How do Saga skills work?

[the_myth]

The "problems" you all are pointing out seem to have a fairly reasonable and easy fix:

1- Make the Feat "Skill Training" allow the character to become trained in ANY one skill, whether in class or out.

2- Make the Feat "Skill Focus" only allowable at Level 11 (Paragon level); and add another feat called "Skill Mastery" (or something) at level 21 (Epic level).

This seems reasonable. Anyone wanna work out the numbers and see how it looks on paper?

 

[KarinsDad]

so the master acrobat will fail at his shtick more than 10% of the time.

To put it in perspective, in D&D a maxed-out Rogue can get +3 Dex, +2 synergy, +3 Skill Focus and 6 ranks in Tumble by level 3 (for 100% chance to hit DC 15).

Thoughts?

Heaven forbid his chance is not 100%.

Note: I think that 4E will have opposed rolls or some such on Tumble, so the DC will not be as easy as 3E. Or at least I hope it is no longer a static DC.


I picked Tumble just as a random skill.

Let's pick Perception instead.

Rogue NPCs same level as PCs.

The PC Rogue spots them ~50% of the time because, quite frankly, 4E is now set up that way.

The PC Fighter, Cleric, and Wizard, although their Perception modifiers have been climbing, are not in the ball park of the NPC Rogues.

NPC's Hides: D20 + 10 + x
Rogue PC's Perception: D20 + 10 + x
Other PC's Perception: D20 + x

where x is other modifiers (including levels) and could be +/-0 to +/-3 points for each creature.

Basically, even though all of the PCs have been adventuring for a long time, the Rogue is great at Perception and the rest of the PCs (relative to same level enemy Rogues) suck (assuming they did not take the skill). They have a 40% to 60% less chance of spotting their enemies. Hence, they get ambushed nearly every time and the PC Rogue gets ambushed 50% +- of the time.

I just think that +10 is too great of a delta on a D20. +6 for your best ability is solid but not overwhelming. +10 mathematically is overkill. IMO.

And, it's not just a straight 50%. Let me show you the actual math for one creature having +15 with a skill and his opponent having +5 (assume ties are re-rolls). The opponent's chance to win the opposed roll is:

rolls  %chance to win
+15  +5
 1   45% + 5%*23.6% (give or take, I won't bother with multiple ties)
 2   40% + 5%*23.6%
 3   35% + 5%*23.6%
 4   30% + 5%*23.6%
 5   25% + 5%*23.6%
 6   20% + 5%*23.6%
 7   15% + 5%*23.6%
 8   10% + 5%*23.6%
 9    5% + 5%*23.6%
10    0% + 5%*23.6%
11    0%
12 to 20 0%

The guy with +15 really only has to roll 11 or higher to guarantee a win, but he wins the majority of the time anyway.

He wins ~76.4% of the time and his opponent wins ~23.6% of the time. Now, 3 to 1 might not sound that bad, but that does not include extra bonuses. Chances are that most creatures will have many of their best skills and abilities with higher ability score modifiers. Just changing this from a 15 to 5 example to a 16 to 5 example (a mere +1 on an ability score) changes it to a ~81.1% to ~18.9% or about 9 to 2.

The problem is that +10 to the delta is too close to the edge of most of the D20 die itself. It's too big a piece of the pie mathematically.


Look at the 3E saving throws. There is only a base +6 delta there (not +10) at 20th level and people were complaining about how "the bad saves" were so bad that PCs nearly always fail them at high level.

For the same reason that +6 +ability scores +magic is too big of a delta in 3E for saves, +10 +ability scores +magic (hopefully less magic) in 4E will be too big of a delta for opposed skills.

I hope WotC realizes this and takes a real close look at the math.

 

[KarinsDad]

2- Make the Feat "Skill Focus" only allowable at Level 11 (Paragon level); and add another feat called "Skill Mastery" (or something) at level 21 (Epic level).

This seems reasonable. Anyone wanna work out the numbers and see how it looks on paper?

I won't work out the numbers, but delaying this to level 11 (and then 21) defeats the entire purpose of how skills are designed in SWSE (and presumably in 4E).

The idea is to spread the sweet spot out for all 30 levels against similar level opponents, not to make it get even more better at higher levels. And not just for combat, but for skills as well.

Put another way, the (WotC) idea is to have the Rogue have his Trained Skill Focus skills +10 to +12 higher than non-trained PCs at first level and to have it be +10 to +15 higher at 30th level. Since the skills climb automatically, it's not as if he is doing much more than boosting his ability scores to gain a bit more bonus.

Personally, I think +6 to +8 at first level and +6 to +11 at 30th level (compared to same level untrained opponents) is powerful enough.

