Best Skill System for a BECMI or 1st Edition game

[Soraios]

I'm working on getting a BECMI or 1st Ed. campaign going but, being a 3.x devotee, I am loathe to give up skills. I want to incorporate a skill system, but I am undecided.

I have seen these versions:

* no skills (Basic)
* secondary skills only (1st Edition)
* Skill slots (Rules Cyclopedia / BECMI)
* 3rd edition skill points
* 4th edition trained/untrained system
* and a mystery system whose name escapes me, but it's a OGL system involving the expenditure of xp to acquire skills.

While I recognize Basic can be houseruled (using Ability checks), I would like a little meat on the bones, skill-wise. I am not a rules-heavy player but it seems to me skills are a way to customize and distinguish the PCs, beyond RP and statistics.

So far I am leaning towards the Rules Cyclopedia version. What are your thoughts on skills for pre-3.x systems?

 

[trancejeremy]

Rules Cyclopedia system.

It's a pretty good balance I think. It's more extra things characters can do, rather than telling them things what they can't.

And you can take them twice (or more) to improve, and the DM can easily give a modifier for difficulty, but since they don't improve drastically (or sometimes ever), DCs don't have to constantly go up to provide a challenge.

 

[grodog]

You might find non-weapon proficiencies useful; IIRC they're mostly in OA, WSG, and DSG.

 

[Water Bob]

I'm working on getting a BECMI or 1st Ed. campaign going but, being a 3.x devotee, I am loathe to give up skills. I want to incorporate a skill system, but I am undecided.

Bah! Break free of the chains of a standardized skill system. You don't need it! Make it up as you go! Don't throw dice when you can roleplay a situation!

You can do it...and after a bit, you just might surprise yourself and like it better!

A couple of ideas for quick throws:

2d6 or 3d6 for STAT or less.

d20 for STAT or less.

d10 + STAT for higher total.

Just make up a %. 1E AD&D is full of simple %dice throws.

...and just about anything else you can make up.





See...many people get snowed into believeing that only a standardized skill system is "fair". In reality, a good DM with a make-it-up-as-you-go system can actually customize a specific situation better than can the one-size-fits-all skill and task system.

I'll give you an example. Let's say the character is in an old, moldy dungeon and he comes upon a thick, iron bound door that has swollen from the underground moisture to seal itself into place.

With 3.5, this would be a STR attribute check, right? Forcing or shoving the door open? That's d20 + STR mod against a DC 15? Sound about right?

With the 1E system of GM customization, the GM can weight the throw much more towards STR--which is what really counts in this example. So, the GM might say, "Throw 3d6 for STR or less to shove open the door. You can attempt this each round, but every failure lowers your STR rating by one point for the purposes of this throw. A second charcter can also push on the door, and in this case, add the two STR scores together before rolling the 3d6."

Boom. You've got a task that is really more suited to the job at hand rather than the more vanailla, one-size-fits-all task from 3.5 E.





Don't get me wrong. I do enjoy a good task system in a game. Top Secret/S.I. has one of the best systems I've ever seen. But don't down a "GM Call" system--those can add quite a lot to a game.

 

[Tav_Behemoth]

Adventurer Conqueror King tries to use a proficiencies system to split the difference between approaches. Many things are left up to "describe how you do it" - all PCs explicitly get an "adventuring" proficiency that covers everything a D&D character should be assumed to be able to do, from tying a rope to starting a fire - with room for the kind of make-it-up-yourself dice rolls Water Bob describes.

 

[trancejeremy]

Yeah, from what I've read about ACKS, they also apparently included some 3E feats as well as skills into their proficiency system. So if you are a 3e fan you might look into that (it's otherwise more or less Labyrinth Lord, apparently, with some custom classes, so Basic/Expert D&D)

The trouble with no skill system at all, just ability checks, is that characters can end up being faceless and dull. Or if the player is obnoxious, an expert at everything (or claim to be)

The BECMI skill slot system doesn't really restrict them from trying basic things (you can just just do an ability check) but also lets characters do more expert things on a limited basis. Like say, one character might be a Jeweller. How is that possible under just the ability score system? Or another is an Engineer.

Sure, you can just say that character is, but the BECMI gives at least vague rules for it.


You might also check out the A1SRD, which is basically a bunch of old school open content lifted from a variety of sources (meant for AD&D 1st ed). It has a skill system in it, somewhat more complex than the BECMI one, but not overly so.

Dragonsfoot • View topic - A1E SRD

 

[Water Bob]

Yeah, from what I've read about ACKS, they also apparently included some 3E feats as well as skills into their proficiency system.

After seeing that post above, I went to the web site and started to fall in love. The world looks like it was modeled after Conan's Hyborian Age, and most people know that I'm a big fan.

I loved everything I was reading about the game world until I came across the "ancient technology" and the ray guns.

That completely blew it for me, and I left the web page.

The trouble with no skill system at all, just ability checks, is that characters can end up being faceless and dull. Or if the player is obnoxious, an expert at everything (or claim to be)

I don't remember my 1E or 2E AD&D games being as you describe. Quite to the contrary, in fact.

 

[DMKastmaria]

I use ability checks, saving throws and the old d6. But, you might check out the free version of LotFP which has a good basic skill system useful for old school games.

 

[saskganesh]

I play a skill-less game with skill checks.

I roll under d20 against the relevant ability adjusted by environmental and situational factors. Fail to roll means utter failure, but sometimes partial success.

To differentiate characters a bit, every player has a background. So for example, (note these are not codified, they are broad strokes and emphatically not a system) my group includes farmboy, street waif, urban aristo, sailor/pirate and nature boy. The idea here is that a when character is faced with a task, they get a wee (or big) bonus if the task being performed fits their backstory.

So farmboy does weather checks, waif has street sense, artisto knows protocol, sailor knows his ropes and nature boy knows his plants. For example, this is just stuff which has come up. Again, this is not a system. I know someone may want to make kits up that do the exact same thing, but I'd really rather not formalise it. I'd rather leave it up to my players. Based on their backgrunds, they decide what they know. And it's fine by me.

My group is now low mid level (level 3-4) so some are NOW starting to learn new stuff. If Titus the Pirate keeps persisting at learning how to hunt, I'll give him some competency eventually. But that's a RP decision not a munchkiny one.

I've played skill systems before and I have enjoyed them. But I don't think they are always necessary, expecially in a rules light game.

 

[saskganesh]

Of course, yeah, if you are playing with obnoxious players that always play characters who are paragons at everything possible, you have bigger issues in your game than skill checks.