Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5510315" data-attributes="member: 54877">And those are all bad design choices, or at least no answer whatsoever to problem I am addressing.&nbsp; It may or may not be a good idea to tweak/complicate how skills work, but doing so adds no appreciable mechanical depth to the system.&nbsp; And it would still resolve into defacto numbers that have predictable chances of success.&nbsp;&nbsp;And this is why it is a bad idea.&nbsp; You don't want a lot of complication for a little payoff, and you want the depth you put in to be ignorable at times.&nbsp;Look at combat.&nbsp; Having extra hit points does not make you hit harder.&nbsp; When you go to resolve your attacks, it doesn't even matter how many hit points you have.&nbsp; Now of course it matters a lot in the fight as a whole, but hit points are on mainly a different axis from hitting.&nbsp; This produces, with relatively little complexity, all kinds of interesting decisions, changing from round to round, such as, &quot;should I run over there and smack that guy, when I'm not sure if I can handle it if his two friends try to smack me back?&quot;&nbsp;Skill challenges, to give XP, should really have multiple types of levers with which to move things, and these levers should have different costs and risks.&nbsp; Then you quite easily get interesting decisions like, &quot;If I bribe that guy now, we will get an easy in to the palace, but I won't have the money later, and we'll waste my pal's high bluff ability to lie our way through.&nbsp; On the other hand, if he blows the roll, we'll start out behind, and this is already a tough nut to crack.&nbsp; Hmm....&quot;&nbsp;Like I said, I'm sure a lot of DMs already do that.&nbsp; I certainly do.&nbsp; I'd rather have more mechanical heft backing me up, given what skill challenges are trying to accomplish, though.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;But mainly my point was that it does not need to be complicated to have depth.&nbsp; Pawns in chess are easy.&nbsp; An 8 year old can learn how to move them in five minutes.&nbsp; Yet people play for decades without really unlocking all the depth in pawns.&nbsp; Thoughtful, simple rules on different axes often produce that result in game design.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5510315, member: 54877"] And those are all bad design choices, or at least no answer whatsoever to problem I am addressing. It may or may not be a good idea to tweak/complicate how skills work, but doing so adds no appreciable mechanical depth to the system. And it would still resolve into defacto numbers that have predictable chances of success. And this is why it is a bad idea. You don't want a lot of complication for a little payoff, and you want the depth you put in to be ignorable at times. Look at combat. Having extra hit points does not make you hit harder. When you go to resolve your attacks, it doesn't even matter how many hit points you have. Now of course it matters a lot in the fight as a whole, but hit points are on mainly a different axis from hitting. This produces, with relatively little complexity, all kinds of interesting decisions, changing from round to round, such as, "should I run over there and smack that guy, when I'm not sure if I can handle it if his two friends try to smack me back?" Skill challenges, to give XP, should really have multiple types of levers with which to move things, and these levers should have different costs and risks. Then you quite easily get interesting decisions like, "If I bribe that guy now, we will get an easy in to the palace, but I won't have the money later, and we'll waste my pal's high bluff ability to lie our way through. On the other hand, if he blows the roll, we'll start out behind, and this is already a tough nut to crack. Hmm...." Like I said, I'm sure a lot of DMs already do that. I certainly do. I'd rather have more mechanical heft backing me up, given what skill challenges are trying to accomplish, though. But mainly my point was that it does not need to be complicated to have depth. Pawns in chess are easy. An 8 year old can learn how to move them in five minutes. Yet people play for decades without really unlocking all the depth in pawns. Thoughtful, simple rules on different axes often produce that result in game design. [/QUOTE]

Verification