d20 Modern: What Would you change part II

[Greg K]

What makes that situation sticky is that it only takes the sneaker 1 failure, and the gig is typically up.

Typically.

Y'see, you have the stereotypical situation where the guard hears something, comes over to investigate, and the protagonist either comes up with a sneaky solution to throw the guard off, or they take out the guard before they can get the alarm off.

But a worst case would be if they sounded the alarm immediately. That, I though, might be the telling difference of a "high alert" situation.

Don't forget scenes where the guard hears something, goes to check out the noise, fails to spot the person hiding and walks off figuring it was nothing.

 

[Twowolves]

Not in the real world. But characters in fiction who are good at one, tend to be good at all three. Take Tarzan for example. Or Indiana Jones.

That said, some folks raised this objection to me, and if you note above the tidbit I quoted about skill specialization, you can be that guy who's a great mountain climber and a lousy swimmer, by taking a +3 bonus on climbing and a -3 penalty on all other aspects of the Athletics skill.

I missed your part about the skill specialization. I like the idea, but is it enough? A -3 when you have 13 ranks at level 10 doesn't seem like much of a penalty. If the system had skills costing various points per rank of each skill, a discount/point break method might be appropriate. But that is kinda the way it is now with Listen, Search and Spot all being seperate skills now.

As for getting rid of opposed checks, isn't this also done in SAGA? Or am I confusing it with the whole "acting character rolls all the dice" concept?

 

[Vigilance]

I missed your part about the skill specialization. I like the idea, but is it enough? A -3 when you have 13 ranks at level 10 doesn't seem like much of a penalty. If the system had skills costing various points per rank of each skill, a discount/point break method might be appropriate. But that is kinda the way it is now with Listen, Search and Spot all being seperate skills now.

Well- whether or not it's enough will be for others to decide.

I had a couple of people who saw the direction skills were taking voice the "what if I want to be good at one thing and not another" concern, and the rule was added to address that.

If you want an exact emulation of the old skill system, you can, well, use the old skill system.

The skills I'm using are very, very broad (the Influence skill is four d20 Modern skills, plus a totally new skill not found in d20 Modern - Networking).

By making the skills broader, I'm able to add new skills, while still reducing the actual number of skills by over 50%.

This also means I can reduce the amount of skill points granted by the classes, which makes character generation/character levelling faster, with no loss in granularity as found in d20 variants like Saga.

As for getting rid of opposed checks, isn't this also done in SAGA? Or am I confusing it with the whole "acting character rolls all the dice" concept?

I'm afraid I haven't read Saga that closely, partially because of what I'm writing right now. Since it's not OGC, I'd rather not come across an idea I'd like to use, but can't.

 

[wedgeski]

I enjoyed your blog but can't agree with a lot of what you're saying. You suggest that uncovering and breaking into the vault is just a 'nuisance' and the *real* adventure lies in the vault itself. Well, no, not in most d20M games I've run, and *especially* not in games where I've introduced complex skill checks from Spycraft 2.0. Under duress, a simple series of die rolls can have the entire group huddled around the table willing the d20 to cut them a break. I don't think I'm far off the mark in saying they wouldn't want it any other way.

Now if they had a safe back at their base and had to get into it, no real time constraints, no danger of being discovered... under those circumstances, I'd waive the die rolls and assume they would simply have the wherewithall to get in.

And to answer your original question: I *would* look at Wealth, I would make combat with firearms more lethal (and in fact already have), and I would overhaul NPC generation, but the fundamentals of the d20 game I would leave intact.

 

[Psion]

Don't forget scenes where the guard hears something, goes to check out the noise, fails to spot the person hiding and walks off figuring it was nothing.

That would also fall into the "reactions would be different if he is actually expecting trouble" thing.

 

[Vigilance]

I enjoyed your blog but can't agree with a lot of what you're saying. You suggest that uncovering and breaking into the vault is just a 'nuisance' and the *real* adventure lies in the vault itself.

Hmm, that wasn't what I was trying to say actually. The act of getting *to* the vault and breaking into it is the adventure.

What isn't the adventure is making a knowledge check to learn the location of the vault, making a research check to determine the vault is made of, and making a craft check to brew an acid capable of burning through the vault's lock.

