Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5694102" data-attributes="member: 54877">I've been playing around with the skill rank idea (homebrew system, not D&D). This particular problem is easily solved. You might not word it this way, but for clarity, you have 2 extra ranks on either end of the scale. Let's say your scale is: Untrained, Apprentice, Journeyman, Expert, Master, Grand Master, Epic, God-like. What tasks are god-like? Ones that even an epic level, epic trained character can't do. If it is more difficult than Epic, then a mortal cannot do it. The Untrained rank is there for explaining the lower boundary of where Apprentice matters, more clearly. Now, parsing out those ranks, if adopted exactly as above, would involve some trades. You probably don't want to parse them out even, say, across the 4E 30 levels and three tiers. Expert might be somthing you achieve near the end of heroic (so 4 ranks in heroic), Master and Grand Master are in the realm of early and late paragon, respectively, and you only get Epic mid-way through the epic tier, for things you have concentrated on. That's one way, you could do it. There are others. But the idea is that a paragon character spends a certain amount of time getting to expert in some secondary skills, and thus finds it harder and harder to advance the main ones (in rank), compared to the relatively fast advancement in the heroic tier. This is not unlike pre 3E level advancement.  Also, within a given rank, there is still room for differences in the numbers. It may be that at level 5, you'll have the occasional easy to medium Expert check--a single one that isn't critical but useful if you pass. By level 10, you may be expected to have someone that can hit it consistently, including easy or medium checks that are critical to make, and hard ones that would be really nice if you made them. There's nothing wrong with saying this Expert trap (a certain level of complication and trickiness) requires +5 to hit, while this other one requires +12. Note that I do think the terminology and breakpoints of having the expert succeed automatically at the expert tasks, is not helpful for exploring the full range of the idea (with master requiring a roll). It's more varied and useful, IMO, to have the given level require a roll at that rank. Experts roll to do expert things. Then they can try master at a minus, can't do grand master, can try journeyman at a substantial bonus (making it "take 10" most of the time) and get auto success for lower rank tasks. But that's all quibbles on details. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /></blockquote>

Verification