Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 5906373" data-attributes="member: 85555"><p>If you are used to skills for every situation (which a lot of games have these days) it can be tricky. It can also be tricky if you are used to 3e or 4e and go back to an older edition like 2e or 1e where (even with with optional nwp rules) the phb doesn't cover a lot of the more standard skills that come upnin the new editions. We found this when we ran Ravenloft 2e again last year. People were stumbling a bit looking for their perception skill or similar abilities. Personally I am no enemy of skill lists (though I have said I am conflicted about them). What I will say is the difference in the behavior of this group was noticeable (and these are guys who are by nature into heavy role play and immersion). But too often when we ran 3e or similar skill heavy games (including ones I designed) people would say &quot;i intimidate&quot; etc. They may even say they look around the room and then roll a detect check (in my own system). This didn't always happen, but it did tend to occur. Without those skills there was just a lot more detail in their descriptions of what they did and a heck of a lot more interacting with the envirnoment (i look around became &quot;i check behind the statue&quot; and I intimidate became &quot;i give him the stare and loom over him like I am about to throw a punch&quot;). These can all be done in a system of skills, but i think skills do eat at the tendancy to do this. I also think skills can make these descriptions superfluous depending on how gms handles social interaction and detection (does it matter what I say if I roll a 3 or a 19?).</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="Bedrockgames, post: 5906373, member: 85555"] If you are used to skills for every situation (which a lot of games have these days) it can be tricky. It can also be tricky if you are used to 3e or 4e and go back to an older edition like 2e or 1e where (even with with optional nwp rules) the phb doesn't cover a lot of the more standard skills that come upnin the new editions. We found this when we ran Ravenloft 2e again last year. People were stumbling a bit looking for their perception skill or similar abilities. Personally I am no enemy of skill lists (though I have said I am conflicted about them). What I will say is the difference in the behavior of this group was noticeable (and these are guys who are by nature into heavy role play and immersion). But too often when we ran 3e or similar skill heavy games (including ones I designed) people would say "i intimidate" etc. They may even say they look around the room and then roll a detect check (in my own system). This didn't always happen, but it did tend to occur. Without those skills there was just a lot more detail in their descriptions of what they did and a heck of a lot more interacting with the envirnoment (i look around became "i check behind the statue" and I intimidate became "i give him the stare and loom over him like I am about to throw a punch"). These can all be done in a system of skills, but i think skills do eat at the tendancy to do this. I also think skills can make these descriptions superfluous depending on how gms handles social interaction and detection (does it matter what I say if I roll a 3 or a 19?). [/QUOTE]

Verification