Note: Against set DCs like Climbing difficulty, Trained Skill Focus skills will go through the roof. A 30th level PC with such a thing will have in the ballpark of +30 to the roll. It's only against same level opposed opponents where it is not 100% guaranteed.

 

[Nifft]

Let's not forget conditional modifiers though, including the Condition Track.

+30 to climb a wall means you can climb pretty much any wall you please. So what does a 30th level dude do? He climbs a wall of animated bones, in a hurricane of boiling blood, with a broken leg.

Basically, you should be doing the kind of heroic stuff that 1st level dudes can only dream about, in conditions that would make them stay home, hidden under their beds.

If that same system puts such tasks a mere 15-18 points away from where you start out (as a 1st level specialist), kudos to that system.

- - -

Regarding opposed checks (because I agree that's where the interesting things happen), let's let all ties go to the PCs. That way we'll see the WORST it could be, right?

Perception vs. Stealth at 1st level, for PCs (A1, B1, C1, D1) vs. NPC Shlub (S1):

A1 (+13) vs. S1 (+0): 5.25% chance of PC failure
B1 (+7) vs. S1 (+0): 19.5% chance of PC failure
C1 (+2) vs. S1 (+0): 38.25% chance of PC failure
D1 (-4) vs. S1 (+0): 70% chance of PC failure

However, a party has five PCs. Let's say they're all type A1 specialists, just for kicks. Now the chance all five of them will make their Stealth checks is (.9475)^5 = 76.37%. That's only 3:1 odds that the party will succeed, despite a very significant resource outlay to get a ~95% chance of individual success.

What about a tight-knit party composed of just A1, B1 and C1? Their chance of party success is just 47%. If we add in D1, that falls to a miserable 14.2%, but a party with D1 in probably wouldn't bother.

A "strike team" party of two A1 and three B1 has a 46.8% chance of success.

And that's just against one guard. Guards can be paired for important locations.

Two guards is about the same as one guard with a +3.75 bonus on his roll. I say about the same because "roll twice, take better" disproportionately favors the high end -- your odds of ending up with a 20 are higher than your odds of ending up with a 19 -- but it doesn't actually grant any bonus, so the PCs can still obviate the guards roll.

- - -

Anyway, it's late. I hope I've made some sense.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Crashy75]

Heaven forbid his chance is not 100%.

Note: I think that 4E will have opposed rolls or some such on Tumble, so the DC will not be as easy as 3E. Or at least I hope it is no longer a static DC.


I picked Tumble just as a random skill.

Let's pick Perception instead.

Rogue NPCs same level as PCs.

The PC Rogue spots them ~50% of the time because, quite frankly, 4E is now set up that way.

The PC Fighter, Cleric, and Wizard, although their Perception modifiers have been climbing, are not in the ball park of the NPC Rogues.

NPC's Hides: D20 + 10 + x
Rogue PC's Perception: D20 + 10 + x
Other PC's Perception: D20 + x

where x is other modifiers (including levels) and could be +/-0 to +/-3 points for each creature.

Basically, even though all of the PCs have been adventuring for a long time, the Rogue is great at Perception and the rest of the PCs (relative to same level enemy Rogues) suck (assuming they did not take the skill). They have a 40% to 60% less chance of spotting their enemies. Hence, they get ambushed nearly every time and the PC Rogue gets ambushed 50% +- of the time.

I just think that +10 is too great of a delta on a D20. +6 for your best ability is solid but not overwhelming. +10 mathematically is overkill. IMO.

And, it's not just a straight 50%. Let me show you the actual math for one creature having +15 with a skill and his opponent having +5 (assume ties are re-rolls). The opponent's chance to win the opposed roll is:

rolls  %chance to win
+15  +5
 1   45% + 5%*23.6% (give or take, I won't bother with multiple ties)
 2   40% + 5%*23.6%
 3   35% + 5%*23.6%
 4   30% + 5%*23.6%
 5   25% + 5%*23.6%
 6   20% + 5%*23.6%
 7   15% + 5%*23.6%
 8   10% + 5%*23.6%
 9    5% + 5%*23.6%
10    0% + 5%*23.6%
11    0%
12 to 20 0%

The guy with +15 really only has to roll 11 or higher to guarantee a win, but he wins the majority of the time anyway.

He wins ~76.4% of the time and his opponent wins ~23.6% of the time. Now, 3 to 1 might not sound that bad, but that does not include extra bonuses. Chances are that most creatures will have many of their best skills and abilities with higher ability score modifiers. Just changing this from a 15 to 5 example to a 16 to 5 example (a mere +1 on an ability score) changes it to a ~81.1% to ~18.9% or about 9 to 2.

