D&D 4th Edition RulesAsk questions about 4th-Edition rules and the like in here. General discussion about 4E or any other game belongs in General RPG Discussion, above.
That depends on what you mean by gambling. Gambling is highly based on chance, and other factors that influence success should not really fall under the same skill.
In a poker-like card game for instance
I would use Streetwise for finding a game, knowing its unspoken rules, and knowing what wagers should generally look like.
I would use Bluff to suppress tells and well bluff.
I would use Insight to spot other players' tells and gut check your hand's chances.
I would use Thievery to swap out cards or to stack the deck.
I would use Perception to check if other players are cheating or to count cards.
I would use Perception to sneak a peak at other players' cards.
Stealth checks might be required to stop other players from noticing your card counting.
Of course, all of that assumes, there's something more interesting than money at stake in the game. I'd let someone capable at same of the above skills skim some money anytime.
I'd go with the avarage of Bluf and Insight to represant the pc skill at something like poker (without cheating). For a gamble of pure chance, like dice or flipping a coin, no skill is needed.
If boiled down to a single roll, a single skill check, which skill would you suggest?
I probably wouldn't boil it down to a single roll. If there's no need to go in depth there most likely isn't anything really at stake. I'd rule if someone is trained in Bluff, Thievery or Insight they can scrap together an adequate existence gambling. Being trained in more than one would lead to a higher living standard or perhaps some pocket money.
If they feel the need to roll despite low stakes, I'd probably have them tell me what their focus is going to be and choose a skill that fits (playing defensively - Insight, cheating - Thievery, playing aggressively - Bluff) with a +2 bonus for having another trained skill that might help - I'd limit it to just a single +2 bonus.
Of course, this is largely a gaming philosophy issue. I tend to play very fast and loose with the rules of the game.
Bluff (Charisma)
[...] You make a Bluff check to fast-talk a guard, con a merchant, gamble, pass off a disguise or fake documentation, and otherwise tell lies.
Ah, gambling! The bane of all DMs everywhere. (OK, it's not that bad, but we've all met players who are way too happy to hang around town gambling to earn gold rather than adventuring...)
Here are two subsystems for gambling:
I) Winners and Losers (stolen from Savage Worlds)
1. Decide upon a stake (say, 5 silver pieces)
2. Every gambler makes a check
3. Subtract the lowest result from the highest result. The gambler with the lowest result pays the difference x the stake, to the gambler with the highest result.
4. Repeat the above steps for the gambler with the 2nd lowest result and the gambler with 2nd highest result. If there's an odd number of gamblers, the guy in the middle breaks even.
II) Winner Takes All (stolen from Star Wars Revised Core Rules)
Same as above, except in step 4, each gambler compares their result to the guy with the highest result and pays him difference x stake.
These systems can be resolved in a single check per participant (although there is a bit of arithmetic involved after making the check), and it doesn't matter what skill or ability you use. You could even have different participants make different sorts of checks (letting everyone use their best skill from Campbell's list, for example).
Ah, gambling! The bane of all DMs everywhere. (OK, it's not that bad, but we've all met players who are way too happy to hang around town gambling to earn gold rather than adventuring...)
Here are two subsystems for gambling:
I) Winners and Losers (stolen from Savage Worlds)
1. Decide upon a stake (say, 5 silver pieces)
2. Every gambler makes a check
3. Subtract the lowest result from the highest result. The gambler with the lowest result pays the difference x the stake, to the gambler with the highest result.
4. Repeat the above steps for the gambler with the 2nd lowest result and the gambler with 2nd highest result. If there's an odd number of gamblers, the guy in the middle breaks even.
II) Winner Takes All (stolen from Star Wars Revised Core Rules)
Same as above, except in step 4, each gambler compares their result to the guy with the highest result and pays him difference x stake.
These systems can be resolved in a single check per participant (although there is a bit of arithmetic involved after making the check), and it doesn't matter what skill or ability you use. You could even have different participants make different sorts of checks (letting everyone use their best skill from Campbell's list, for example).
-- 77IM
Thanks, that will come in handy!
Zapp
PS. But shouldn't the procedure for "Winner Takes All" be:
1. Decide upon a stake (say, 5 silver pieces)
2. Every gambler makes a check (using the skill of their, or the DM's, choice)
3. Every gambler except the winner, the one with the highest check, owes the winner money equal to (the stake) x (the difference between the checks in points)
(That is, in the context of subsystem II, step 3 "Subtract the lowest result from the highest result" doesn't make sense except for one of the gamblers)
In addition, here's a suggested additional step to handle multiple winners:
4. If there is a tie for winners, perform step 3 as if there is only one winner; then split the earnings equally among all winners.
Here's how I resolve gambling. Gambling is divided into two basic types. Pure-luck (craps), and skill-based (poker).
Skill-based is resolved with opposed Bluff checks. I might do so over a series of rounds or not depending on how important this gambling is to the players or the plot.
Pure-luck is different. If the players are gathering to play a game of craps, I don't have them roll opposed rolls. I have them play craps. The actual game. I mean, what's easier, trying to figure out a dice system to simulate craps, or using those same dice to just -play- craps, which is probably the best simulation for craps ever made?
Player: I want to play _____, what skill do I use?
Me: What skill do you want to use, and how are you applying it to the game?
Assuming they're wanting level appropriate rewards, I'll check pg. 42 and decide whether it's easy, moderate, or hard based on their skill choice and description.
Pure-luck is different. If the players are gathering to play a game of craps, I don't have them roll opposed rolls. I have them play craps. The actual game. I mean, what's easier, trying to figure out a dice system to simulate craps, or using those same dice to just -play- craps, which is probably the best simulation for craps ever made?
Not all pure-luck games are easy or uncomplicated.
Craps takes way too long to fit into one of my group's role-playing sessions (maybe other groups have more patience or enjoy craps more), but there are other ways to use the dice to play a real game.
If I recall, the 3e Book of Challenges had an encounter with a gambling hall run by monsters. You could play a dice game against them which, at first glance, seems like a really good deal. But if you run the probabilities, it turns out to be very much in favor of the house. I forget the details of the game but it was played in rounds, where round 1 was pretty straightforward and even-odds, but later rounds the stakes went way up and the odds of winning went way down.
It was a good mini-game because each round was a single roll, and you could stop whenever.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
