Do Star Wars Saga skill rules make d20 better?

[Dragonhelm]

...and the consolidation is fantastic. I'm sooo over this conversation: "Roll your Move Silent. I'll roll my Listen. Now you roll your Hide. And I'll roll my Spot..." It also makes the skills more individually useful. Even when I'm running political/social campaigns, it's a rare day when my players invest in Forgery or Disguise (or for that matter Handle Animal, Use Rope, etc).

I have to agree on the skill consolodation as well. In all the years I've played D&D, your Hide and Move Silently are always rolled together. Spot and Listen are too. So why do two rolls when you can do one?

I also like consolodating Spot and Listen into Perception just because a character may notice something with a different sense. For example, I once played a wild elf with a heightened sense of smell. I could see him rolling Perception to notice things by smell, such as finding when someone is hiding. You could find the hidden person because the character could detect his scent.

I probably would consolodate Climb, Jump, and Swim into Athletics. Then I might separate out the "thief skills" (i.e. Pick Pocket/Sleight of Hand, Open Lock, etc.) from Stealth just so that the rogue would have a bit more to play with. Still not certain on that one.

 

[Arkhandus]

Is Saga's way of handling skills better? For me, a definite NO. For some other people? Apparently yes. Would I be fine with that approach being used in D&D? NO. Do I care if other people use it? Not at all, play however you like. But I prefer more granular skills than what Saga, Castles & Crusades, or other such systems utilize.

Why, oh why, would Joe Dirtfarmer from the deserts of Athas, or Tattooine, or Arrakkis/Dune, or whatever, who has never even heard of a body of water larger than his bathtub, be a better swimmer than Bob Swimmerguy from Hawaii, Mon Calamari, or whatever, just because Joe Dirtfarmer is 12th-level while Bob Swimmerguy is a 1st-level Olympic swimming champ-in-the-making? Or more knowledgeable about random trivia and occult lore than Tim the Wizard just because Tim is 3rd-level at the time?

*slaps that absurd level of excessive abstraction with a dead fish*

 

[Ranger REG]

Do you think, on balance, Saga rules for skills and skill bonuses make d20 better? Or at least more fun?

For gameplay, yes.

For creating characters (PC/NPC) on-the-fly, yes.

To have +10 bonus on a skill check at 1st level, yes.

To have cross-class/hobby skills to increase during level-up, yes.

To have spellcasters "attack" with their magic using a skill check (especially since we're not going to add a Magic Base Attack Bonus or MBAB) vs. Defense rather than stick with obsolete, antiquated Vancian-style "fire-n-forget" system, yes.

To consolidate some skills (and won't take up more space in your character sheet), yes.

 

[Aus_Snow]

I strongly disagree.

 

[Ranger REG]

I strongly disagree.

Why? We should keep D&D complex, so that other third-party publishers are free to make rules-lite games?

 

[Bagpuss]

Well probability wise skills in SAGA are perhaps more complex than in D&D.

In D&D skills are usually compared against other skills, (Move Silently vs Listen, Bluff vs Sense Motive), occasionally verses a level check (Intimidate for example), and sometimes against a fixed DC (Diplomacy to improve NPC attitudes).

Assume you have maxed ranks and used Skill Focus and other methods to get the best possible roll.

Your skill improves 1 point per level. So against an equal opponent (one who is also improving his opposition skill by 1 a level) your chance (of success) stays the same, against a level check your chance stays the same and against a fixed DC your chance improves.

In many skill vs skill case however your chance actually improves because the opponent isn't putting 1 skill rank in a level, either they don't have enough skills points, or it's cross class, this is particularly true of Bluff for example. So in the majority of case you chance of success improves with level.

SAGA doesn't work like this.

In SAGA skill checks are against other skills (Stealth vs Perception), Defense value (Persuasion verse Will Defense), or against fixed DCs (many cases of Use the Force).

Assume you have Skill Training and Skill Focus.

In skill verses skill your chance of success remains the same, your skill improves at 1/2 heroic level but so does your opponents, if anything your chance of success will drop as you increase in level as the probability of an opponent having Skill Training and Skill Focus in the opposition skill increases.

In Skill verse Defense, you start of with a much better chance of success, but your skill improves at 1/2 level while your opponents defense improves at 1 pt a level. So at higher levels your chance of success actually gets worse.

In Skill verse fixed DC, you improve as you increase in level.

So while in SAGA you can start off as an expert in something, you never improve and in fact get worse against similar levelled opponents. This seems counter intuitive to how levelling works in D20 games. It seems odd to me that my best chance of success with a skill is when I'm 1st level.

