Perform skills = Languages?

[Kerrick]

I was reading the Pathfinder thread in GD, and the forked thread about Perform skills, and I had an idea: maybe we could make Perform skills like language skills. With some modifications, of course, but the basic idea is that you don't really need any measure of proficiency in a perform skill beyond "novice/proficient/talented/maestro/virtuoso".

This is basically what I did for languages and Decipher Script - instead of spending one rank to become fluent in the language you're speaking/reading, you have multiple levels of proficiency, and can make Int checks vs. a scaling DC to understand something that's above your level (for instance, I'm not fluent in Spanish, but I understand enough that I can usually puzzle out something written in Spanish).

This is just a half-formed idea ATM, but the concept is that you can gain levels of proficiency in different Perform skills (you can only spend 1 rank/skill/level, or maybe 1/3 or 4 levels, to prevent someone from becoming a maestro by L5). Bardic music works as normal, but the higher-level abilities require greater proficiency instead of more ranks. You could also add rules for greater proficiency levels when playing an instrument (adapting the rules from Song and Silence, where each instrument grants a different bonus; you could have the bonus scale by proficiency level. Same with bardic music.)

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

This is just a half-formed idea ATM, but the concept is that you can gain levels of proficiency in different Perform skills (you can only spend 1 rank/skill/level, or maybe 1/3 or 4 levels, to prevent someone from becoming a maestro by L5).

The only thing I'd change in your system is removing any limits on taking Perform ranks; 5th level is where D&D starts diverging from the real world, so having a maestro at level 5 actually makes perfect sense.

 

[Hawken]

So, if you can do that for one or two skills, why not for all of them?

 

[Kerrick]

The only thing I'd change in your system is removing any limits on taking Perform ranks; 5th level is where D&D starts diverging from the real world, so having a maestro at level 5 actually makes perfect sense.

Sure, if you play E6. If you're a maestro at L5, where do you go from there?

So, if you can do that for one or two skills, why not for all of them?

You could... I think the other skills lend themselves better to scalability, though. Speak Language is a fairly binary skill, and Perform is largely so - there's little benefit for having a huge score, unless you make new rules for it (as I have). Add to that, that bards are the only ones who really use it, and they MUST take ranks in it (which ties up some of their skill total), and it only makes sense to adapt the system.

I certainly wouldn't - it's far too much work.

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

Sure, if you play E6. If you're a maestro at L5, where do you go from there?

C'mon, think fantastically. Yo Yo Ma is a 5th-level cello maestro. Joshua Bell is a 5th-level violin maestro. James Galway is a 5th-level flute maestro. (Yes, I'm a classical fan.) A 20th level bard? He's a maestro at the cello, violin, pan flute, harpsichord, harmonica, and kazoo--a veritable one-being orchestra.

 

[Hawken]

C'mon, think fantastically. Yo Yo Ma is a 5th-level cello maestro. Joshua Bell is a 5th-level violin maestro. James Galway is a 5th-level flute maestro. (Yes, I'm a classical fan.) A 20th level bard? He's a maestro at the cello, violin, pan flute, harpsichord, harmonica, and kazoo--a veritable one-being orchestra.

The only name there I recognize is Yo Yo Ma. And I'd have to say he's further along than just being a 5th level Bard (or even Expert). If these guys are at the top of their field, best in the world, they would be pushing 20th level, if not already epic!

Also, considering that it takes years for even prodigies to master a single instrument, I don't see a 20th level bard being a master of more than maybe two or three instruments. It just isn't feasible. Going out and killing monsters, stealing treasure, plane hopping, all that stuff doesn't make one a better singer or story-teller.

Kerrick, I kind of like your ideas for proficiency levels, but at the same time, why bother? On your Decipher Script thing, proficiency level doesn't mean anything special--or at least, that's how it read to me. If you're the lowest rank, you can still translate something multiple ranks above you, it just takes longer to do so. What's the incentive beyond just getting better die rolls (or just getting magic items that give better modifiers), just to speed up the time it takes?

If you're going to have levels, there has to be things levels can do, things they can't. You listed what levels can do, but not what they can't. If someone has only proficient level in a language, how exactly are they going to be able to translate, muchless understand, something written at a more erudite level? Meaning, if someone has a Jeff Foxworthy-level of understanding of a language, how is just taking a little more time (a few extra minutes per page) going to allow them to understand Sartre or Confucious level writings? Some codes take years, decades or even centuries to break, and that's after being worked on by experts. Someone with rudimentary language skills would be lucky to get a single word right, and without having the correct context, that word could have any number of meanings.

