Mike Mearl's on simplifying skills in D&D

[Greg K]

so what WotC needs to do is just have Mike cut and paste the skills chapter from IH into the 4e PHB.

I hope this never happens!

 

[glass]

This from the guy who wrote Iron Heroes?

Well, considering how much I disliked Iron Heroes (including skill system) and his current monster redesigns, I am not surprised.

Thing is, even not liking the skill system in IH yourself, are you not surprised to discover that its designer apparently doesn't like it either?


glass.

 

[Psion]

Keep in mind, though, this is just a random musing on his blog -- not an actual proposal or even a thought experiment.

Maybe.

But
1) I don't dismiss that Mike and other designers & developers with a public presence will have their ideas play into a new iteration of the game.
2) I don't dismiss the possibility that the receptions of little breadcrumbs like this are an instance of vetting early design ideas to see how well they are received.

So, if I see something I really think sucks, like a reversion to the craptastic proficiency system or nerfing drow to PC levels to make them more playable (we have Andy Collins to thank for that breadcrumb), I think it's best to put 2 cents in.

 

[Li Shenron]

The biggest problem with Mikes idea is that it makes level irrelevant wrt skills. Having the same chance of success in your best abilities whether a 20th level hero or a 1st level neophyte goes completely against the basic principles of a 'level-based' game, while making buffing items and spells even more valuable.

I agree this is the main flaw of the idea. Better to ditch the whole skill system and use only ability check then.

The 3ed rules make it already very easy to keep track of skills, if you just max all of them out. It might be cumbersome if a player spreads all the skill points into different skills, but it's completely optional. House rules like this one take options away and force you to fit into one case which was anyway allowed since the start.

For me, the best version of the skill system was the first (3.0 all the way). Some skills were less useful, so what? Feats can have better ones but not skills? And anyway to make a skill better is dead easy, just add new uses to it and it becomes more attractive, and it's fully back-compatible with any published book too

 

[buzz]

I hope this never happens!

Different strokes, baby.

 

[howandwhy99]

I like the idea of getting rid of skills. There's a system in UA for doing just that. Skills now are just a vast number of tables with DC for specific actions. They can't hope to cover every eventuality.

The above system is too encumbered for my taste. Every check requires multiplication. Imagine calculating for each character in a group for a group check.

DCs range from 10 to 30 for most tasks, with 5 point increments. The (DC - the ability score + 1) times 5 is the chance of success. Some checks are opposed, just as per the rules now.

This should be "chance of failure" not success. For example, a DC 50 - 11(stat10+1) = 39. 39x5 = a 195% chance of success using the method as listed.

 

[Psion]

I like the idea of getting rid of skills. There's a system in UA for doing just that. Skills now are just a vast number of tables with DC for specific actions. They can't hope to cover every eventuality.

I wasn't under the impression that they were supposed to.

The skill tables have sample benchmarks for a variety of common tasks, but it's perfectly possible (and supported by the DMG) to spin your own DCs and modifiers.

Are DMs out there really that powerless that they can't come up with a DC for on the fly tasks? I do it all the time.

 

[Wik]

This from the guy who wrote Iron Heroes?


glass.

Yeah, I actually mentioned that in my reply on his LJ.

All in all, I like the system he has set up. But then, as I've said elsewhere, I like the idea of a simplified D&D.

 

[satori01]

I'm I am not enamoured of this suggestion, it puts too much emphasis on ability scores.
Right now a 1st level cleric with an 18 Wisdom is equal at first level to a Rogue with full ranks and no Wisdom modifier. However over time no Cleric can hope to compare with a Rogue in the spot department over time and training.

I would personanly love to see a system that makes, everyone capable of doing simple things, (ride a horse), and then allow for specialization that gives characters access to abillities based on their specializations. Perhaps a character with a spot specialzation in the broad based perception skill gets a chance to see invisible creatures a certain amount of time a day. Or a character with a jump specialization out of athletics broad catergory could jump or run accross water.

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

Blargh.

I'm for combining some skills, which I've done in the past, or splitting out some skills ... right now the big issue is that "some skills are more equal than others".

I think the proposal in the LJ is a giant leap backward for gaming.

I think super-simplified skill systems are something "some" people like, but I think tailoring a game to the, forgive me for saying it, lowest common denominator is going to make a pretty poor game.

I mean, we could resolve everything with Rock, Paper, Scissors as well, but that's not going to be a ton of fun. I like there to be a balance between robustness and playability ... if it's not playable, we need to scale back robustness until it is.

A super-simple skill system without levels of accomplishment (I'm great at climbing walls! Bob can't climb stairs! Woo!) just doesn't appeal to me. It takes the focus on skilled characters entirely out of the game, and I like MORE focus on skills. This is why I prefer things like d20Modern and Grim Tales. I like granularity of skills where it's not assumed that the only way to set a skill DC is to take Max Ranks and max stat mod and an additional +5 somewhere into the equation. I like a skill system where Bob the Fighter can have just enough ranks in Climb to be passable while John the Rogue can scale a polished marble slab and everything in between.

I don't play C&C and I don't play True20 for those reasons.

--fje