The problem is that +10 to the delta is too close to the edge of most of the D20 die itself. It's too big a piece of the pie mathematically.


Look at the 3E saving throws. There is only a base +6 delta there (not +10) at 20th level and people were complaining about how "the bad saves" were so bad that PCs nearly always fail them at high level.

For the same reason that +6 +ability scores +magic is too big of a delta in 3E for saves, +10 +ability scores +magic (hopefully less magic) in 4E will be too big of a delta for opposed skills.

I hope WotC realizes this and takes a real close look at the math.

They could also make some changes to checks in general to favor PC's. One possibility in this example is if they made the rogues roll vs. each PC separately. Assuming they haven't attacked yet the PC's can warn each other. If you have 4 PC's and assume they have a 80% (not horribly unreasonable as cleric types will have a good wis) chance vs. each pc, they get... about 41% vs. the group. That's assuming there is no rogue with perception as a trained skill. Perhaps I'm too generous as a DM, but I always allow my players to warn each other before the assassins start stabbing. Perhaps this type of play will become canon. Also, who knows if the "minion" rules will factor into this. It is possible that minions will be comparatively inept. I'm sure they will have a less-than-elite array. Other skills may be more troublesome however but they may make subtle changes to each one to allay our fears. It all depends.

 

[Ranger REG]

While I dislike this system greatly, that part of it right there has soured me on it 110%. If this is even a shadow of the 4E skill system, I foresee writing a new skill system in my future.

I'm certain you can spend a feat to have x number of skills to be Trained Skills (automatically gaining +5 bonus). Considering the bonus, it should be no more than two.

You really gotta test-drive Star Wars Saga Edition Rule. If not, then stick with what you have and say no more. It's not like WotC is spending your money in the 4e development project (unless you're a shareholder).

 

[Plane Sailing]

Another issue to note is that there is no such thing as a cross-class skill. If a skill does not appear on your class skill list, you cannot train it. If a scout wants to be trained in Treat Injury, he needs a level of Noble or Soldier.

A house rule that I use (inspired by Conan OGL) is that trained skills resulting from Intelligence bonus can be taken from ANY of the list, not just the list for your class.

Thus Int 12+ allows at least one skill from anywhere (enabling you to have a scoundrel medic or scout medic for instance... without that you have to be a soldier or noble to get medic skill trained).

Cheers

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

What I really liked is the ability to get skill rerolls.
Some races and some class talents grant the ability to reroll a certain skill check and take either the reroll result or the better (usually, always taking the better applies only to a subset of the skills use).

This way, the chances of success for a given skill go still up, but the absolute thing you can do does not change. I think this is pretty clever, because it allows to keep skill modifiers from different classes to stay within the range of a d20 roll, and still gives a way to improve skills further.

I think you could apply this on several other things, too. (Unfortunately, Saga doesn't do that)
Instead of getting an extra attack at BAB +6, +11 or +16, characters could get a reroll for their attack. The same could even be done for two-weapon fighting (reroll your attack if you're unhappy to see if your off-hand attack hits better) or using shields (reroll the opponents attack if it would hit, or just remove one of his rerolls).

I also think that is a great idea for E6 "epic level" feats. Don't give more bonuses, but still increase the chance of success.

 

[Nine Hands]

Its worth noting:

NOTHING* else grants you a permanent bonus to skill checks. Not race, not synergy, not feats (beyond Skill Focus). Nothing.

Most races show skill aptitude with re-rolls, take-10s, or auto-skill focus.

DCs start high, but most skills fall into a 5-15+ ability mod range (rather than D&Ds 4-23 range). So skills become easier to use, but slower than a 3.5's character would.

Most skills can be used untrained. The sole exception is mechanics (which is completely trained). Most skills have trained-only uses (tumbling for acrobatics, surgery for treat injury) making being trained a very important element beyond the +5.

* Ok, some equipment does, but thats HARDLY a permanent thing...

That is a good point, the values of the skill bonuses remain in a narrower range (compared to standard d20).

The ability to take 10 is pretty useful but not overly powerful.

The ability to reroll but must keep the second roll is very good (and has saved my player's bacon many times).

Finally the ability to reroll and keep either result (basically allowing you to roll 2 dice and keep the one you want) is even more powerful.

These three things should be remembered when thinking about skill checks as they don't appear on paper to be really cool until you get to the table and play. Some of them backfire once in a while, but players love getting a second chance.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Also note, you can only Take 10 in skills you are trained in.

Visit the Modern forum here at EN World and download The_Gneech's conversions of Star Wars Saga into Sword & Sorcery Saga.

Could you link this, please?