Legends & Lore: A Bit More on Feats

[DMZ2112]

Wait, you're saying that AD&D a single crayon to resolve conflicts? Your experiences are vastly different from mine. I mean, how many different (AD&D 1e) ways are there to determine whether someone snuck up on somebody else (don't forget surprise rolls)? Even which dice are rolled can depend on things like race, class, environment, etc. I'm not entirely sure what all you have to (or get to) roll if you're an Elf Thief in the Woods wearing leather next to a Halfling in the dark.

I think we're comparing apples and oranges, here. You're right in that AD&D1 was famous for modifying your Dexterity check for being an elf, being a thief, being in the woods, wearing leather, standing next to a halfling, and it being nighttime. But no matter what your race, class, or circumstances were, everyone only got the one Dex check. Or, in combat, the one attack roll.

I don't consider that to be six different systems. It's one system with a lot of modifiers.

Neither do I. The problem here is that different folks have different goals. You will have some kind of rules for it hardwired in, even if they are informal. Heck, 1e has stronger scene-typing than 3e. I certainly don't see why it would be bad for the rules to address how the game is designed to be played.

Having re-read these last few posts, I must say that I still feel like I'm not quite sure what you're reacting to.

In simplest terms, I think what I'm concerned about is skill challenges, more than anything else. A lot of proponents of skill challenges don't seem to have the problems with players I have. I have often played with players who will call me out on social scenes that end poorly for their characters because I didn't give them the dubious benefit of a skill challenge as they are outlined in the rules.

And I understand that. I do. If it were a combat scene and I kept telling this player that the orc was hitting his character repeatedly and doing max damage, all without rolling any dice, he'd be rightfully torqued up. But when it comes to roleplaying challenges sometimes I expect my players to think with their heads and not their polyhedral polymer.

Or if I do want them to roll dice, I have a predetermined sense of how the rolling should go, and that sense evolves as the scene changes due to their input. The skill challenge system just doesn't fit all circumstances, but it is presented in the material like combat adjudication.

That's what I want to avoid in D&D5. If feats are going to modify pillars of the game other than combat, that is a sticky business, because the more rules you have in those theaters, the more they are going to lock dungeon masters into a single method of adjudication. It works in combat. It's crap for just about everything else.

To clarify, yes, social feats ought to work on a maneuver system, if you've got to have social feats at all. But I feel like this is unfriendly territory. "Oh, the king is stubborn? I use my Redirect Stubbornness feat. 16 on the Charisma check, and now he's stubbornly on our side. Next?"

But you know what? Maybe D&D /ought/ to have a social combat system. Maybe the answer to D&D being a combat-heavy RPG has been staring us in the face all along. If you can't beat them...

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I think we're comparing apples and oranges, here. You're right in that AD&D1 was famous for modifying your Dexterity check for being an elf, being a thief, being in the woods, wearing leather, standing next to a halfling, and it being nighttime. But no matter what your race, class, or circumstances were, everyone only got the one Dex check. Or, in combat, the one attack roll.

I don't consider that to be six different systems. It's one system with a lot of modifiers.

I believe he is referring to the fact that the rules stated you had a 1 in 6 chance of being surprised(or something like that), which changed based on the race you were. Mind you, thieves had a skill to move silently which was a percentage roll that seemed to change the entire mechanics for sneaking up on someone. Sometimes a Dex check was rolled to sneak up on someone as well. There's probably at least one other mechanic I'm not remembering as well.

There were literally multiple mechanics for the same thing depending on the circumstances.

 

[Grazzt]

But when it comes to roleplaying challenges sometimes I expect my players to think with their heads and not their polyhedral polymer.

And that's pretty much why I never liked skill challenges. No fun (for my group anyway) if you just roll a d20 + mods. Much more fun (for my group anyway) to figure things out (like the traps and puzzles in Tomb of Horrors or Pharaoh...or the module with the chessboard floor...White Plume?? Barrier Peaks??)

 

[Ratskinner]

oops, ninja'd...

I think we're comparing apples and oranges, here. You're right in that AD&D1 was famous for modifying your Dexterity check for being an elf, being a thief, being in the woods, wearing leather, standing next to a halfling, and it being nighttime. But no matter what your race, class, or circumstances were, everyone only got the one Dex check. Or, in combat, the one attack roll.

I don't consider that to be six different systems. It's one system with a lot of modifiers.

Dex checks?!?...you did say 1e, right? Dex checks don't even enter into it, if only it were that simple (like 3e shot for and missed.)

