The problem I see with the rules regarding skills in SAGA, more specifically the lack of skill points, and the skill progression of 1/2 char level for every class for everyone is that some of the designer's premises were not always true.
The premises are:
"One advantage of this system is that characters who aren't trained in a skill can still use it in some cases. Since part of your skill bonus is based on your level and ability modifier, as you advance in levels, you essentially gain "free" bonuses to skills you aren't trained in. Thus, you become able to do simple things that previously were available only to those trained in the skill."
and
"At this point, you might be wondering why these changes were made. The simple answer is this: Anyone can do anything in Star Wars if the scene calls for it. For example, over the course of the saga, we see Obi-Wan Kenobi fly ships, deceive people, perform amazing acrobatics, use diplomacy, ride animals, command troops, get information from his contacts on the street, and more. Similarly, Han Solo can fast talk, run, shoot, fly the Millennium Falcon in circles around Star Destroyers, hot-wire doors, lead troops, formulate plans, ride a tauntaun, and use other skills seemingly at will. The new skill system simulates this extremely well. Obi-Wan and Han might not be trained in all the relevant skills, but their untrained bonus allows them to attempt those actions with some chance of success.
In game terms, that chance is important for capturing the Star Wars feel. In the past, some players have been unwilling or unable to participate in certain scenes because they didn't have ranks in the relevant skill. For example, let's say the Gamemaster wants to have a chase sequence where the heroes pursue an enemy while riding tauntauns through an icy canyon on Hoth. Very few people put ranks in the Ride skill -- it just doesn't come up that often. As a result, some of the players might be tempted to say, "Well, I don't have ranks in Ride, so I can't participate in this scene." Thus, the exciting, fast-paced chase sequence the Gamemaster hoped for is reduced to one or two players participating while the others sit and watch."
Full article:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/article/SagaPreview2
Everything they say is true in the context they exemplified, but from some roleplaying standpoints, sucking in some skills is not always bad and not funny. Sometime the lack of skill can turn the session to great roleplaying situations.
I once had a dwarf fighter with no pts in Diplomacy skill, obviously
. The campaign had many scenes where we were in the King's court with nobles and important people, so diplomacy skill were heavily used. 1/3 of the campaign was about negotiation and intrigue. The fact that my dwarf was completely anti-social, he had -2 in diplomacy checks, was not a bad thing. I've never said "ok guys, i'll stay here drinking ale, go ahead". On the contrary, many funny situations emerged when he tried to overcome his diplomatic flaws. Sometimes it was hilarious.
Of course being useless in combat may be a great drawback for the character, because the combat plays a big part in D&D games, but sometimes even when your character is completelly useless in the combat, interesting and creative and unexpected situations could come to take place. This kind of challenge is also important for the game.
I hope D&D 4E can keep these elements of the game.
Combat challenge, tactical challenge, choices to be made, characters to create etc, are important types of challenges in D&D, but challenges that can be only solved with creativity, with unpredicted and clever ideas are also very important, and I hope I can still play them in 4E.
So I don't think D&D character should be relatively good in everything. Being a sucker is not always a bad thing in D&D.
If I'm wrong or missed something, please show me. I really wanna like this system if it comes to D&D.
