|
6 years ago ::
Sep 15, 2007 - 10:41AM
#71
|
Date Joined:
Dec 13, 2003
|
A houserule mentioned on the Star Wars board by the Wiz0s is to drop the +5 bump in favor of a bonus equal to character level. So non-trained skills get a +1/2 level bonus and trained skills get a +1 level bonus.
I think that's a bad move. It would make starting characters have almost no skill disparity, so someone that has trained in sneaking around is basically the same as someone who had it. At level 30, the skill disparity would be far too high (15 points without any other differences between trained and not trained) -- and you need to still have opposed rolls matter. This makes a "sweet spot" of mid-levels where skill training matters but isn't overpowering, but 4E is trying to do away with such spots.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 15, 2007 - 10:42AM
#72
|
Date Joined:
Dec 13, 2003
|
 
Complicated? Detailed? You should take a look at Rolemaster or Hero System to see what a complicated/detailed skill system truly looks like. Keeping track of skill points in 3.X Edition should not require math skills or calculus beyond what they teach in the Elementary School...
True, it could be worse (I've played the Hero System), but the skill system in 3.x is too complicated given its importance in the game. It requires too much work in given what you get out of it.
They teach calculus in Elementary school now? 
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 15, 2007 - 11:00AM
#73
|
|
|
...
BTW, if you've *never* ridden, do you think it feels right for your character to have +10 Base Modifier (plus Ability Modifier) on all Riding checks? 
Yes I do when an unskilled Ride check allows you to only saddle, mount, ride and dismount. I have taken friends horseback riding for the first time and in the course of a couple of hours they become fairly good at the basics of horeseback riding, These are not heroic figures and they certainly do not have high DEX scores. This skill does not replace the Mounted Combat or Mounted Archery Feats hwich would be used to represent someone who has combat experience in the saddle.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 15, 2007 - 11:53AM
#74
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
True, it could be worse (I've played the Hero System), but the skill system in 3.x is too complicated given its importance in the game. It requires too much work in given what you get out of it.
They teach calculus in Elementary school now?
Ah, sorry, that's what you get when you don't 'proofread' your posts! Thanks for correcting me! :D :embarrass
I actually think the skills are *very* important in 3.X Edition. Just think about it... Spot, Listen, Move Silently, Hide, Spellcraft, Knowledge, Heal, etcetera. -- our sessions typically feature many more skill checks than saving throws or attack rolls. And not to mention how Craft skills might have a major impact a 'slower-paced' campaign. So, I don't think that the skill system should be considered 'less important' than any other aspect of the game.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 15, 2007 - 11:58AM
#75
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Yes I do when an unskilled Ride check allows you to only saddle, mount, ride and dismount. I have taken friends horseback riding for the first time and in the course of a couple of hours they become fairly good at the basics of horeseback riding, These are not heroic figures and they certainly do not have high DEX scores. This skill does not replace the Mounted Combat or Mounted Archery Feats hwich would be used to represent someone who has combat experience in the saddle.
Alright, how about an example during a game session: In the middle of a combat encounter your 20th level wizard, who has *never* ridden a mount in his life, decides to mount a riderless (let's assume the rider was killed by the PCs) horse and ride away from melee. Would you still let him get that +10 bonus on his skill check?
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 15, 2007 - 1:01PM
#76
|
Date Joined:
Dec 14, 2006
|
Yes I do when an unskilled Ride check allows you to only saddle, mount, ride and dismount. I have taken friends horseback riding for the first time and in the course of a couple of hours they become fairly good at the basics of horeseback riding, These are not heroic figures and they certainly do not have high DEX scores. This skill does not replace the Mounted Combat or Mounted Archery Feats hwich would be used to represent someone who has combat experience in the saddle.
Hmm, personally I think that your example just indicates that it's easy to learn the basics of a skill. That is, learning. But if you have to use a skill for the first time, +10 is something you are not exactly gonna get especially if you have never spent a few hours practicing the basics.
So my point is, throw your level 20 rogue in the water (where he cannot support himself) without him having ever swimmed, and he drowns.