That's what I was trying to say- obviously not very well

 

[Twowolves]

Well- whether or not it's enough will be for others to decide.

Well, ok. But I'm one of those "others", and I just cast my vote.

I'm afraid I haven't read Saga that closely, partially because of what I'm writing right now. Since it's not OGC, I'd rather not come across an idea I'd like to use, but can't.

Basically, instead of rolling a saving throw, the acting character has to be a static number, like a DC. So instead of a reactive Reflex save of 1d20+Ref save vs attack mode DC, the attacker rolls 1d20+mods trying to beat the defender's 10+Ref save mods. They called it something like "active character rolls all the dice" or somesuch. Your static notice DC example seemed like that (Notice skill +10).

 

[Psion]

Hmm, that wasn't what I was trying to say actually. The act of getting *to* the vault and breaking into it is the adventure.

What isn't the adventure is making a knowledge check to learn the location of the vault, making a research check to determine the vault is made of, and making a craft check to brew an acid capable of burning through the vault's lock.

Yeah, well, in Spycraft, this is intel. You don't have this, you have no mission. For Spycraft, watch a season of Alias, and consider that everything that happens in the briefing room has no roll.

But if you want a character who has good contacts, is good at research, etc., I still think they have an important role to play. There is a brand of player (me, on occasion) who likes being able to come up with answers. Such players should have the ability to make their job easier, minimize risk, etc., by early die rolls, and feel like they contributed thereby.

 

[Vigilance]

Yeah, well, in Spycraft, this is intel. You don't have this, you have no mission. For Spycraft, watch a season of Alias, and consider that everything that happens in the briefing room has no roll.

But if you want a character who has good contacts, is good at research, etc., I still think they have an important role to play. There is a brand of player (me, on occasion) who likes being able to come up with answers. Such players should have the ability to make their job easier, minimize risk, etc., by early die rolls, and feel like they contributed thereby.

Again, I'm not getting rid of any of that.

In fact, contacts are a much bigger part of these rules than d20 Modern.

What I'm getting rid of, is rolling dice to make a Knowledge check.

You still have knowledge skills, and either you know things or you don't, and if you don't, you have a research time that will tell you how long it will take for you to find out.

I am not getting rid of a single option from the old rules.

My attempt to reduce die-rolls is not an attempt to reduce player choice, character types, granularity, etc.

Edit: Unless you're saying that, unless dice hit the table pre-adventure, you haven't contributed.

I watch Alias. And what I want is MORE like that not less.

I am not talking about getting rid of intel, player prep, craft skills, etc.

I just want to decrease the amount of randomness and dice rolling involved in this aspect of the game.

I say "I want less dice rolling in adventure prep". People say "I like adventure prep!"

Like without dice rolling, it can't exist.

The change I'm advocating is akin to doing point-buy character generation, rather than random stat-rolls.

 

[Committed Hero]

I'm going on the record in favor of more die rolling, for a couple reasons.

First, to consider the Stealth check you mentioned - what if the PCs are the guards? Who rolls the check? If it's the GM, will the players be happy having the resolution out of their hands? Or being surprised when an enemy gets a coup de grace attempt?

Or, a better question - if the PCs have no way to influence a check, why roll at all check? Can't the GM just decide who wins based on how the story needs to go? Is that fair?

One easy solution to the multiple roll problem is having the DCs incorporate the NPCs roll beforehand. Or represent an NPC roll by checking off a number between 1 and 20, representing 20 rolls. If she wants the party to win a roll, she'll use the highest failing roll, and vice-versa. The trouble is, at some point a series of easy victories may end up hurting the party when it counts....


Secondly, you make the skill check an all-or-nothing proposition, when it might not have to be. One crucial thing that's ignored in skill checks is time. As has been mentioned in this thread, a failure could only mean a check takes longer. The key is making this loss count. In an open ended adventure, this is difficult. If the party has a definite time limit, however, it could hurt. I think it becomes a question of how to frame the extra time.

Another option is to give the party chances to spend an Action point on a GES: A Guaranteed Expository Success. As long as they are in the preliminary stages of an adventure, they can avoid the kinds of failure you are worrying about.


Lastly, sometimes the exposition can be the solder that welds a series of unrelated scenarios into a campaign.