Great idea for making things easier on the fly. The problem I see is that the p.42 table doesn't have differentiated damage every level but rather in buckets of three levels. Level 1-3 = X damage, Levels 4-6= Y, etc.
Try
this. Updated damage expressions, DCs, monster math etc. Everything you need to run the game except for monster themes, and Skill Challenge framework/rules.
Very cool. Again, what's the rationale behind both a skill check and an attack role? Or am a misinterpreting?
If the skill check has a reasonable chance of failure then you are effectively "penalizing" the attack. If the skill check is trivially easy, then why have it.
1) Check out the p42 tutorial example. Rogue Acrobatics check and attack roll.
2) Check out the Terrain Powers in DMG2 and other resources moving forward from that book. That is basically the formalizing of the p42 stunting system. They involve Skill (almost exclusively versus medium DC) and L + 5 vs AC or L + 3 vs NAD.
3) The rationale is pretty straightforward (and sensible) I think:
a) It creates a scenario where character's stunts will be genre credible; eg Rogues will typically doing swashbuckling things with Acrobatics and Wizards will be doing magicky things with Arcana. Those who don't possess that level of proficiency will find their entry into those stunts...stunted!
b) Assuming that you're playing to archetype, the stunting math (your "shtick" skill vs mod DC + attack roll) will perturb your odds for success slightly downward (compared to your normal odds), forcing you into a cost-benefit analysis and decision-point. If entry into the stunt is guaranteed, then the system goes pear-shaped. If entry into the stunt is too punitive, then it never gets tried. However, if entry is non-punitive but also a non-trivial risk, and the reward that you're looking for is exciting/cool/and potentially tactically advantageous, then the stunting system is right where it should be. And that is where the 4e stunting system is.
I hope that all helps.