PS: Raiding actually assumes that everyone can ride without training, just you can't do stunts or control the animal under duress without training.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 15, 2007 - 1:42PM
#77
|
|
|
Alright, how about an example during a game session: In the middle of a combat encounter your 20th level wizard, who has *never* ridden a mount in his life, decides to mount a riderless (let's assume the rider was killed by the PCs) horse and ride away from melee. Would you still let him get that +10 bonus on his skill check?
If said Wizard had grown up in a world without horses and/or during the 100's of hours of gameplay that got him to Lvl 20 he had RP'd that he had a disdain for horses, then I would require some skill rolls (Handle Animal to approach comes to mind).
Otherwise, I think that in a world where horses are a primary travelling component and a character who had done a fair bit of travelling. I would have no problem at all with this option. I don't understand why you would, if that is what you're implying by your reply to me.
As far as the bonus goes, it wouldn't matter what his bonus was because until he attempts something tricky with the Mount, there's no need to roll.
Now if your arguement had been, "Should a Lvl 20 Wizard who had never ridden a horse in his life be able to Fight with Warhorse (DC 10 Ride check)?" I would have to agree that this is faulted. Of course some latitude should be given to characters of this Epic Level. Although in a 30 Level system is L20 that Epic anymore? No idea yet. Can't wait to see though.
Let me clarify that my arguement is not that the Saga system is perfect, I just like it MUCH better than the 3.5 Skill system.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 15, 2007 - 1:47PM
#78
|
|
|
...
So my point is, throw your level 20 rogue in the water (where he cannot support himself) without him having ever swimmed, and he drowns.
I'm certainly not a Lvl 20 Rogue and was thrown in the water at age 9 and managed to paddle my way to the edge of the pool just fine. People don't drown because they can't swim (we are all naturally buoyant) they drown because they panic and a Lvl 20 character would seem to me to be less likely to panic.
**Note: If anyone has lost a loved one to drowning I am sorry for your loss and this post is in no way meant to trivialize that.**
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 15, 2007 - 3:49PM
#79
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
People don't drown because they can't swim (we are all naturally buoyant) they drown because they panic and a Lvl 20 character would seem to me to be less likely to panic.
Unless he had hydrophobia! :P
But seriously, yes, it'd be a bit far-fetched not to let him have a skill check. And you might also get some synergy bonuses in 3e (although not to Swim checks, as I recall?). These synergy bonuses are a great mechanic, because that way you could actually have modifiers like +6 on your skills checks (assuming that you have a +2 attribute modifier) -- even if you've never tried that particular skill in your life (and I feel that's about the maximum total modifier you should have if you're 'unskilled' in it).
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 15, 2007 - 4:56PM
#80
|
|
|
There is of course some loss of flexibility and fine-tuning going from the skill point system in 3E to a tiered system like the one in SAGA, but I think it's worth it.
I'm a pretty smart guy, and I've been playing 3E since day one, but I still make mistakes with skill points. Some of my friends still have trouble with skill points. I recently built a 10th level character- I put off the skills and did them last. I found it tedious, especially with three classes and raising my Int at 4th level. Ugh.
Maybe I'm just lazy, but I think that this is an area in which things can be greatly simplified. Most players with most characters just keep a few skills maxed out anyway. That's even used as an example of how to do things in the PHB.
I agree that there must be a certain degree of gradation, but I think that a tiered system can provide enough. +0/+5/+10 might seem rather blunt at first, but finer differences are less significant, and if we have to cut corners, then let's cut the less significant ones.
As for the minimum being 1/2 half level, do keep in mind, as others have pointed out, that an untrained user with +8 in a skill still can't do what a trained user with +6 in that skill can do. Skills have uses that are trained only, like the surgery example in SAGA. Some skills, like Knowledge, Spellcraft, and Use Magic Device, might be completely unusable untrained.
There are other good facets of the SAGA system. I like combining Hide and Move Silently, if only because they are almost always rolled together. It's much the same with Listen and Spot. Forgery was folded in with Bluff to make Deception, and that's probably okay because Forgery isn't used much.
Lastly, I really don't think that we will see a direct port over of the SAGA skill system. There will be changes to accommodate the differences in genre, if nothing else.
|
|
|