If you want to do proficiency levels, how about like this:
Each skill has a proficiency level: Novice, Proficient, Talented, Expert, Master.
Each level has 5 ranks; Novice 1-5, Proficient 1-5, etc.
The first rank put in a skill becomes Novice 1, etc., up to 5 ranks being Novice 5. The sixth rank changes the level to Proficient 1, and so on, up to Master 5.

Each skill has 6 difficulty ratings; Easy, Simple, Average, Difficult, Hard and Impossible. Each rank has different DCs based on the proficiency level.

Skill check difficulty levels
Easy: DC 7
Simple: DC 10
Average: DC 15
Difficult: DC 17
Hard: DC 20
Impossible: DC 25
The skill check made is as normal: skill ranks + modifiers + d20 roll.

If your proficiency level is higher, reduce the DC by 1 step for each proficiency level higher. So what would be Difficult (DC 17) for a Novice, would be Simple (DC 10) for a Talented person. The Talented person would add his ranks of Talented (1-5), plus modifiers + d20 roll when making that check.

On the other end, increase DCs by 1 step if the task is set for higher proficient level characters. So, something Average (DC 15) for a Master, would be Impossible (DC 25) for someone Proficient.

I just came up with the DC numbers off the top of my head--feel free to tweak to your heart's content!

 

[Ashtagon]

The only name there I recognize is Yo Yo Ma. And I'd have to say he's further along than just being a 5th level Bard (or even Expert). If these guys are at the top of their field, best in the world, they would be pushing 20th level, if not already epic!

You appear to be suffering from level inflation, a common disease

There is an oft-quoted article by a game designer which shows that Einstein (unarguably one of the greatest, if not the greatest, physicists ever) can believably be written as a 5th level character. Analysis of the various athletics skills shows that Olympic-grade athletes are no higher than 6th-7th level. Even the heroes of Tolkein's LotR can be believably written as between 5th-8th level.

Just because 20th level is the highest level possible in the rules, it doesn't mean that the greatest hero in a particular world must therefore actually be 20th level.

 

[Kerrick]

The only name there I recognize is Yo Yo Ma. And I'd have to say he's further along than just being a 5th level Bard (or even Expert). If these guys are at the top of their field, best in the world, they would be pushing 20th level, if not already epic!

Also, considering that it takes years for even prodigies to master a single instrument, I don't see a 20th level bard being a master of more than maybe two or three instruments. It just isn't feasible. Going out and killing monsters, stealing treasure, plane hopping, all that stuff doesn't make one a better singer or story-teller.

Yeah. It's like gaining classes in general - you can either be really good at one or two, or have fewer levels in several classes, but you can't gain lots of levels in lots of classes.

Kerrick, I kind of like your ideas for proficiency levels, but at the same time, why bother? On your Decipher Script thing, proficiency level doesn't mean anything special--or at least, that's how it read to me. If you're the lowest rank, you can still translate something multiple ranks above you, it just takes longer to do so. What's the incentive beyond just getting better die rolls (or just getting magic items that give better modifiers), just to speed up the time it takes?

Ohhh... I forgot to put in a penalty for attempting to read something that's above your proficiency level. That would help a lot, I think. It IS possible to translate something above your level, given time; like I said, I can read some Spanish, and can sometimes get the gist of something I read (or even understand it entirely), and sometimes I just say "Duh... what?"

If you're going to have levels, there has to be things levels can do, things they can't. You listed what levels can do, but not what they can't. If someone has only proficient level in a language, how exactly are they going to be able to translate, muchless understand, something written at a more erudite level? Meaning, if someone has a Jeff Foxworthy-level of understanding of a language, how is just taking a little more time (a few extra minutes per page) going to allow them to understand Sartre or Confucious level writings?

Some codes take years, decades or even centuries to break, and that's after being worked on by experts.

I just read an article about a friend of Thomas Jefferson's who wrote a code into a letter he sent to Tom; an expert recently cracked it, 200 years later, with the aid of a computer. I should split off the code rules into a separate section, or at least rule that you can't attempt to crack a code unless you're fluent in the language (that's why it takes them so long - no one speaks the language anymore).

