Are Skills Mechanically Important in d20?

[hexgrid]

I do know of some examples.

The obvious ones:

Invisibility vs. the hide skill
Charm Person vs. Diplomacy
'Disguise Self vs. Disguise
Feather fall vs. the fall reduction aspect of tumble
Spider Climb vs. Climb

Even in these examples, however, they only overshadow the skills in a transitive way, because they aren't permanent solutions to the kinds of quandries that skills can solve. A person Charmed will be likely hostile if he discovers he's been charmed, unlike winning them over with diplomacy, tumble fixes more than just falls, disguises don't detect as magical, invisibility wears off unlike a skillful hider, etc.

This Iron Heros Design Diary actually has a complete chart of what skills are "overshadowed" by what spells:

http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?designdiary_mmearls_16

 

[DamionW]

AIM-54, sorry, I realized after I posted that reply that the "you"s in it came off as offensive. I meant them to be nebulous as in "there are DMs that tell me they want less combat but then demean social mechanics," not you personally. My apologies. I also feel we're near the same page on this, and I can imagine some bad players out there trying to get by with saying they're Ruler of the World for life just because they rolled a 35 or whatever. In genral though, there is a limited amount of "crunchy capital" that comes with character design. For a given level, class, race, etc. you only have a finite amount of feats, skills, etc. I feel if you invest that capital in more skills and social abilities, you should get equal return on that investment regardless of your personal role-playing ability. If you're designing a 1st level rogue and take the Persuasive feat over Weapon Finesse or some similar combat feat suitable to rogues, you shouldn't get less of an ability to utilize it based on what you say in character. As I've demonstrated, DMs don't ask the player who picks weapon finesse to demonstrate that his character somehow is more nimble. You just add the appropriate bonuses to the attack roll and move on. However, there are instances where DMs make players prove their characters are influential with roleplaying. That is double standard and provides negative motivation to pick those feats and mechanics that are not combat oriented. Power attack just works, but if you pick Negotiator instead, we'll see how it goes when you role-play. Well, why pick Negotiator? Yeah, bad players want to be munchkin when it comes to bluff checks, too, but I see way more many power gamers try and max combat stats over persuasive stats, so give the guys trying something else a try at least, IMO. I guess its more of a rant for me because I think I've seen some bad cases where DMs think that good role-playing in character is the foundation of good plot. I think the players and DM can make in interesting plot regardless if you're good at getting into character. Again, this is all just my experiences and I'm not trying to say anyone on the board is a bad DM or player.

 

[Alzrius]

This Iron Heros Design Diary actually has a complete chart of what skills are "overshadowed" by what spells:

http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?designdiary_mmearls_16

Which is a great lead-in to the fact that, IMO, Iron Heroes fixes this very problem.

 

[AIM-54]

AIM-54, sorry, I realized after I posted that reply that the "you"s in it came off as offensive.

Hey, no harm done. I wasn't offended, just confused as I was pretty sure I hadn't said anything about combat one way or the other.

I think we've both had bad experiences on different ends of this, which makes different aspects of this loom larger in our minds. That's cool and one of the beauties of this board is we can discuss these things without it devolving into flames.

Hopefully this doesn't scare you from continuing to contribute.

 

[Voadam]

As a DM I haven't called for a skill check in the last year that I can remember in my high level game. I find them generally unnecessary mechanically and distracting when running a game. Maybe I had the arcane trickster rolling a disable device check for a DC 35 magic trap, but he gets those easy.

For a while when I started DMing 3e I tried applying the skill checks as written in the srd but it was annoying (one party member with a +23 listen, others with +2) and often led to wierd situations (with diplomacy, et al.) where results were completely contrary to how things were being roleplayed and leading to forced unnatural interactions with NPCs.

I was forcing the game to fit these poor mechanics for no real benefit to the game. This It was unpleasant as a DM. was backwards to how things should be. Mechanics should benefit the game or not be used.

