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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5655658" data-attributes="member: 2067">A few cons that leap out at me:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> No sense of increasing skill as you gain levels. Everything becomes exceedingly binary. This actually exacerbates the problem Mearls mentions at the top of the article: some people being able to do the thing automatically, while others just have no chance to do it at all. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> Complexity Without Payoff: Hooray, everything now needs two elements to measure difficulty: a DC AND a difficulty rating. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> "Impossible": Do you for reals need a rating for something the DM just tells you you can't do? A rule that says "you can't fly by flapping your arms" seems mostly unnecessary to me. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> No Rating for "Natural Ability": What, my Dex 24 Elf can't balance on a rope because I didn't check the right box at character creation? Pfffft.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"> No Surprising Results: So I guess I can't even try to be awesome with a good die roll? No? You're just gonna shut down my fun right there? Great. Thanks. Guess I'll keep chugging along on this railroad you've helpfully laid for me. Choo Choo.</li> </ul>More generally, I'm not entirely sure what this accomplishes that a more expansive "Take 10"/Passive Check-style rule wouldn't."Take 5": Assume a roll of 5; for routine tasks. (Novice)"Take 10": Assume a roll of 10; for basic tasks. (Trainee)"Take 15": Trained only; assume a roll of 15; for advanced tasks. (Expert)"Take 20": Trained only; assume a roll of 20; for very precise tasks. (Master)So for balancing on a tightrope at a circus, it's DC 15. Our trained performer can take a Passive 5, assuming at least +5 in bonuses. Our Dexterous Elf can do the same thing. Our heavily-armored dwarf probably won't make it, but it's not unbelievable. When the earthquake hits, its DC 20. Suddenly our dwarf is less sure of himself, though there's still a chance of making it, on the outside, if he's lucky. Our Elf can Take 10, if he's got a high bonus, but chances are he'll have to roll. Our acrobat can Take 15, though -- she's still solid. Then, the rope is greased. It's DC 25. The dwarf has basically no chance. Our Elf can possibly make it, but it's a challenge. Our trained acrobat can still take her time and assume victory, though it'll take some time.Possibly in combat, we'd use the Action Economy to make sure Taking 15 or 20 would be difficult, though still something a player could dedicate some time to, if they opted into it. This accomplishes the "certain tasks are routine" virtue that Mearls was talking about, and incorporates the scaling DC's, and the natural ability, giving you a feeling of increasing power with level and of not needing to take a test to play your character right. If navigating the Dark Wood is Nature DC 15, you've got a precise number you can hit to go out and navigate the Dark Wood, that you can't do otherwise, but you can hit this through training and bonuses, or through natural ability. Now, there's a second issue that is still possibly an issue: rising DC's can give trained characters a chance of success while limiting untrained characters.The first thing is the general rule of "Only roll dice when there's a challenge." Some things don't really need a DC. Can I bluff the town guard? Yeah, probably. Even if I'm not trained? Sure. Even if I have a Cha of 7? Well, maybe not...But when there is a challenge, I think 4e's "everyone gets better at everything" is a pretty good solution, personally. Flatten the curve, like how it is done for attack rolls and AC's/Defenses, and you should be fine. Only a limited number of small bonuses can actually be applied at any one time. Make training +2 instead of +5. Ditch the Armor Check Penalty (it is mostly pointless bookkeeping and a penalty for actually bothering to wear armor anyway). Don't have backgrounds grant static always-on skill bonuses (access to new or "free" training = still cool). No Out Of Combat At-Wills (e.g.: Encounter Powers) that give you +4 to a skill check. In fact, for that last one, don't let things give you a +4 skill check when you wouldn't let those things give you +4 to an attack roll. There's also the "more than one way to skin a cat" method. Crossing a tightrope is one way to cross that gap. But taking a flying leap (using Str to jump!) or conjuring a cloud chariot (using Int to make magic!) or convincing a passing Roc to give you a lift (using Cha to persuade!), or climbing down one side and up the other (the Slow Ride!) are all ways to do it. To encourage folks to diversify rather than specialize, make sure that even the untrained and unspecialized have to contribute to a challenge. I don't care if you're a big clumsy dwarf and you have a Dex of 5, you are going to HAVE TO try somehow to cross this gap, and your failure -- if indeed you do fail -- is going to hurt your party, while they drag your tin can butt up the other side. The current Skill Challenge system is rather inadequate for that, but certainly there's ideas out here.That lets everyone participate, and keeps the DC's reasonable. It's also more streamlined than this "two difficulty classes" system is. I would not miss the ACP, and I don't think training needs to be +5, and giving the players more than one way to accomplish their goals is always a boffo idea. And a general word of advice: If you don't want people to be able to do things, just don't allow it. I don't need a rule telling me that flapping your arms can't make you fly.</blockquote>

Verification