)
11    95.83     50                 75
12    93.75     45                 70
13    91.25     40                 65
14    88.33     35                 60
15    85          30                 55 (Moderate)
16    81.25     25                 50
17    77.08     20                 45
18    72.5       15                 40
19    67.5       10                 35
20    62.5       5                   30 (Hard) 
21    57.5       0                   25
22    52.5                            20
23    47.5                            15
24    42.5                            10
25    37.5                            5 (Very hard) 
26    32.5                            0
27    27.5
28    22.92
29    18.75
30    15 (Formidable)
31    11.67
32    8.75
33    6.25
34    4.17
35    2.5 (Nearly Impossible)
36    1.25
37    0.42

Wow, that actually looks about right...Smile

Edit: Added in an untrained and untalented commoner (+0 + 1d0), and a talented but untrained person (+5, +1d0).
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.

I think the way I'll reflect the mastery thing is I just won't call for checks from a master with a skill that I would from a novice. I'd prefer it if the numbers reflected this but I suppose what one considers a mundane task is all relative anyway.


I noticed they fixed the DCs. I feel vindicated about that and it's gone a long way to making skills make sense.


I think the way I'll reflect the mastery thing is I just won't call for checks from a master with a skill that I would from a novice. I'd prefer it if the numbers reflected this but I suppose what one considers a mundane task is all relative anyway.


I noticed they fixed the DCs. I feel vindicated about that and it's gone a long way to making skills make sense.




Actually they work fine. Its peoples understanding of math that makes it look like it doesn't...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Like many things in the playtest process, they are tossing out to the public this idea of skill as die (instead of static bonus) to see what people think. If it gets a decent reception, then they can start tweaking it. Look at how much Expertise Dice changed over the packets since their initial good reception.

Likewise, the rogue skill tricks let them test a delivery method for non-spell based interaction and exploration boosts. Again, if people seem to like it, they can expand and generalize the system, making them available to other characters (through the skill system itself, class features, or specialties).

Like many things in the playtest process, they are tossing out to the public this idea of skill as die (instead of static bonus) to see what people think. If it gets a decent reception, then they can start tweaking it. Look at how much Expertise Dice changed over the packets since their initial good reception.

Likewise, the rogue skill tricks let them test a delivery method for non-spell based interaction and exploration boosts. Again, if people seem to like it, they can expand and generalize the system, making them available to other characters (through the skill system itself, class features, or specialties).



Yeah I don't mind the idea of dice instead of static bonuses, I do mind that the basic level of achievement possible for a novice isn't very different from a master. The dice don't really accomodate it very well, but I can compensate in the way I described above.


It's their fear of letting things get bigger. It's probably a good place to start but there will be places where it's appropriate to let go of the fear and let stuff get bigger. The one nice thing about their rabid fear of it is they're being very conservative in relaxing their constraints. Probably that'll allow it to expand further before it breaks.

personaly i would like to see the D4 at 1st level changed to D6 for the folowing reason:

D20+ max ability score +5 = maximum 25
D20+ skill dice D4 = maximum 24

if the D4 at level 1 is changed to a D6 sombody trained in a skill always has the potential to perform better then sombody not trained. 
I'd still vote optional.  Let people pick between the roll, or a flat bonus.

i.e.
+1d6, or +3.
+1d8, or +4.
+1d10, or +5.
+1d12, or +6. 

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

I, for one, am a huge fan of the skill die. Sure, the number's might need to be fixed slightly, and the option for a flat bonus should be there, but as a DM, this is a huge improvement.

In every edition of D&D, players have vastly different bonuses to skills, and it only gets worse with levels. You might have one person who can't fail that 40' jump, but another who can't possibly make it. With this version, the trained person has a decent % better chance, but can always fail, whereas the other person has a small chance of success.

It seems like this is exactly what we were told would happen when they discussed bounded accuracy. 
This also has a similar benefit to dis/adv dice mechanic. The physical die on the table gives you an easy way to keep track of whether or not the bonus has been applied.

personaly i would like to see the D4 at 1st level changed to D6 for the folowing reason:

D20+ max ability score +5 = maximum 25
D20+ skill dice D4 = maximum 24

if the D4 at level 1 is changed to a D6 sombody trained in a skill always has the potential to perform better then sombody not trained. 


Depending upon the skill though, that shouldn't always be the case. Some skills (say ones that require a great deal of manual dexterity/agility) will sometimes be easier for those with a natural talent than even those who are trained to do them.

Remember that even a +3, due to ability, is unusual; even a +1 is above average.

Hmmh, speaking of skills:


I miss the notion, that you can just take a different skill, if something provides you with a skill you are already trained in.



Did anyone find it?