Maximum skill results?

[Kahuna Burger]

Skills should not be less effective than spells of equivelent level and devotion.

they aren't. nor are they more effective. They're different. Spells can do more fantastic things than skills can, but they are falible by their very nature of being spells. With the exception of destroying stuff, they also aren't as good at making real changes. But there are things you can do with magic that you can never do by mundane means. Thats why they call it magic.

Kahuna burger

 

[RangerWickett]

Well, in response to the "90 on a skill check vs. 9th level spell" point, you'd have to be well past 40th level to get anywhere near a 90 on a skill check, and I think 40th level characters, if one were to use them, would be incredibly more powerful even in their natural bodies than the magic that could be wielded by someone at 20th level.

I'd say balancing on a cloud is actually impossible, but a lot of the other ideas presented in this thread seem more a matter of misinterpretation than one of impossibility. For the sake of this discussion, let's stick to the realm of DC 80 or lower. Stuff that's in the Epic Level Handbook is as far as we're going to go.

For a diplomacy check, you need a DC 50 to make a hostile person friendly. Now, you're my friend, right? If I asked you to hand over to me everything you own, of course you wouldn't do it, because that's more than you can ask of a friend. I think the ELH gives rules for making people your fanatical followers, which actually I consider a bad idea, but let's run with it. In the real world, suave folks can convince willing people to hand over all they own. To use a slightly risky example, some corrupt preachers have convinced people already friendly to them to hand over huge sums of money. I'd guess the DC to make a helpful person 'fanatical' is 30, quite possible with a few good attempts.

Of course, to make an unfriendly lich your fanatical follower, you'd need a 50 or higher, perhaps, but it could be done. You convince the lich to serve you, because you are the route to it gaining even more power. So in it's mind, it's not giving up power; it's using power to gain more. Certainly a hard sell, and not one I could manage, but someone sufficiently heroic could do it. To convince a hostile lich while in the middle of combat would be much harder, requiring a DC 80 or so, with a -10 penalty because you're trying to do it as a free action. But I can imagine someone sufficiently charismatic being able to convince his enemy to listen. He shouts, "If you harm me, you throw away infinite power!" with just the right tone to his voice, and it clicks.

For a more mundane example, if Piratecat came to this thread and said he thinks a DC 50 Concentration check should let you cast a wish while being slammed into a stone wall by the force of a tsunami, people would be inclined to belief him. If some random guy none of us know or like said the same thing, he'd have a harder time being accepted.

It's possible to do ridiculous things with enough talent. I mean, a master rockclimber can freescale a 600 ft. cliff in two minutes (saw it in a documentary; most impressive). That's the equivalent of forty DC 30 climb checks in a row, so I'm guessing the guy had a pretty good climb check.

For me, as a quick guideline, spending a minute and getting a DC 20 check result can match about anything a 1st level spell could do, and every 10 higher is about a spell level higher. So spending a minute on a Bluff check to get a result of 60 would be suitable enough for me to let you ~sorta~ dominate someone, making them do something you want because they fall for a complex lie that leads them to do something of their own free will.

 

[A'koss]

- There is no diplomacy check high enough to have a arch lich hand over his power.

A'k: Yeah, heh... you'll get no argument out of me. There's no way, no way I'd allow Diplomacy to effectively function as an at will, no save charm spell.

But really, I've come to the conclusion that I just don't like how skills handle things like Diplomacy, Intimitation, Perform (essentially another Diplomacy-effect skill) and the opposing skills. My feeling is that the opposition skills should be tied somewhat to a person's level.

Instead of making checks against Listen, Sense Motive, Spot... I think it would be better handled being opposed by the level of the character (with the appropriate modifiers) you're trying to bluff or hide from, etc. The theory being that adventuring classes should automatically improve in these areas. I consider these essential survival skills a la BAB, HP and Saving Throw improvements.

- There is no bluff check high enough to convince a person looking at a blue sky that it is in fact green.

A'k: If someone gave me a really good reason to allow it I might.

- There is no hide check high enough to hide in a bare, featureless, round room with a central light source.

A'k: Definitely. But in 3.5e, you need something to hide behind in order to even make a hide check so that is no longer a concern.

- There is no move silently check high enough to move at normal speed in platemail right behind an alert guard.

A'k: I'd probably agree with that. Unless it was "silenced" platemail.

- There is no survival tracking check high enough to know who passed a week ago when yesterday 30 head of cattle were driven over this road in the rain.

A'k: I'm a little more lenient about tracking, that above check to me is still possible, just really freakin' hard. Tracking an air elemental's movement across the sky is something I'd consider "impossible".

- There is no Balance check high enough to let you walk on clouds, because it's not a matter of Balance, you are simply too heavy to do it!

A'k: Agreed. Skills should not be able to duplicate magic IMO, they should be rooted in reality. Any feat that is clearly superhuman is better left to a class/PrC ability. I've no problem if you have a monk-like class that allows you to extend the utility of these kinds of skills into the superhuman arena. Then at least I can argue that the monk can psionically enhance these skills allowing him to do all the wire-fu style stuff where others can't. But since it essentially "magical" it should follow the rules of magic as well.

