Idle Musings: Partial Success and Restricting Ability mods

[Crazy Jerome]

Here's a free idea that I haven't done much with, that I thought I'd throw out and see if others have better applications for it.

Mechanical change: Ability mods do not add directly to skill rolls, attack rolls, saving throws, and other such checks. (Or if you prefer, they do add but in a restricted way. The numbers are the same either way. It's all how you look at it.) Instead, ability mods determine the range of possible partial success.

Example: Felipe wants to do a moderately difficult climb, say DC 18. He has Str mod +2. His climb check is +7 (from skill training, level, feats, whatever makes sense). This check does not include the Str mod. If the d20+7 roll is 18 or better, Felipe makes the climb. If not, he doesn't. So far, that is standard.

However, if Felipe gets a 16 or 17, he can then add his Str mod to the roll to get a partial success. This means something like he makes it halfway up, almost slips, and has to cling there for a bit to catch his breath, get his pounding heart back under control, etc. If he rolled less than that, he actually fails, and whether falls or not, has to start over. A partial success, however, means another partial or two will get the job done.

Meanwhile, his friend Jasper is trying the same climb with his Str mod of -1 and climb check of +2. If Jasper can manage an 18 or better, he has at least some success. Anything below that is failure. To get full success, Jasper has to beat the DC and his penalty--in this case, get a 19 or better. A roll that beats the DC, but doesn't compensate for the penalty, is only a partial success.

There is probably a better way to present that, but I hope the examples convey the main idea: An ability score mod that is positive turns some of the "failure" range against the DC into "partial success". An ability score mod that is negative turns some of the "success" range against the DC into a "partial success." In the process, checks become a bit flatter, and are thus not subject to wild swings from ability scores.

Note also that this is in no way opposed to the 5E reported direction of basing so much on straight ability checks. Actually, it works with that better than some things, because the nature of the ability check becomes more standard. The key to whether it would be worth it or not is defining "partial success" in ways that make sense.

 

[Minigiant]

Sound good for a module.

Personality I'd go for a simple d20+Ability mod+Training mod vs DC. Then have class, race, background, and theme features that allow partial successes.

So halflings (race), athletes (background), thieves (background), and rogues (class) can make catch themselves if they fall a Climb check.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Sound good for a module.

Personality I'd go for a simple d20+Ability mod+Training mod vs DC. Then have class, race, background, and theme features that allow partial successes.

So halflings (race), athletes (background), thieves (background), and rogues (class) can make catch themselves if they fall a Climb check.

That could work, too, although it would tend to increase stacking issues instead of mitigating them. It might not be a bad way to repurpose their optional "skills" that they have discussed. Instead of giving a flat bonus on top of everything else, the "bonus" carves out a range of partial success possibilities on otherwise failed rolls.

Hmm, that might have some interesting effects on out of control DCs, too. You can't climb a near-frictionless, magical glass surface, no matter how much of a climb bonus you have--at least not without magic of your own, like spider climb. But doing things such as climb up 30 foot castle walls, the skilled climber will turn many failures into partial successes, whereas the talented and generally experienced adventurer who isn't so trained will tend to either make it or not.

 

[Minigiant]

That could work, too, although it would tend to increase stacking issues instead of mitigating them. It might not be a bad way to repurpose their optional "skills" that they have discussed. Instead of giving a flat bonus on top of everything else, the "bonus" carves out a range of partial success possibilities on otherwise failed rolls.

Hmm, that might have some interesting effects on out of control DCs, too. You can't climb a near-frictionless, magical glass surface, no matter how much of a climb bonus you have--at least not without magic of your own, like spider climb. But doing things such as climb up 30 foot castle walls, the skilled climber will turn many failures into partial successes, whereas the talented and generally experienced adventurer who isn't so trained will tend to either make it or not.

Well in my own fantasy rpg, each rank in a skill grants you a +3 bonus to the check or 1 skill enhancement (partial success/accelerated usage) of an aspect of the skill.

So a rank 2 Athlete would get a +3 to Athletic checks or a skill enhancements. So they can get +6 to checks, +3 and Reroll a Climbing check to catch oneself, +3 and accelerated Climbing, +3 and Natural Climb (take 10 during stress) Accelerated and Natural Climbing, Natural Climbing and Swimming, etc.

 

[Leatherhead]

Well, as long as it's musings. I think it would be better to do upper caps and use incremental success rolls.

With an upper cap, PC's will have an upper limit on how effective they can be at something. Meaning there isn't such a huge disparity between characters who are focused in something VS those who just dabble in it, which allows for a DC range that is reasonable for everyone. Now because it is a cap, the players can use the overage to negate some penalties, meaning that doubling up isn't completely useless, but it won't let the players skyrocket their scores and break the system.

With incremental success rolls, you would have multiple DC's to hit, and depending on which one you managed to get, that is how well you do. This removes the all or nothing factor of checks. Incremental rolls would also be a great way to handle multiple attacks: The better you do, the more attacks land, but you are only doing one roll so the total time needed is cut down dramatically.

 

[P1NBACK]

I love partial successes. I just don't know if I like this method.