Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fuindordm" data-source="post: 5838315" data-attributes="member: 5435">I've run games at both ends of the spectrum, and they both work.Generally speaking, using ability rolls for skills leads to a permissive game: players are more willing to just try things and let the DM sort it out.  Using skill ranks leads to a restrictive game: players tend to only try what they're good at. On the other hand, they're rewarded for specializing and they can predict their chance of success.  When running AD&D, I tell the players "Your PCs are competent adventurers. You know how to survive in the wilderness, light a fire, ride a horse, and all sorts of other things that make sense given your background and class. If you want some skill like stealth or alchemy that's really useful and isn't normally part of your class, then talk to me about what you're willing to trade for it."In the game, nearly all skill checks are resolved as a roll under the most appropriate ability score on a d20. For difficult checks, I have them roll 4d6 instead. For nearly impossible checks, I have them roll something like a bend bars/lift gates percentage.When running 3E/3.5E/PF, I use the skill system as written. I encourage the players to take 10 and try things even if they don't have the skill, because easy tasks have low DCs. The ranks and bonuses are great for things like stealth vs. perception opposed rolls.</blockquote>