If you want to do proficiency levels, how about like this:

It's a workable system. I'm pretty burned out on design right now, but I might look at it more seriously later.

You appear to be suffering from level inflation, a common disease

There is an oft-quoted article by a game designer which shows that Einstein (unarguably one of the greatest, if not the greatest, physicists ever) can believably be written as a 5th level character. Analysis of the various athletics skills shows that Olympic-grade athletes are no higher than 6th-7th level. Even the heroes of Tolkein's LotR can be believably written as between 5th-8th level.

More like over-quoted. That article inevitably gets trotted out during discussions like this. Here's my rebuttal (one that's been used on me a few times): You can't compare the real world to D&D. By the RAW, a person can't run a marathon at all, let alone in 4 hours (which is the average time for a marathon runner). It might be reasonable to assume that Olympic athletes are 6th-7th level, since they focus solely on one or two things (Michael Phelps, for example, has max ranks in Swim, Skill Focus (swim), Endurance, and maybe Rapid Swimmer, which gives him greater swim speed), but this would make any D&D PC over 10th level a near-demigod. I consider that concept absurd, but then, I've been searching for a way to scale back power so that a PC can't achieve superhuman feats before 20th level.

 

[Ashtagon]

Personally, when someone says that it would make a 10th level D&D character a demigod I smile, nod, and agree wholeheartedly.

Level 1-5: Realistic
Level 6-10: Heroic
Level 7-15: Wu-Xia (matrix-like stuff)
Level 16-20: Stepping on the toes of the gods

And it's not just comparing real life to D&D levels. Even the Lord of the Rings heroes don't rate much higher than 7th level (Gandalf excepted, but he is a DMPC anyway).

 

[Hawken]

You appear to be suffering from level inflation, a common disease

And you appear to be suffering from underestimatius excessivus!

The best in the world ARE the highest level. That's why they're the Best. No one else can match them. Using Star Wars (comes easiest to mind), Yoda and Palpatine are portrayed as 20th level characters because each is the best, the pinnacle of Jedi/Sith. Back to D&D, Raistlin was around 20th or so before going back in time and he was the Best. After going back in time, he sucked out Fistandantilus' soul and gained even more levels from that and became even better (way Epic!). Zaknafein (Driz'zt's daddy) was the best swordsman in Menzoberranzan and was a 25th level fighter (back in the fun days of 1e/2e). Elminster is/was the best in the Realms, and he's been consistently portrayed as well over 20th level. Same with that Mordenkainen guy. Vecna, the lichiest lich of all liches has always been over 20th or so.

Its not level inflation, its accuracy. The levels in D&D translate into raw power and ability to deal damage because its a game about killing bigger and badder monsters. In our world, levels would translate into skill and talent (since no one can call down flaming rocks out of the sky by waggling their fingers!). And those musicians are the best in their respective fields. They didn't do it overnight, they've been at it all their lives, so, yeah, they're Epic or right on the cusp. Ghandi may not have had 200hp, but he was epic--he liberated the second most populated country in the world! Elvis too! The Beatles! Hitler and Stalin were epic figures also--one single person responsible for the deaths they each caused, you cannot do those things and NOT be epic! Gen. McArthur (sp?) was the Supreme Commander of Allied forces in the Pacific during WWII--one man in charge of the armies and navies of multiple countries!--tell me that's not epic!

If you want to compare levels to real life you have to drop game mechanics and consider skill and ability in relation to others. By RAW, no one can swim miles, hold their breath for 5 minutes (or even 3), run for miles without stopping (while heavily encumbered), make death attacks on multiple targets without studying for 18 seconds, yet those are things that SEALS, Rangers and Special Forces are able to do by second nature. No one in real life can swing a greatsword four or five times in the span of 6 seconds, or make up to 9 attacks on nine different targets (whirlwind attack) in 6 seconds. A midget (halfling) cannot win a grapple check against Triple H (an ogre) by random chance (d20 roll) or even skill.

There are things done all the time in real life that aren't allowed by RAW, just as the rules allow characters to do things that are impossible in real life. So, forget all the D&D mechanics that cannot apply to real life and look at levels as a measure of ability, skill, talent, proficiency, whatever.

It's a workable system. I'm pretty burned out on design right now, but I might look at it more seriously later.

So, what? You're looking at it comically right now? Gimme a break! You started this thread, so give it a serious look and see if it does what you're wanting with the proficiency level stuff.