|
3 months ago ::
Mar 06, 2013 - 12:51AM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2010
|
DM: You walk in to a room, there is a door on the other side of the room and an alter in the middle there might be something else in there..
Players: We walk up to the alter and do a int based spot check to search the alter
DM: You forgot to make a spot for monsters so you provoke OA as you pass the 8 Lions skulking in the room, really sorry but its an action now to use your senses. Oh and there was a trap in the corridor that aleted the dragon but since you didnt ask if you had sprung any traps I didnt alert you to the wailing alarm that went off when you fell over the tripwire. Its not my fault, really sorry but Im following the RAW in next.
--------------
Its purposfully an extreme to say that the game probably would benefit from being less rigid in terms of who calls for what check. I readup on skill use on p1 of skills document and by RAW mrpopstar is abbsolutely rignt in all he says. I dont agree with that way to run a game but he IS right.
Sorry for typos. Im in a bumpy train.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 06, 2013 - 4:19AM
#52
|
Date Joined:
Jun 18, 2010
|
In my reading of the DM Guidelines, it looks to me like the DM can and should call for an ability check when the players try to do something that would require a check of some sort. So calling for a spot and/or listen check (or just a wisdom check) when characters are in iminent danger of lions isn't out of the question.
Wouldn't the lions have to make an apposed Dex vs Wis check to hide anyway?
Eh, whatever. The PCs deserve to get lioned - they're too focused on searching an alter when they should have taken a glance around the room first.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 06, 2013 - 6:10AM
#53
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
DM: You walk in to a room, there is a door on the other side of the room and an alter in the middle there might be something else in there..
Players: We walk up to the alter and do a int based spot check to search the alter
DM: You forgot to make a spot for monsters so you provoke OA as you pass the 8 Lions skulking in the room, really sorry but its an action now to use your senses. Oh and there was a trap in the corridor that aleted the dragon but since you didnt ask if you had sprung any traps I didnt alert you to the wailing alarm that went off when you fell over the tripwire. Its not my fault, really sorry but Im following the RAW in next.
--------------
Its purposfully an extreme to say that the game probably would benefit from being less rigid in terms of who calls for what check. I readup on skill use on p1 of skills document and by RAW mrpopstar is abbsolutely rignt in all he says. I dont agree with that way to run a game but he IS right.
Sorry for typos. Im in a bumpy train.
I would love it
Players have become complacent with the "on rails" hand holding scenarios often bring
However, You were slightly unfair
You told them they could see an alter, meaning you activated their vision for them
You should not have even mentioned the alter
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 06, 2013 - 8:29AM
#54
|
Date Joined:
May 22, 2003
|
I'm of the opinion that those separate skills don't deserve to stand on their own and only serve to dilute skill points.
There's no such thing as skill points in this edition.
Its purposfully an extreme to say that the game probably would benefit from being less rigid in terms of who calls for what check. I readup on skill use on p1 of skills document and by RAW mrpopstar is abbsolutely rignt in all he says. I dont agree with that way to run a game but he IS right.
Sorry for typos. Im in a bumpy train.
LOL At least we've pinpointed the reason why we've both been feeling like we're pounding our heads against each other to no avail of understanding. 
The reason why I stand behind the current implementation of skill-use is because it refocuses the narrative. It requires that you engage with the story in order to affect it. The collaborative aspect of building something together is renewed, in lieu of dice and adjudication mechanizing the world we're adventuring in.
In my reading of the DM Guidelines, it looks to me like the DM can and should call for an ability check when the players try to do something that would require a check of some sort. So calling for a spot and/or listen check (or just a wisdom check) when characters are in iminent danger of lions isn't out of the question.
Wouldn't the lions have to make an apposed Dex vs Wis check to hide anyway?
Eh, whatever. The PCs deserve to get lioned - they're too focused on searching an alter when they should have taken a glance around the room first.
The ability contest to maintain their stealth would only be inititated if the player characters surveyed the room. Otherwise, they're simply hidden -- it's an automatic success.
The game assumes competence. If you duck into a hiding place, you're hidden (assuming no one saw you do it). You remain hidden until someone performs an action to find you or reveal your hiding place.
I would love it
Players have become complacent with the "on rails" hand holding scenarios often bring
Evil! 