Hmmm, I think I just gave myself an idea...

- There is no Craft check high enough to create a magical item.

A'k: I agree, barring something like... divine intervention. This has happened IMC.

- There is no ride check high enough to make your horse take you deliberately inside a collosal foe's mouth.

A'k: This one I disagree with. I think it's very doable, as others have mentioned, on a good enough check.

A'koss.

 

[seasong]

There is no diplomacy check high enough to have a arch lich hand over his power.

Well, perhaps just temporarily. But this would be better in the bluff skill.

There is no bluff check high enough to convince a person looking at a blue sky that it is in fact green.

I don't know. I think it can be done. You just have to take the right tack.

There is no hide check high enough to hide in a bare, featureless, round room with a central light source.

If the light source is an object, it's not featureless - you just hide on the side of the light source that they are NOT looking at. Or if there are people in the room, behind them. Or if the light source is not solid, INSIDE it.

There is no move silently check high enough to move at normal speed in platemail right behind an alert guard.

It's DEX based. You are just holding the plates just right and still managing to scoot along at a fair pace.

There is no survival tracking check high enough to know who passed a week ago when yesterday 30 head of cattle were driven over this road in the rain.

Unless you check to either side. Or look for other signs, like what kind of game was killed in the intervening span, and compare that against the total expected game kills for the local ecology, and then make an educated guess based on how the bones were disposed of.

Can you tell I've run high power games?

-seasong

 

[Mistwell]

Well, in response to the "90 on a skill check vs. 9th level spell" point, you'd have to be well past 40th level to get anywhere near a 90 on a skill check, and I think 40th level characters, if one were to use them, would be incredibly more powerful even in their natural bodies than the magic that could be wielded by someone at 20th level.

Ha! I sense a challenge to my min/maxing powers!

This is in Arcana Unearthed, so YMMV.

All you need to be is a 17th level Akashic.

Charisma 22 (four increases), for +6 to Charisma skill checks. 20 ranks in Diplomacy. 5 ranks in Bluff, for a +2 synergy bonus to Diplomacy checks. 5 Ranks in Sense Motive, for a +2 synergy bonus to Diplomacy check. Feats: Affinity with Skill: Diplomacy (+4 Diplomacy checks), Skill focus: Diplomacy (+3 Diplomacy), Skill Application: Diplomacy and Bluff (+2 Diplomacy), Tattoo Spell: Heightened Canny Effort (+10 to next skill check once a day), Born Leader (+4 Diplomacy), Akashic Abilities used: Skill memory (+6 to skill check), Minor ability: Skill Focus: Diplomacy ability (+4 to skill check), Lesser ability: Skill Focus: Diplomacy ability (+4 to skill check), Greater ability: Skill Focus: Diplomacy ability (+4 to skill check).

Yes, these are all stackable bonuses. Most are inherant bonuses that specifically stack according to Monte Cook.

So, you trigger your Skill Memory, seeking words of advice from the most charismatic people of the ages. You tap your tattoo. You roll 20 on the Diplomacy check, using Skill Mastery. And there you go...you have a 91 for your Diplomacy check (one better than you asked for).

I think with some magic items you could crank it even higher. There are also several races that get a bonus to Diplomacy that could add to it.

 

[Cedric]

I think you greatly underestimate the gullibility of some people and the ability of others to take advantage of it.

Now, could "anyone" be convinced that the sky is green? No, many people just have too good of a sense motive skill. But there are still a large number of people in a game world of magic and gods who could be convinced that the sky is green.

Cedric

 

[Synicism]

6. There is no Balance check high enough to let you walk on clouds, because it's not a matter of Balance, you are simply too heavy to do it!

Actually, there is. I think it's in the Epic Level Handbook and it's like DC 100 or something. <g>

 

[Norfleet]

There is no ride check high enough to make your horse take you deliberately inside a collosal foe's mouth.

A'k: This one I disagree with. I think it's very doable, as others have mentioned, on a good enough check.

A'koss.

I agree with the original poster: No ride check is high enough to make your horse do that. You can make a "Handle Animal" check to convince it to do so. Ride would be for what happens after you attempt to convince your horse to do so, but it decides at the last minute that this would be a really bad idea and changes its mind.

 

[S'mon]

Actually, there is. I think it's in the Epic Level Handbook and it's like DC 100 or something. <g>

The ELH writer made a bad call. I agree that walking on clouds is in the realm of 'bending the laws of reality' - it perhaps makes sense as a monk ki power, not as a regular skill check. Unless clouds in your campaign are very different from on Earth, there's nothing there to 'balance' on.

 

[Norfleet]

Well, you might be able to balance on the cloud, but that merely means the hapless molecule(s) you've managed to balance yourself perfectly on will be hauled down to the ground with you as you plummet to an annoying 20d6 damage. It'll sting a bit. Fortunately, you're level 80 or 90, so it won't be much more than an irritation. Why are you even trying to balance on clouds anyway? Don't you have fly somewhere by now?