Then I decided I would eyeball the PCs stats and skills, consider their characterization of the character and adjudicate most skill type things on the fly unless there was significant physical mechanical effects like feinting, tumbling, or concentration (but by 15th level all the casters autosuccess defensive casting so no roll was needed).
So the dwarven cleric of a knowledge god who comes from a smithing background got a lot of google information on wierd metal blades (arsenic bronze) used by ancient cultists that they found. No skill checks, I decided it was appropriate and cool so he got the info. It added to the game and we then moved on to more explorations and physical investigations.

For some things like searches I did a take 10 calculation and used that for my secret checks. Made adjudicating swifter and not usually something where dice rolling adds to the game more than a good description and having them react to the results does.

I've been happier DMing the game and it has run great. There is plenty of investigation, NPC interaction, non combat activity, and combat.

I reiterate IMO & IME skills are largely unnecessary mechanically for D&D.

 

[Psion]

Yes.

At least the way I play, and my players build characters.

Skills are extremely important to my gaming experience. #1 reason I would never even consider using C&C for any gaming.

Incidentally, I only find that 1/3 or so of the skills listed as being overshadowed by spells are practically overshadowed by them in actual play. Even then, as countermeasure spells and strategies come out, skills continue to pull their weight.

 

[AIM-54]

This Iron Heros Design Diary actually has a complete chart of what skills are "overshadowed" by what spells:

http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?designdiary_mmearls_16

This only increases my interest in Iron Heroes.

Thanks for bringing it up!

 

[The Grackle]

Which is a great lead-in to the fact that, IMO, Iron Heroes fixes this very problem.

I don't even see it as a problem, as much as it is a D&Dism. If you want a more skill-heavy game there's lots of other d20 games w/more focus on the skills.

 

[The_Universe]

I agree with Voadam. Having played other skill-based games, where what skills you have determines your abilities across the board (combat, social, technical, magical) D&D's skill system is heavily overshadowed by feats, special abilities and equipment. Sure, it's a vast improvement over 2E, but when many of the abilities key to the game (combat, magic) operate on different bases, it pushes the skills to a lesser position. They support the character, fill in some useful details and can be more or less important in any given group, but they are never the key component that class, feat choice, and magic/special abilities are. Players agonize over what feats to take or spells to learn, not what to invest skill points in.

They don't unless they're rogues, who have skills as a primary focus of their class abilitites. Their skills are what set them apart from the crowd! Of course, D&D focuses less on skills than some of the other D20 games, but I'd place the blame for that on spells, not feats. Since it's relatively easy to find something that obviates the need for you to invest skill points in bluff, or hide, or whatever by granting a temporary bonus to that ability when and if you need it, skills are never going to recieve the focus (once more, unless you're a rogue) that some of the things that can't be as easily replicated by magic do.

For me, skills are an absolutely essential part of the game, and a key to why I like D&D/D20 at all. Having come to the system from an all-skills-based game like WEG's D6 Star Wars, having that ability to customize beyond the lame old non-weapon proficiencies was key.

 

[Storyteller01]

I'd have to agree. The skills that have a direct impact on combat or magic are very defined in ability and scope (penalties for range with Listen and Spot checks, tumble mods due to circumstances, etc). Those that don't have their benefits limited to a single line of description.

From the SRD, concerning Gather Information:

If you want to find out about a specific rumor, or a specific item, or obtain a map, or do something else along those lines, the DC for the check is 15 to 25, or even higher.

I don't think we need to bring up the tables on the Concentration or Jump skill descriptions . Even the Hide and MS skills go into detail for using the skills while sniping or moving.


I don't mind. I prefer the simplicity, but with magic items giving huge bonuses to skills (+10 to hide and move silently??) and few feats catering to the skill set, it seems apparent that skills are not a primary concern (Every Rogue build I've seen has some magic item boosting their H/MS skills to incredible levels). IMC, skills have only become useful with the lack of magic items (even tech requires a Use Device check).

YMMV