Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Croesus" data-source="post: 5974447" data-attributes="member: 35019">Agreed.Also, the OP's suggestion hinges on the GM properly adjudicating when checks must be made, especially with a party composed of characters with significantly different skill sets.  Consider the following example:One character has never ridden a horse in his life. He's unsure he'll even keep his seat if the horse moves at a trot. Another character is an expert rider. All the other characters have some skill with horses, but not as much as the expert.So...the party comes to a shallow stream and decide to ford it. Do they need to make ride checks? If so, does everyone make a check? If so, what is the DC? If the GM does what most GM's do - "Make a Ride check" - then you have a 5% chance the expert will fall off his horse (or have some other problem) simply crossing a shallow stream similar to ones he's crossed his whole life. Is that reasonable? How about the novice? There's a real chance he'll have problems, but what if the expert can help guide the horse across, perhaps even taking the reins? In such a situation, is there still a 5% chance of the novice falling?One advantage of skill checks is that the GM doesn't have to be an expert on everything, able to make carefully nuanced rulings on esoteric subjects. If a reasonable person thinks a check might be necessary, the GM can call for one, confident that the expert character won't be affected. Once you include automatic failure 5% of the time, the burden shifts to the GM to determine when each character has to make a check, vs. the party as a whole.BTW, this is a good argument for Monte's idea of skill levels vs. skill points. Characters are rated (IIRC) as Untrained, Novice, Skilled, Expert, etc. The GM assigns a level to the task. If a character has that level of skill, they succeed automatically. If they don't, then they roll. That is a situation where I could support automatic failure.</blockquote>

Verification