Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
variant skill list (45+ -> 24)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3952121" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>This is all true. Basically, a skill system needs to balance realism with playability. If all you cared about was playability, you wouldn't need a skill system at all - you could just use ability checks. Based on SW:SE, 4e seems to be moving in this direction. In SW:SE, everything is just an ability check in a slight disguise. Other than your inherent ability, there isn't much variation in skillfullness between characters of the same level and much of the variation that does exist is just class features in disguise (skill uses only available to 'trained' characters). The problem with this is having much distinctiveness in your skills. You have a system that plays fast, and isn't too worried about whether the results are 'appropriate' based on who the character is supposed to be. </p><p></p><p>To a certain extent, when the system gets this simple, I prefer to just drop it. The proposed system really only has 3-4 skills for most attibutes, zero for constitution, and only 1 for strength. Alot of them look to me like they could be consolidated further without any real harm - intimidate + bluff, perform + diplomacy, etc. Only int based skills have any real diversity, and some of these could be folded into something like 'Educated'. </p><p></p><p>The opposite intention is something like GURPS, with hundreds of skills covering almost any narrow field of human endeavor. The problem with that is that there isn't really an end to it. You end up with all sorts of relationships between the skills because they overlap so heavily, and the system gets really unwieldy. Power gamers try to ignore the system by dumping as many points as possible into attributes (effectively creating a skillless system again), and figuring out what your skill check between all the defaults and modifiers happens to be is a pain. It works best if the DM is using alot of fiat and loose interpretation (often specifically recommended in the rules), which works cross purposes to having a highly detailed system in the first place. (Which I why I left GURPS. All the detail didn't end up making my job as a DM easier, and in fact made it much more work.)</p><p></p><p>I think existing D20, while hardly perfect, does a good job of balancing the concerns. It's got about the right number of skills, IMO, although it doesn't necessarily define those skills as well as possible. I think that if you have 6 attributes, you probably need about 30-36 skills minimum, but probably not more than about 42-48 depending on what you think you can do with a skill (for example d20 skills are for the most part explicitly mundane and let you do mundane things, so it needs fewer skills). Ideally, the skills are split as close to evenly amongst the attributes as reasonable, and each covers a separate non-overlapping space so you can keep synergies, defaults and vagueness about when each particular skill applies to a minimum. Additionally, I think the whole skill system should be space covering so that there isn't a question where some unusual activity falls. For example, navigating a ship or paddling a boat probably comes under the already uber-skill 'Survival' in the current system, but it isn't explicitly so. Likewise, legal knowledge probably falls under 'Culture' and legal skill probably falls under Intimidate or Perform, but I'm guessing. </p><p></p><p>Notice again the baggage. All desert nomads are great ship pilots. All great ship pilots make great desert nomads. All lawyers are probably great dancers, or whatever.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 3952121, member: 4937"] This is all true. Basically, a skill system needs to balance realism with playability. If all you cared about was playability, you wouldn't need a skill system at all - you could just use ability checks. Based on SW:SE, 4e seems to be moving in this direction. In SW:SE, everything is just an ability check in a slight disguise. Other than your inherent ability, there isn't much variation in skillfullness between characters of the same level and much of the variation that does exist is just class features in disguise (skill uses only available to 'trained' characters). The problem with this is having much distinctiveness in your skills. You have a system that plays fast, and isn't too worried about whether the results are 'appropriate' based on who the character is supposed to be. To a certain extent, when the system gets this simple, I prefer to just drop it. The proposed system really only has 3-4 skills for most attibutes, zero for constitution, and only 1 for strength. Alot of them look to me like they could be consolidated further without any real harm - intimidate + bluff, perform + diplomacy, etc. Only int based skills have any real diversity, and some of these could be folded into something like 'Educated'. The opposite intention is something like GURPS, with hundreds of skills covering almost any narrow field of human endeavor. The problem with that is that there isn't really an end to it. You end up with all sorts of relationships between the skills because they overlap so heavily, and the system gets really unwieldy. Power gamers try to ignore the system by dumping as many points as possible into attributes (effectively creating a skillless system again), and figuring out what your skill check between all the defaults and modifiers happens to be is a pain. It works best if the DM is using alot of fiat and loose interpretation (often specifically recommended in the rules), which works cross purposes to having a highly detailed system in the first place. (Which I why I left GURPS. All the detail didn't end up making my job as a DM easier, and in fact made it much more work.) I think existing D20, while hardly perfect, does a good job of balancing the concerns. It's got about the right number of skills, IMO, although it doesn't necessarily define those skills as well as possible. I think that if you have 6 attributes, you probably need about 30-36 skills minimum, but probably not more than about 42-48 depending on what you think you can do with a skill (for example d20 skills are for the most part explicitly mundane and let you do mundane things, so it needs fewer skills). Ideally, the skills are split as close to evenly amongst the attributes as reasonable, and each covers a separate non-overlapping space so you can keep synergies, defaults and vagueness about when each particular skill applies to a minimum. Additionally, I think the whole skill system should be space covering so that there isn't a question where some unusual activity falls. For example, navigating a ship or paddling a boat probably comes under the already uber-skill 'Survival' in the current system, but it isn't explicitly so. Likewise, legal knowledge probably falls under 'Culture' and legal skill probably falls under Intimidate or Perform, but I'm guessing. Notice again the baggage. All desert nomads are great ship pilots. All great ship pilots make great desert nomads. All lawyers are probably great dancers, or whatever. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
variant skill list (45+ -> 24)
Top