Going on memory and other folks' websites here: Your elf, in the woods has a base 4 in 6 chance of surprising the orcs...unless its dark enough for orcish infravision, then its 2 in 6 just like everybody else in the universe. But wait! The elf is a thief! So he has some percentage chance based on his level and modified by race and Dex(?) to Move silently. Of course, he also might need to Hide in Shadows which is the same type of roll, but a different number. Its fairly unclear which of those rolls would be needed and what the consequences are for any failures. If I fail my Move Silently, do I still get my 4 in 6? Or do I do them the other way 'round? If they hear me, do I get to Hide in Shadows, or do I need to make both in order to avoid notice? Don't forget the Halfling who has his own 3(?) in 6 roll to surprise them. What happens if I make it but he fails? If I've got a Cloak of Elvenkind, there's apparently another independent percentile roll to consider. Virtually every DM I ever had had different answers to these questions. If it was in the rules, it wasn't clear to them. (I never ran 1e.)

So we have (at least) two different dice methods, and (at least) two different possibilities for calculating the necessary rolls for each. Hardly just a batch of modifiers for a Dex check. If the DM thinks a Dex check is also in order that would add yet another method to the roster of rolls.

But you know what? Maybe D&D /ought/ to have a social combat system. Maybe the answer to D&D being a combat-heavy RPG has been staring us in the face all along. If you can't beat them...

Or maybe a universal conflict resolution system, with combat being one case....but then there's sacred steak lying all over the place.

 

[Balesir]

Going on memory and other folks' websites here: Your elf, in the woods has a base 4 in 6 chance of surprising the orcs...unless its dark enough for orcish infravision, then its 2 in 6 just like everybody else in the universe. But wait! The elf is a thief! So he has some percentage chance based on his level and modified by race and Dex(?) to Move silently. Of course, he also might need to Hide in Shadows which is the same type of roll, but a different number. Its fairly unclear which of those rolls would be needed and what the consequences are for any failures. If I fail my Move Silently, do I still get my 4 in 6? Or do I do them the other way 'round? If they hear me, do I get to Hide in Shadows, or do I need to make both in order to avoid notice? Don't forget the Halfling who has his own 3(?) in 6 roll to surprise them. What happens if I make it but he fails? If I've got a Cloak of Elvenkind, there's apparently another independent percentile roll to consider. Virtually every DM I ever had had different answers to these questions. If it was in the rules, it wasn't clear to them. (I never ran 1e.)

It's a loooong time since I ran 1e, but I'm pretty sure you missed still a few more wrinkles and complications:

- The elf is a Thief, but in the woods and not in a city or dungeon, so it's not clear that Thief abilities are available; the Ranger gets those abilities in "wilderness terrain". But it's dark, so maybe the thief gets them anyway?

- To get the 4 in 6/3 in 6 the elf (and the halfling) have to be at least 60' from any party member who isn't an elf or a halfling in leather or lighter armour (I think). You didn't specify where or what the other party members were...

- Later in the game's run, there were suggestions that attribute checks might be used for fairly "normal" hiding and sneaking, but how that might interface with the various earlier systems I honestly don't know.

Yeah - I remember that modus operandi well, if not the details of the system(s).

 

[pemerton]

I don't consider that to be six different systems. It's one system with a lot of modifiers.

Adding to [MENTION=6688937]Ratskinner[/MENTION] and [MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION] - there's also the monk, who has a percentage chance to be surprised based on level - how does this interact with the monk's percentage chance to move silently or hide in shadows? Or interact with rangers, elves and/or halflings in the party?

The sneaking/surprise rules in AD&D are hard to adjudicate, for no very good reason that I can see.

 

[DMZ2112]

I have to admit in the face of overwhelming evidence that my memory of AD&D1 is not as strong as I had believed!

 

[Ratskinner]

I have to admit in the face of overwhelming evidence that my memory of AD&D1 is not as strong as I had believed!

I would've just XP'd you, but must spread.... Good show.

In a larger sense, (as I've said a lot) I think that this is one of the things that gives people such fond memories of 1e. Everybody was basically making up whatever they wanted, picking and choosing what they wanted to do from an incoherent pile of suggestions masquerading as a set of rules. Which makes some sense, if reports are accurate that those really old-school editions represented more what people were doing at their tables in Wisconsin rather than something Gary and Dave actually sat down and designed ab initio. I've seen 1e games that played much like the anecdotal Fantasy effin' Vietnam, and others that played like Warlord of Mars on steroids. Having recently had a chance to try and play the game "RAW"...I'm not confident that that's even possible.

I'm not at all sure of the reception if someone were to release such a thing into the current market without the cachet of being 1eAD&D.