Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Idle Musings: Partial Success and Restricting Ability mods
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5880065" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>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 <strong>not</strong> 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. </p><p> </p><p>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. </p><p> </p><p>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 <strong>and</strong> 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.</p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5880065, member: 54877"] 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 [B]not[/B] 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 [B]and[/B] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Idle Musings: Partial Success and Restricting Ability mods
Top