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
*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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Monte Cooks First Legends and Lore
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: 5693525" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>I feel like I'm caught in the middle of a gang war here. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></p><p> </p><p>I agree with you that everyone needs to be <strong>able</strong> to do something more or less all the time. Whether they do so or not is another thing.</p><p> </p><p>However, I think you are going too extreme the other way here with your assumptions. Why is the combat analogy that the expert fighter <strong>kills</strong> the opponent? It would seem to me that if you are going to extend the analogy from skills more faithfully, it would be that the expert fighter doesn't have to roll to hit. He hits, and combat goes on from there.</p><p> </p><p>Of course, bare bones, that is boring. So what I was aluding to with special moves is something akin to what Lost Soul gave a great example of. I was thinking that the fighter hits automatically for basic damage, but then has to roll for whatever the special is.</p><p> </p><p>Now, with skills, I also agree that the problem is that they are binary. But the binary problem is not in the comparison of success, it is the granularity of what success means. So yeah, if we are going to keep all current assumptions in such a system, such that, "expert thief automatically solves all expert perception problems," then no, I'm not for that. I'd like some expert perception problems to require multiple successes. Those are the ones worth fiddling with.</p><p> </p><p>One of the reasons that people tend to collapse the skill checks down into binary decisions--whether rolled for, given by fiat or passive abilities, or through player choices--is that the skill roll sitting there creates the illusion that something is happening. And at the same time, the busy work of the d20 roll feeds back into this illusion, while simultaneously encouraging us not to complicate the system more. I'd like for the system to be a bit more involved, and I know it won't be with a bunch of d20 busy work rolls. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5693525, member: 54877"] I feel like I'm caught in the middle of a gang war here. :D I agree with you that everyone needs to be [B]able[/B] to do something more or less all the time. Whether they do so or not is another thing. However, I think you are going too extreme the other way here with your assumptions. Why is the combat analogy that the expert fighter [B]kills[/B] the opponent? It would seem to me that if you are going to extend the analogy from skills more faithfully, it would be that the expert fighter doesn't have to roll to hit. He hits, and combat goes on from there. Of course, bare bones, that is boring. So what I was aluding to with special moves is something akin to what Lost Soul gave a great example of. I was thinking that the fighter hits automatically for basic damage, but then has to roll for whatever the special is. Now, with skills, I also agree that the problem is that they are binary. But the binary problem is not in the comparison of success, it is the granularity of what success means. So yeah, if we are going to keep all current assumptions in such a system, such that, "expert thief automatically solves all expert perception problems," then no, I'm not for that. I'd like some expert perception problems to require multiple successes. Those are the ones worth fiddling with. One of the reasons that people tend to collapse the skill checks down into binary decisions--whether rolled for, given by fiat or passive abilities, or through player choices--is that the skill roll sitting there creates the illusion that something is happening. And at the same time, the busy work of the d20 roll feeds back into this illusion, while simultaneously encouraging us not to complicate the system more. I'd like for the system to be a bit more involved, and I know it won't be with a bunch of d20 busy work rolls. ;) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Monte Cooks First Legends and Lore
Top