Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="rkanodia" data-source="post: 1764743" data-attributes="member: 11681">I guess I see Duke Lord High Muckity-Muck, 16th level Sorceror, as being more or less unresponsive to the overtures of someone who is uncouth and unsophisticated in the arts of diplomacy and negotiation.  He's hard to impress.  His participation in a plan represents a large investment compared to that of a commoner.  My view is that, no matter how little risk and how much reward my offer entails, the big boys aren't going to want any part of it if I sound like a rube.  Your mileage (and expectations) may vary.I see that I said 'all sorts of skills' would break down.  That was a poor chose of words.  I didn't mean to imply that all skills break down when trivial cases occur.  I think that most skills handle trivial cases quite nicely.  For instance, if I say 'Use Rope is broken because it can stop me from tying my shoelaces,' then I'm dead wrong.  With an average Dex and no ranks in Use Rope, I can still take 10 (just as you said) and perfectly hit the DC for 'Tie a knot'.  If I'm under pressure, I might fumble it.  If I'm clumsy, I can't take 10, but I'll still get it if I try a few times.  Fits both my real-world experience and my gameplay expectations just perfectly.But there are some skills that don't handle trivial cases very well.  Going by the SRD: even if you assign DC 0 to 'Find out the Soup of the Day', it still takes 1d4+1 hours using Gather Information.  Even if you assign DC 0 to 'Get Rex to come over for a pat on the head', a PC without any ranks in Handle Animal can not make Rex come over, because they can't even attempt the check untrained.  Same thing with knowledge skills.  If you decide that knowing the name of the kingdom you live in requires a knowledge: local check (the SRD lists DC 10 for 'really easy questions', but making it 0 still wouldn't change anything), then the vast majority of people in your campaign world don't know it, because they don't have any skill ranks in knowledge: local.  Under the d20 rules as written, the only thing a sensible DM can do is to say that there are some situations which can't be reasonably mapped onto the skill system.I agree that the house rules would fail in some cases that the SRD rules would hold up, such as your 'ask your lover for the time of day' example.  By the house rules, this could have a very high DC if your lover is, say, a high-level cleric.  By the SRD, the worst that could happen (assuming you have low Charisma, or are under a curse or something) is that the lover goes from 'Helpful' to 'Friendly' (maybe you asked rudely) and they still are willing to 'chat' and 'advise'.The point of this long-winded monologue is to highlight the reasons I have for my opinion: I think that the house rules are worth looking at, because the increased value that they offer as compared to the SRD rules (in terms of accuracy of modeling character interactions, and in terms of providing a clear, unambiguous framework for PCs and DMs to use) is greater than the value that they take away by breaking some trivial cases.  I would rather say 'This trivial situation gets you a specific outcome without requiring a check, even though if I were to make you roll a check according to the literal rules, you'd probably fail it' (as I'll have to with the house rules) than say 'This serious situation is going to be resolved in a nonspecific way according to a set of modifiers that I'm choosing entirely by fiat, without any sort of guidelines' (as I currently have to do all the time with the SRD).That being said, I haven't tried the house rules in actual gameplay yet.  I'll keep you posted when I find out how it goes.Edit: And if'n ye be finding the house rules not ta yer likin, well then I be havin a short plank 'pon which yer welcome to be takin a long walk, landlubber!</blockquote>

Verification