|
9 months ago ::
Sep 20, 2012 - 10:45AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Apr 30, 2012
|
Skill mastery is an ability that tries to define a role for the rogue, but in my opinion it went quite too far and damaged the game. Having both +3 and minimum roll of 10 makes for a bored rogue player (i know that mine was at least) and overshadows the other PCs (why would i invest in skills if no matter what the rogue is better?). Add to this the knack skill at lvl 2 and the DM starts to be in serious problems, if he wants to provide a really challenging skill test, then he must set a DC impossible for the rest of the group. As such i suggest the following change: 1) Remove knack at lvl 2 (see below). 2) Skill mastery allows you x times a day (3, 4 or something like that) to either raise a skill to +3 OR get a minimum of 8 on your roll. At lvl 2 you also get the chance to grant yourself advantage on a roll, and maybe additional uses/day. This way the rogue would still be a master of skills, since he has an answer to any situation: 1) Routine check that you don't want to fail. Get 8. 2) Check in something you are untrained. Flat +3. 3) Difficult check in something you are good at. Get advantage. At the same time you are not limiting the other PCs. If my paladin has diplomacy +6 then i'm the one that will negotiate with that guy, cause at best you have a +3. You don't have +3, advantage, and no less than 10 on the roll at the same time. Also, it would make sense for the rogue to invest in secondary ability scores. Having a + 2 instead of -1 means autosuccess on easy checks and makes your advantage more useful. Just throwing an idea, what do you think?
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 20, 2012 - 12:09PM
#2
|
|
|
Bored rogues? I would beg to differ. My rogue players have said that it finally made them feel like they could do skill checks in combat without feeling like they were wasting their turn. Knowing you were most likely going to disable that trap made it a comparable option to Sneak Attack for the first time since 2e :P SA every turn? That can also create bored rogues. I do agree that it seems a little TOO guaranteed, but your system brings it back to a non comparable level. At least in my eyes.
At the same time you are not limiting the other PCs. If my paladin has diplomacy +6 then i'm the one that will negotiate with that guy, cause at best you have a +3. You don't have +3, advantage, and no less than 10 on the roll at the same time.
How is the rogue gaining advantage in a way that the paladin wouldn't?
My two copper.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 20, 2012 - 2:48PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Aug 20, 2011
|
For our next session I will give the rogue an extra d6 to add to his roll instead of the current rules for skill mastery, it won't interfere with the advantage/disadvantage rule and will still allow fumbles to happen.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 21, 2012 - 6:57AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Apr 30, 2012
|
I feel that for constested checks having +3, no bad rolls and advantage is much better than a flat +6. But that may be just my opinion. Even if the other chars don't feel overshadower skill wise by the rogue, a great problem that i actually find is the fact that he has almost no reason to invest in secondary abilities.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 21, 2012 - 7:40AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Aug 14, 2012
|
I think is too much advantage for a character (my rogue in the playtesting liked it) It does not allow other characters make anything out of their fields (fight, heal...) But I see your idea too much complicated. Why not return to the 3rd ed and simply give more skill training to the rogues? Maybe training more skills (like Jack of all trades) or giving more points when you get a new level. If you have the +7 limit it will not get crazy like 3rd ed when your skills could be almost supernatural
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 21, 2012 - 8:10AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2010
|
I have a bored Rogue as well. I'm going to try and throw in some traps of higher quality as well as the lower quality ones that she can disarm in a second.
Ant Farm
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 21, 2012 - 8:40AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2007
|
I think your reading Skill Mastery too broadly. I think the "your skills" wording means the rogue's actually trained skills, not every check the rogue might make. This is a change from terminology compared to the older editions, but it is spelled out at the start of the backgrounds PDF when it explains skills. In the past you where making always making a diplomacy check, even if you where not trained in diplomacy. In next your making a charisma check, but using diplomacy in place of charisma when trained because that skill applies to this check.
This means the rogue can only use Knack when trying to outpace the Paladin at diplomacy. Read this way it is fine. Without the other two bonuses, Knack just gives him a decent chance of succeeding at easy rolls unless it is something he is talented at anyway. The +3 bonus just insures a rogue can't be bad at a skill he is trained in, and the minimum 10 is roughly a +2.25 bonus. This means a rogue will slightly outpace another character at something they are both trained in, but not by much.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 21, 2012 - 8:52AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2010
|
My rogue is only using her Trained skills for the checks. In the end she can always intimidate, find traps, disable traps, see everything, and hide. At considerable advantage. Basically she is a ninja, with no problems.
Ant Farm
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 21, 2012 - 10:51AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2007
|
My rogue is only using her Trained skills for the checks. In the end she can always intimidate, find traps, disable traps, see everything, and hide. At considerable advantage. Basically she is a ninja, with no problems.
That is possible, if the difficulty levels are set too low, the fairly high mininum a rogue gets on their rolls means that easy tasks become automatic. It wasn't a problem for our group, but that might have been a side effect of what we where running into. Our rogue was mostly using stealth and open locks, and didn't have spot as a skill. Stealth in combat needs to be fairly reliable as the rogue depends on it now to get sneak attack, and the open lock checks where the sort of thing you do want to mostly be trivial because it just holds the game up if the party spends too much time opening doors. The few times a rogue specific skill check was important it was also a harder roll.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 21, 2012 - 1:05PM
#10
|
|
|
My rogue is only using her Trained skills for the checks. In the end she can always intimidate, find traps, disable traps, see everything, and hide. At considerable advantage. Basically she is a ninja, with no problems.
That is possible, if the difficulty levels are set too low, the fairly high mininum a rogue gets on their rolls means that easy tasks become automatic. It wasn't a problem for our group, but that might have been a side effect of what we where running into. Our rogue was mostly using stealth and open locks, and didn't have spot as a skill. Stealth in combat needs to be fairly reliable as the rogue depends on it now to get sneak attack, and the open lock checks where the sort of thing you do want to mostly be trivial because it just holds the game up if the party spends too much time opening doors. The few times a rogue specific skill check was important it was also a harder roll.
At first, I defended this mechanic, but the recent arguments have swayed me to the other side.
Yes, the DCs are too low, but that's the problem. If a rogue is in the party, DCs HAVE to be high. Other players don't even get a chance, or they do and the rogue auto passes it every time. Now this only applies on the skills the rogue has, true. But it's still an issue.
Read the latest Playtester Profile, on Hocus Smokus, he has a great review of Skill Mastery's issues. He even concludes that sometimes it seems better not to have a rogue in the party, lol.
My two copper.
|
|
|
