|
3 months ago ::
Feb 27, 2013 - 6:27PM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2011
|
I agree with OP that there are too many skills, too many redundancies, and too many confusing bits of legacy left in (especially to someone who has no experience with previous editions).
The differentiation between Spot and Search is too fine and not worth the page or two it takes to explain. This edition needs to clearly and simply explain skill usage. Instead, it has chosen to obfuscate matters by tying Search to Intelligence and Spot to Wisdom, all the while claiming that any skill might be linked to multiple attributes.
As for Search being used to search for traps... Why not Spot? I never understood why it works like this. If you're walking down a hallway with a concealed pit trap, why would Search help you locate the mechanism that pulls the floor out from under you? Shouldn't the trap be spotted (by a combination of intuition and good luck) rather than force the rogue to laboriously prod at every 5 foot square with a rod before he finds it?
In addition, there needs to be a core rule for group checks. If you say "only the group leader gets to roll" then multiple players who have taken Search/Spot will be useless. If the whole group gets a roll, then traps are much easier to locate through the power of sheer number of d20s alone.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 27, 2013 - 6:44PM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2010
|
Groups checks would be a good tool for the DM when rolling in secret to increase the odds of success. But for the party, if they fail, then they will want individual rolls just to be sure and game the system.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 27, 2013 - 9:45PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Feb 15, 2013
|
both 4e and pathfinder combined certain skills that were too closely related
Search + Spot + Listen = Perception
Hide + Move Silenty = Stealth
Survival + Track = Survival
for pathfinder, Gather Information got combined into Diplomacy
To me, these were welcome changes. Since they are perfectly okay with combining Diplomacy and Bluff into Persuasion, they clearly get the concept.
There is no functional reason to separate spot and listen, and with the limited number of skills available for training, these seem liek reasonable changes.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 27, 2013 - 9:57PM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Feb 15, 2013
|
Groups checks would be a good tool for the DM when rolling in secret to increase the odds of success. But for the party, if they fail, then they will want individual rolls just to be sure and game the system.
I give everyone their individual roll.... It's tough though, because more party members means a much higher chance of spotting something even if the check is hard.
For pathfinder I give each player 10 + their perception bonuses for "passive observation". I avoid rolls all together. There was a small amount of concern about this initially, but everyone came around. This, of course, doesn't include search rolls, or actively trying to listen for an invisible enemy combatant or listening at a door... this is just used for things they are not yet aware of. It works quite well. I have always hated asking players to roll spot checks.... the very act gives away that there is something to see. At one point (back in 3e) I started just randomly asking for spot checks and telling everyone that they didn't see anything, just so I could keep them guessing. But this took time away from the game.
Unfortunately I don't think 10+ will really work in DDN. Although I guess I could calculate their average total from feats and skill dice, skill mastery etc. and use that..... far less elegant though.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 27, 2013 - 11:46PM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Feb 23, 2013
|
both 4e and pathfinder combined certain skills that were too closely related
Search + Spot + Listen = Perception
Hide + Move Silenty = Stealth
Survival + Track = Survival
for pathfinder, Gather Information got combined into Diplomacy
To me, these were welcome changes. Since they are perfectly okay with combining Diplomacy and Bluff into Persuasion, they clearly get the concept.
There is no functional reason to separate spot and listen, and with the limited number of skills available for training, these seem liek reasonable changes.
When did they combine Bluff and Diplomacy? The packet I have has Bluff, Persuasion, Gather Rumor, Perform, Disguse, Handle Animal, and Intimidation listed as the skills that generally use Charisma as their used ability. Personally, I would like to see Persuasion, Intimidation, and Gather Rumor combined into one skill called Persuasion. Think about it, all three of them persuade people. Persuasion (which is diplomacy) persuades people to be your friend, Intimidation persuades people to fear you, and Gather Rumor persuades people to tell you stuff reguardless of how they feel about you. You just need to add flavor text. (For example, Merry and Pippin used Persuade to become friends with the Ents by convincing them with clever word play. Spike used Persuade to make the other vampires follow him by grabbing "The Annointed One," throwing him in a cage and forcing him into the sun. Colombo used Persuade by informing the witness of a discrepancy in his story causing said witness to inform the dectective of where more clues might be obtained.)
Bluff on the other hand is something completely different. Yes, you persuade people to believe you, but it has been usable in combat (feinght/cause distraction), and it is frequently used as a means of hiding your identity.
Also, I've always though Profession was pointles.
So here is, what I think should be the revised skill list.
Balance (possibly combined with Tumble and called Acrobatics)
Bluff (possibly combined with Disguise)
Climb
Disable Device
Escape Artist
Handle Animal
Heal
Knowledge (Arcana)
Knowledge (Dungeoneering)
Knowledge (Folklore)
Knowledge (Heraldry)
Knowledge (History [Combines History and 1/2 of Warfare... the historical part])
Knowledge (Religion [Combines Forbidden Lore and Religion])
Knowledge (Sciences [Combines Nature, Sciences, and 1/2 of Warfare... the technological part])
Perception
Perform
Persuade
Ride
Sense Motive
Slight of Hand
Sneak
Survival
Swim
Tumble (possibly combined with Balance)
Use Rope
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 27, 2013 - 11:56PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
May 22, 2003
|
Spot/Listen:
What I was trying to say was: Do we need both listen and spot, does it make the game better than having just perception?
I think it makes the game better.
With both Listen and Spot, I can have a character with sharp hearing and relatively poor vision. With Perception, all of my senses are muddled together.
With the current system as you say, stealth is countered by either (not both) so only 1 skill is necessary there, either is equally powerful.
Then there are all the other things, do you notice the buzzards in the sky, do you hear the distant rumble of scared buffalo. Do we really need to have 2 skills for this? Why is it important how it was perceived that the lion killed a buffalo if the intent of the Wisdom check was to alert people to the presence of lions?