SAGA skill system works when you are mainly using your skills against much weaker mooks, which reflects the Star Wars genre resonably well, but doesn't necessarily work so well in D&D when you tend to face similar ranked opponents more often.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Why? We should keep D&D complex, so that other third-party publishers are free to make rules-lite games?

I don't see the skill system in D&D as being complex. Also, it's one of the last things I would change for 4e, hypothetically. That's not to say I wouldn't eventually get around to doing so, but OMG, magic first. Then combat. Hm, then classes. Then races. . .

Well, anyway, you get the idea.

I think the Saga [for fantasy] wave will be popular for a while, then die. t least, I hope so.

 

[Alnag]

I voted "Strongly Agree", I really have gone through very easy creation phase with newbies on this new system and it is easy, smart and cool. I like it much and I hope to see it in 4e.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Why, oh why, would Joe Dirtfarmer from the deserts of Athas, or Tattooine, or Arrakkis/Dune, or whatever, who has never even heard of a body of water larger than his bathtub, be a better swimmer than Bob Swimmerguy from Hawaii, Mon Calamari, or whatever, just because Joe Dirtfarmer is 12th-level while Bob Swimmerguy is a 1st-level Olympic swimming champ-in-the-making? Or more knowledgeable about random trivia and occult lore than Tim the Wizard just because Tim is 3rd-level at the time?

*slaps that absurd level of excessive abstraction with a dead fish*

You are quite right to recognise that some things will appeal to some people and not to others, and I'm absolutely fine with that.

However, do you mind if I talk about your example quoted? Using Saga rules, I could expect to see:

Joe Dirtfarmer - can make swim checks at +6 but can't attempt any use of the skill which requires 'trained only'. Probably can't swim underwater, for instance.

Bob Swimmerguy - from his name it seems as if he is trained and probably has skill focus too, since he is an olympic swimming champ in the making. He makes swim checks at +10, and can make 'trained only' checks too

Tim the Wizard might just be trained in Occult Lore, but he is still getting +6 (the same as Joe Dirtfarmer) and once again he can attempt 'trained only' uses of the skill, which Joe Dirtfarmer cannot. If Tim had taken Skill Focus in Occult Lore too, he would be way ahead.

(not to mention that if Joe Dirtfarmer is really 12th level he ought to think about changing his name, since he is a person of truly heroic stature! Why not call him Luke Skywalker and say that despite being born on a desert world, falling into water isn't instant death for him because he's heard that humans float and he's learnt enough composure to make his way to the side of the body of water as long as it isn't too rough?)

Basically I don't think the picture is as silly as you've painted it in those examples!

Cheers

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

You are quite right to recognise that some things will appeal to some people and not to others, and I'm absolutely fine with that.

However, do you mind if I talk about your example quoted? Using Saga rules, I could expect to see:

Joe Dirtfarmer - can make swim checks at +6 but can't attempt any use of the skill which requires 'trained only'. Probably can't swim underwater, for instance.

Bob Swimmerguy - from his name it seems as if he is trained and probably has skill focus too, since he is an olympic swimming champ in the making. He makes swim checks at +10, and can make 'trained only' checks too

Tim the Wizard might just be trained in Occult Lore, but he is still getting +6 (the same as Joe Dirtfarmer) and once again he can attempt 'trained only' uses of the skill, which Joe Dirtfarmer cannot. If Tim had taken Skill Focus in Occult Lore too, he would be way ahead.

(not to mention that if Joe Dirtfarmer is really 12th level he ought to think about changing his name, since he is a person of truly heroic stature! Why not call him Luke Skywalker and say that despite being born on a desert world, falling into water isn't instant death for him because he's heard that humans float and he's learnt enough composure to make his way to the side of the body of water as long as it isn't too rough?)

Basically I don't think the picture is as silly as you've painted it in those examples!

Cheers

Moreover: Does it really matter what Joe Dirtfarmer can do? In D&D, he would be a Commoner, and nobody has an idea how they level up, because all challenges described in the DMG would indicate to combat. And as was "proven" on this board is that the Commoner can be killed by a common housecat...
So, even in D&D, he doesn't make "sense".

For playability, the new skill system is great. It might be a bit too simple, and I am not certain I agree with the specific advancement rules. If it was me, I would probably have tried to consilidate the Base Attack Bonus, Save Bonus and Skill Bonus advancement in one single package (even if there probably are still needed some differences). But maybe they tried and didn't find something that worked well enough in actual gameplay.