Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ainamacar" data-source="post: 5850289" data-attributes="member: 70709">Probably. At least it's cordial confusion, as opposed to stereotypical internet RAGE! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Quite so.Yes, this is what I would consider the standard way of handling granularity in success-based systems (although skill tricks are a bit of a twist on the classic formula).  The system I have played in for the last several years operates in just this fashion, except the notion of "extra successes" does not exist because there is a unique result for every possible number of successes.I, on the other hand, propose a system where outcomes corresponding to one's training or lower only require a single success, and the training relative to the outcome determines the number of dice rolled.  On the other hand, outcomes corresponding to training above what one has use the classic success system just as you do, with untrained/competent requiring 1 success, expert requiring 2 successes, and master requiring 3 successes.  If desired, the DM can continue increasing that number for ever more dramatic outcomes.Yes, the lower skill guy requires multiple successes, and as since he does not get to roll multiple dice by default he must acquire resources or be in very favorable circumstances which provide extra dice on his check. (Note that the only difference between the "old" and the "new" system should be in the presentation.  I did not intend to change the mechanics at all, so if you can point out what looks different I'll either fix my mistake or try and state what I mean more clearly.)All resources or circumstances can be represented by modifiers to the skill check, of which there are 3 major types I'll summarize.  (For simplicity I assume bonuses, since I'm still thinking about the best way to represent penalties.)1. Increasing the skill bonus (i.e. what one adds to each d20 roll).  These represent resources which make a character more likely to succeed  at what he can already do, but do not enable him obtain more powerful  outcomes. The bonus should be limited to +3 at most so it doesn't move to a wildly different DC or outshine the effect of the other two modifiers. Most minor resources and circumstances fit here.2. Increasing the number of dice rolled.  These represent resources which enable a creature to obtain more powerful outcomes than normally possible, but the primary effect is to put these outcomes in reach, not make them likely.  Notice that the extra dice also makes success more likely at the things the creature is already good at.  Most moderate resources and circumstances fit here.3. Increasing (for this check only) the creature's level of training.  These represent resources which enable a creature to obtain more powerful outcomes than normally possible, but the resource is so powerful as to effectively make the creature as good as someone with better training.  If the resource or circumstance seems like it would be more important than the creature, this modifier may be appropriate.  Such resources are very rare and extremely potent.So lower skill guy must obtain modifiers of type 2 or 3 to obtain higher skill outcomes, since these either add extra dice or simply make one die sufficient.We're already familiar with the type 2 modifiers because taking extra time and aid another usually work this way.  The DM is free to imagine more. For example, if the PCs are researching something they might go to a library and receive an extra die due to the resources of the library.  All these type 2 resources are, in a sense, various forms of aid another.  Aid another itself represents help from creatures.  Taking extra time is rather like "aid self" by being thorough.  Access to a relevant library is like having the library aid on the check, and so on.These types of modifiers are flexible, and it is up to the DM to determine which is most appropriate.  For example, the bonus from a library is not fixed.  If the PCs are searching for lore about a specific dead god a noble's vast collection of literature and family records might provide a +1 bonus, the national library an extra die, and the library of a major church once allied with that dead god an effective increase in training.  On a check to find specific knowledge about a certain noble's financial affairs the church library might give a +2 bonus (the noble was an occasional supporter of that church), the national library an extra die (it includes extensive political and financial records), and the noble's collection an effective increase in training (the noble who owns the library is a longtime business partner with the noble in question).That's really interesting.  At least at first glance I like your suggestion of using aid another for extra dice within checks and "links" using +2 between checks.  It feels natural to me that aid another normally grants a stronger bonus than the indirect aid from a linked test, except in those cases where success with one skill is a prerequisite to even making a check with another.  And it certainly seems to maintain a strong boundary between checks, which means I can start to see how to self-consistently fit individual checks into a framework of many skills working toward larger related goals.It could open up some new mechanical territory like "cross-check" skill tricks, for example.  Unlike normal skill tricks these would grant benefits to linked checks, but otherwise they would have a similar flavor.  I think I could see using these to define scenarios with special interactions between skills specific to the context.  Trying to make a general list of "cross-check" skill tricks would be a fools errand, because the unpredictable interactions between skills are a primary driver of the emergent behavior we observe during the game.  Good DMs often do this sort of thing naturally, and Skill Challenges sometimes show this kind of thinking, where a success with one skill yields some special result in the Skill Challenge without counting as a success per se.  It's a tough balancing act, though, giving just enough structure to support good play without making things overly rigid.</blockquote>

Verification