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 06, 2013 - 3:49PM
#55
|
Date Joined:
Nov 12, 2007
|
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />I'm of the opinion that those separate skills don't deserve to stand on their own and only serve to dilute skill points.
This is my view as well, ignoring the poor wording. By cutting down on the number of skills a player has, they need to be more general to justify the "expense" on the player's part and allow the party to be balanced so they can handle the conflicts that come their way. And by being more general in scope, there's more time playing.
While I can see now that my views don't match the general design of the skill system, I can't help but feel disapointed. But I do like the bonus dice approach a lot. I think it's a fantastic direction.
Thank you Mr. PopStar for all your replies.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 06, 2013 - 10:30PM
#56
|
|
|
Don't forget though, that you don't have to roll a check to perceive things that are obvious. Now - six lions might be hiding in a room, and if you don't search for signs of them, you won't even get a chance to find them. BUT that means you're in a room with not only an altar - but also at least six hiding places large enough to conceal lions. Whatever is providing that cover (or concealment, if the room is pitch black, or fogged over) should be obviously visible as part of the room.
A DM that doesn't mention the six alcoves at the sides of the room, or doesn't tell the players that the chamber is pitch black, is not giving them the opportunity to explore and interact with the world - and will of course end up with players who didn't bother to search a room they assumed to be as stark as the DM's description.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 06, 2013 - 11:28PM
#57
|
|
|
@mrpopstar
"There's no such thing as skill points in this edition."
Forgive me, I meant skill "slots" or choices. A character that should have keen senses has to devote 2 or 3 skill choices to actually accomplish that (listen, spot, maybe search). I think that's over-blown.
I can understand search being separate, but Listen and Spot should be combined. Likewise I think climb and swim are similarly silly and should just be athletics, or something like that.
My concern boils down to this - when characters only get a handful of skill choices, those choices should be broad and meaningful, IMO.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 07, 2013 - 5:24AM
#58
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2010
|
Why can you understand search and spot being seperate?
Description of Search:
You search whenever you actively look around(5) for clues that point to a hidden object such as a trap(4) or a secret door(2), or a hint that might point to a person's or creatures passage through(3) or activity in an area(1)(3).
Description of Spot:
You use spot to notice a creature lying in ambush(1) ahead of you on the road, see signs of a thief(3) hiding in the shadows of an alley, or catch sight of a faint gleam of candlelight under a closed secret door(2).
SO
(1) to find an ambush you use spot and search
(2) to find a secret door you use both spot and search
(3) to find a thief you use both search and spot
So the only thing that search does that spot apearently doesnt do is:
(4) find hidden objects such as traps
What exactly is the justification to have two skills? That they are tied to different stats, nope as skills are not tied to stats any more. That one can find traps and the other cant...well why would I take spot when search does the same and more?
Maybe it is that Search is the skill to use for active looking and spot for passive (5). But the general use for skills define that there IS no passive skill, according to the skill document (there is un-specified references to an alternative way of doing it in the DMG, but dont know where that is).
Search and Spot ARE the same skills, they just havnt noticed it themselves yet. Its a remnant of a copy paste skill system as Ive outlined earlier in this topic. There is some that say that search is tactile awareness, but that is un-supported by the rules in any way.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 07, 2013 - 5:34AM
#59
|
|
|
Why can you understand search and spot being seperate?
Description of Search:
You search whenever you actively look around(5) for clues that point to a hidden object such as a trap(4) or a secret door(2), or a hint that might point to a person's or creatures passage through(3) or activity in an area(1)(3).
Description of Spot:
You use spot to notice a creature lying in ambush(1) ahead of you on the road, see signs of a thief(3) hiding in the shadows of an alley, or catch sight of a faint gleam of candlelight under a closed secret door(2).
SO
(1) to find an ambush you use spot and search
(2) to find a secret door you use both spot and search
(3) to find a thief you use both search and spot
So the only thing that search does that spot apearently doesnt do is:
(4) find hidden objects such as traps
What exactly is the justification to have two skills? That they are tied to different stats, nope as skills are not tied to stats any more. That one can find traps and the other cant...well why would I take spot when search does the same and more?
Maybe it is that Search is the skill to use for active looking and spot for passive (5). But the general use for skills define that there IS no passive skill, according to the skill document (there is un-specified references to an alternative way of doing it in the DMG, but dont know where that is).
