Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="buzz" data-source="post: 3685232" data-attributes="member: 6777">Beat me to it! SotC has some of the best GM advice ever written, IMO.This seems less of a mechanical issue than a scene-framing and intent-setting issue. And, to get back to SotC, one of the best pieces of advice in it is that, for any check, the GM needs to first imagine its success and failure. If either one of those outcomes is uninteresting, then you should not be calling for a check.So, in your example, if failing the Knowledge check to find the vault results in nothing but the adventure coming to a dead stop, then you should not be calling for that check. Totally ruining the adventure is not an interesting outcome.What would be more interesting is if the Knowledge check, assuming it's needed at all, gave a result that affected the overall task in a meaningful way. The simplest example might be that the check determines how long it takes for the PC to determine the location. Or maybe whether they determine that, I dunno, the vault happens to be in a building with long-forgotten coal tunnel access that maybe the enemy doesn't know about.I think the issue is really more about scenario design, and the fact that task resolution in d20 is intent-irrelevant. The best fix, IMO, is to provide solid guidelines about calling for skill checks and designing scenarios, and to add intent and stakes-setting to the mix.Again, back to your example... if that preamble stuff doesn't seem fun to you, don't include it. Start the PCs at the point they begin infiltrating the vault location, and let them use their skills to maybe retroactively determine what advantages/disadvantages they've got going at the outset.The randomness is dependent on the skill bonus. A PC with +20 vs. an NPC with +1 is going to be no contest. A PC with +10 vs. an NPC with +10 is a toss-up, but that's okay, as they are equal in skill and both rolling that 1d20.I think defaulting the passive skill to rank+10/+20 is stacking the deck too heavily in favor of that passive participant.Anyway, I heartily recommend taking a look at SotC. You can get the rules for free in the SotC SRD: <a href="http://www.faterpg.com/dl/sotc-srd.html" target="_blank">http://www.faterpg.com/dl/sotc-srd.html</a></blockquote>

Verification