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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
New WotC Article - The Role of Skills
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="Mallus" data-source="post: 5842308" data-attributes="member: 3887"><p>Yeah, this is a concern, but there are several relatively simple ways to address it.</p><p></p><p>You could differentiate between core class skills and general skills. Some classes would get a small number of class skills which are superior to what non-class members can do, like thieving skills in AD&D/2e, or a 3e class's EX abilities.</p><p></p><p>EX: any PC can try to hide in the right circumstances, but a thief has a chance to hide that borders on the supernatural. </p><p></p><p>Likewise, any PC can attempt to track, but a ranger's ability to do so works in the most unfavorable conditions and can yield extraordinary results. </p><p></p><p>If you prefer a unified skills framework, you can get the same effect with class-based bonuses/penalties. 2e did this w/tracking. It was a warrior NWP, but non-rangers got a -6 penalty to their check. </p><p></p><p>Or, you could use something like the skill system I was noodling around with, which ditched most bonuses/penalties in favor of changing the DC/target number based on <em>who</em> was attempting the action, ie, a ranger tracking would roll against a DC of 10, whereas the priest from your example would roll against a DC 15 or 20, depending on how familiar they were with the outdoors-y activities. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Well put! </p><p></p><p></p><p>Nice and simple. Another idea: cap all non-situational modifiers at a low value like +2, ie, a PC might get a +2 to Spot from training, or +2 from being a elf, but a trained elf is still only +2.</p><p></p><p></p><p>There's a lot I like about 4e's skill system, but it still suffers from too wide a variance between specialized/non-specialized characters, which makes setting DC's difficult -- parties end up split between the PCs who can barely make a check and those who can't fail. At least that's how it was in my 4e campaign. </p><p></p><p>I think 4e's skill system would benefit from having fewer ways to boost skill checks or a max bonus per level, or both. </p><p></p><p></p><p>What I'm finding playing Pathfinder and running AD&D, is that mechanical specialization of PCs is a fun and rewarding experience --I have gear-head tendencies, too-- outside of actual play. It's essentially a minigame. </p><p></p><p>But what works best in live play is a simpler framework which reduces the difference between specialists/non-specialists in core adventuring activities.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mallus, post: 5842308, member: 3887"] Yeah, this is a concern, but there are several relatively simple ways to address it. You could differentiate between core class skills and general skills. Some classes would get a small number of class skills which are superior to what non-class members can do, like thieving skills in AD&D/2e, or a 3e class's EX abilities. EX: any PC can try to hide in the right circumstances, but a thief has a chance to hide that borders on the supernatural. Likewise, any PC can attempt to track, but a ranger's ability to do so works in the most unfavorable conditions and can yield extraordinary results. If you prefer a unified skills framework, you can get the same effect with class-based bonuses/penalties. 2e did this w/tracking. It was a warrior NWP, but non-rangers got a -6 penalty to their check. Or, you could use something like the skill system I was noodling around with, which ditched most bonuses/penalties in favor of changing the DC/target number based on [i]who[/i] was attempting the action, ie, a ranger tracking would roll against a DC of 10, whereas the priest from your example would roll against a DC 15 or 20, depending on how familiar they were with the outdoors-y activities. Well put! Nice and simple. Another idea: cap all non-situational modifiers at a low value like +2, ie, a PC might get a +2 to Spot from training, or +2 from being a elf, but a trained elf is still only +2. There's a lot I like about 4e's skill system, but it still suffers from too wide a variance between specialized/non-specialized characters, which makes setting DC's difficult -- parties end up split between the PCs who can barely make a check and those who can't fail. At least that's how it was in my 4e campaign. I think 4e's skill system would benefit from having fewer ways to boost skill checks or a max bonus per level, or both. What I'm finding playing Pathfinder and running AD&D, is that mechanical specialization of PCs is a fun and rewarding experience --I have gear-head tendencies, too-- outside of actual play. It's essentially a minigame. But what works best in live play is a simpler framework which reduces the difference between specialists/non-specialists in core adventuring activities. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
New WotC Article - The Role of Skills
Top