Search and Spot ARE the same skills, they just havnt noticed it themselves yet. Its a remnant of a copy paste skill system as Ive outlined earlier in this topic. There is some that say that search is tactile awareness, but that is un-supported by the rules in any way.
And if we really need a skill break-down to allow for tactile awareness, why don't we just go with See, Hear, Feel, Taste, and Smell, to replace Listen, Search, and Spot? Oh, and instead of Sneak, why not Hide, Move Silently, Move So As Not To Disturb The Air (probably a Monk only skill), and Neutralize Odor (not usable by the Barbarian)?
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 07, 2013 - 9:01AM
#60
|
Date Joined:
May 22, 2003
|
While I can see now that my views don't match the general design of the skill system, I can't help but feel disapointed. But I do like the bonus dice approach a lot. I think it's a fantastic direction.
Thank you Mr. PopStar for all your replies.
No problem!
A DM that doesn't mention the six alcoves at the sides of the room, or doesn't tell the players that the chamber is pitch black, is not giving them the opportunity to explore and interact with the world - and will of course end up with players who didn't bother to search a room they assumed to be as stark as the DM's description.
Spot on!
@mrpopstar "There's no such thing as skill points in this edition." Forgive me, I meant skill "slots" or choices. A character that should have keen senses has to devote 2 or 3 skill choices to actually accomplish that (listen, spot, maybe search). I think that's over-blown. I can understand search being separate, but Listen and Spot should be combined. Likewise I think climb and swim are similarly silly and should just be athletics, or something like that. My concern boils down to this - when characters only get a handful of skill choices, those choices should be broad and meaningful, IMO.
Listen and Spot succeed at two completely separate things.
The issue is that skill training represents exceptional ability -- they are indicative of places where you excel as a byproduct of your talent or education. Broadness would dilute the specialization that the current skill system intends to signify.
Your ability scores are broad and meaningful. Your skill training modifies capability in key areas.
Why can you understand search and spot being seperate?
Description of Search:
You search whenever you actively look around(5) for clues that point to a hidden object such as a trap(4) or a secret door(2), or a hint that might point to a person's or creatures passage through(3) or activity in an area(1)(3).
Description of Spot:
You use spot to notice a creature lying in ambush(1) ahead of you on the road, see signs of a thief(3) hiding in the shadows of an alley, or catch sight of a faint gleam of candlelight under a closed secret door(2).
SO
(1) to find an ambush you use spot and search
(2) to find a secret door you use both spot and search
(3) to find a thief you use both search and spot
So the only thing that search does that spot apearently doesnt do is:
(4) find hidden objects such as traps
What exactly is the justification to have two skills? That they are tied to different stats, nope as skills are not tied to stats any more. That one can find traps and the other cant...well why would I take spot when search does the same and more?
Maybe it is that Search is the skill to use for active looking and spot for passive (5). But the general use for skills define that there IS no passive skill, according to the skill document (there is un-specified references to an alternative way of doing it in the DMG, but dont know where that is).
Search and Spot ARE the same skills, they just havnt noticed it themselves yet. Its a remnant of a copy paste skill system as Ive outlined earlier in this topic. There is some that say that search is tactile awareness, but that is un-supported by the rules in any way.
I think that you are grossly oversimplifying, to the detriment of understanding.
Taken in full context...
The description of search states that "You use Search whenever you actively look around for clues that point to a hidden object, such as a trap or secret door, or hints that might point to a person’s or creature’s passage through or activity in an area." (Backgrounds and Skills 10)
The description of spot states that "You use Spot to notice creatures lying in ambush ahead of you on the road, see signs of a thief hiding in the shadows of an alley, or catch sight of a faint gleam of candlelight under a closed secret door." (Backgrounds and Skills 10)
The search skill is the Nancy Drew skill. You use it to modify ability checks made to rummage through desks, notice things out of the ordinary, pick up clues, discern that a device is rigged, and generally do sleuthy things.
The spot skill is the Scout skill. You use it to modify ability checks made when keeping watch, catching on to sleight of hand, recognizing things that can be seen, and measuring visual acuity.
...they are not the same thing.
The justification is clear. There may be overlap, depending upon one's understanding or utilization, but that speaks to the desire of some to have skills apply broadly moreso than it indicates that the skills fail to accomplish what they're intended to accomplish.
|
|
|