The Wisdom check used to determine whether the presence of lions is detected is a straight Wisdom check, which doesn't differentiate between the senses.
Also the game master calls for an [attribute] check and the players then ask if they can use their listen skill...if I say no ive given away that its a visual clue (and ofc vice versa), and have thus spoiled some of the mystery.
Don't say no. Just ignore the value displayed on the skill die.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 28, 2013 - 12:13AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Feb 15, 2013
|
that's my bad, they just renamed diplomacy....
I like your list. I particularly like combining knowledge skills.
Profession.... yeah this is a tough one. There are a few examples that I have used/seen that tended to work even before craft was taken out. Profession: Sailor comes to mind. It might seem like a good sailor would just be able to have good climb, use rope, drive and survival (nautical hazards are still natural hazards. This also covers direction sense)
But there are other things like reading a map, estimating travel times over sea, knowledge of rough waters/reefs, dead-reckoning etc that could be placed into the profession skill for a sailor.
Profession: Soldier covers a lot of military tactics, logistics, general wages for mercenaries, knowledge of ranks and the chain of command, military protocol and lots of other useful things.
I actually love that the craft skill is gone. Profession: Blacksmith covers crafting arms and armor but also metalurgy, knowledge of tempering methods, knowledge of cultural differences in the field (eg identifying the general origin of a weapon)
So now you can have profession: fletcher, alchemist, blacksmith, merchant, carpenter, stonemason etc.
Each craft skill is really a profession unto itself. It always seemed silly to me that you could have craft alchemy, but ignore herbalism for example. They seem pretty tied together. I like profession, and I am glad that they have put more emphasis on it.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 28, 2013 - 12:32AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2010
|
I didnt ask if you could distinguish the two, I asked if it was nesceserry to do so. For the X% who want to play deaf with super vision there is a Y% that just want a smooth game where the DM is not double checking and subtracting skill dice. If 1/10X > Y then maybe it is worth it. But from personal experience 1/11 of characters in my game is not audio/visually impaired.
There is no such thing as a straight WIS check. If the player wants to roll in a skill he is entitled to ask if he can. Why would you deny him sensory input in the lion example? And if you allow him sensory input, why does it matter if its listen OR spot, rather than perception? The ninja tracker elf will EITHER see or hear the clues, you cant roll two skills at once...why? Or do I need to fudge that rule as well as a DM?
So do we really need two skills just so a minority* can play with mild shortsightednes (not blind or with any stigmatism as you still get your D20 and your ability) for roleplaying puposes? Are there any mechanical benefits?
*I think its safe to assume its a minority, and my guess is that it is rather tiny as well. The only times Ive seen people in dnd have either/or of listen and spot is when they have mechanically forced in to it....and THAT is limiting roleplaying.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 28, 2013 - 5:20AM
#29
|
|
|
Groups checks would be a good tool for the DM when rolling in secret to increase the odds of success. But for the party, if they fail, then they will want individual rolls just to be sure and game the system.
What you could do is take the best skill die of all the PCs, the highest appropriate attribute modifier, and roll with advantage for an overall group check. Of course you'd want to add in any specials to that, like if there's a rogue, roll 2 skill dice and take the highest; if a PC has Skill Focus for the skill, then any roll under 10 would become a 10. I don't know what you'd do if a character had Skill Supremacy, but I suppose you could roll 3d20 and take the highest, if you were really feeling generous.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 28, 2013 - 6:08AM
#30
|
Date Joined:
May 22, 2003
|
If you use the forum's 'quote' feature, the people you're in discussion with will be alerted that someone has responded to something they've said.  I didnt ask if you could distinguish the two, I asked if it was nesceserry to do so. For the X% who want to play deaf with super vision there is a Y% that just want a smooth game where the DM is not double checking and subtracting skill dice. If 1/10X > Y then maybe it is worth it. But from personal experience 1/11 of characters in my game is not audio/visually impaired.
You're using hyperbole to shoot down a point that was never made.
No one has asserted that they desire to play a sensory-impaired character. I submitted that it is not without reason that the archetypal archer would have keen eyes without having equally keen ears.
There is no such thing as a straight WIS check. If the player wants to roll in a skill he is entitled to ask if he can. Why would you deny him sensory input in the lion example? And if you allow him sensory input, why does it matter if its listen OR spot, rather than perception? The ninja tracker elf will EITHER see or hear the clues, you cant roll two skills at once...why? Or do I need to fudge that rule as well as a DM?
You misunderstand the rules. There is ONLY a straight Wisdom check, which a player may then modify with the application of an applicable skill (if and only if they happen to be trained in one).
So do we really need two skills just so a minority* can play with mild shortsightednes (not blind or with any stigmatism as you still get your D20 and your ability) for roleplaying puposes? Are there any mechanical benefits?
We need two skills to further enrich our storytelling. Our narrative is far more dynamic than wholesale 'notice' as a trained skill. There are countless examples where there is no opportunity to see, only to hear, and vice versa.
Ultimately, the elf has Advantage with their senses; able to roll once for Listen and once for Spot (if the narrative dictates that a sneaking creature is at risk of being both seen and heard).
*I think its safe to assume its a minority, and my guess is that it is rather tiny as well. The only times Ive seen people in dnd have either/or of listen and spot is when they have mechanically forced in to it....and THAT is limiting roleplaying.
You've never witnessed a scenario where a hidden creature has total cover (rendering them impossible to see)?
You've never witnessed a scenario where a skulking creature is using Silence to muffle all noise (rendering them impossible to hear)?
There are infinite examples where these skills may be employed separate from each other...
Differentiation affords me the opportunity to define my capability more finely. You don't see the same opportunity.
|
|
|
