Siloing: Good or Bad?

[delericho]

Siloing is just an outgrowth of the same methodology that insists that a Wizard gain BAB when he levels, as well as magic abilities, or the Fighter gains skill points, even if he never used a skill, or... It's a method of ensuring that the characters are well-rounded, and don't just take the powergamer's route of obsessively specialising in one narrow facet of the character to the exclusion of all else.

So, yes, I think it's a good thing.

 

[AllisterH]

I tend to see siloing as a good thing.

Mainly because not only does it ensure that you have a minimum level of ability in both combat AND non-combat.

It also ensures that you have a MAXIMUM level of ability in both combat and non-combat.

We all know about the "trade out of combat for incombat perks" but just as deadly is the reverse. See the Diplomancer who basically can shortcircuit any roleplaying encounter.

 

[Garmorn]

I agree with your statement on this, but I feel that 4E's focus on combat was a step in the wrong direction - or at least not the direction I would have chosen. It's a big factor why my group is currently using the Storyteller system and we've put D&D up on the shelf (we tried it at least three times and realized it wasn't what we wanted)*.

And that makes me sad. I've been playing RPGs for 25 years or so and I hate to see my play style, for my favorite system, be thrown to the wayside so that I feel I have to go to other game systems to get my 'fix'. I want to play D&D, but not with the current ruleset.

After all the fighting/debates over the 3.x rule set over the use of social skills being wrong/right. The non use of non combat skills. Players saying that the only good thing about humans is 1 extra feat unless you where a rogue, I don't thing 4e lost of those rules really hurt that style of play. It just went back to the thing where in 2e until some one can develop a decent and balanced approach.

As for siloing, almost every level based system does one way or another. What D&D needs now is a non combat silo for skills and such. A list of social skills and abilities for a separate silo might work. I can't think of any skill based social system that would work for D&D.

 

[lutecius]

- decoupling combat abilities from out of combat so that all characters always have something useful to do? ...good

- anemic non-combat rules, unbalanced rituals, "martial action" chopped into pseudo-vancian powers? ...BAD! bleah!!!




...yuck!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Good.

 

[Gort]

unbalanced rituals

Interesting. What is it about the rituals system you think is unbalanced? I must say, I've never had any issues with them as written - I haven't seen them used that often either, though my latest character is going to try and do as many as possible.

In response to the OP, I think siloing is excellent. Combat will kill you, being good at diplomacy and knowing about arcana are merely handy extras in comparison. It's rather obvious which one you'd be better off specialising in and which should be your "dump area".

I'd love to see siloing expanded to feat selection as well, then I might see someone take linguist before level 15.

 

[Vegepygmy]

Neither, but personally, I don't care for it.

This. It makes characters too homogenous for my tastes, but it's good for the players who want that.

 

[Dausuul]

IMO, siloing is absolutely a good thing. In fact, I think we could use a bit more of it. The only drawback I see to siloing is that it leads to more complicated chargen systems.

Very rarely have I seen a specialized noncombat character work out well in play. IMO, a player experienced and savvy enough to make such a character work is a player experienced and savvy enough to sit down with the DM and work out a house-ruled solution.

(And of course there's the flip side, which is characters specialized for nothing but combat, which siloing also prevents. I'm somewhat amused that those haven't come up yet.)

One thing I do think D&D could use, however, is characters whose combat abilities manifest through henchmen or other PCs - the warlord has a little of this going on, but I'd like a class built around it. Such a class would allow the creation of characters who were "noncombatants" in the strict sense, while still being able to contribute when the crap hits the ventilator.

For those who've played the solo adventure WotC put out a few days ago, Splug is a good example of this sort of thing (albeit a highly simplified one). He's your cowardly goblin buddy whose usual combat move is an ability called "Cringe," wherein he cowers and whines and keeps the enemy's attention, enabling you, the boss, to get an extra attack. It's a nice way of giving you a mostly noncombat lackey who can "pull his weight" in a fight.

 

[malraux]

I think it's great, at least in theory. I play DnD primarily for combat. Story telling and the like is nice and all, but at the end of the day, I'm in this to roll attacks and damage. This means I'm never going to pick a noncombat centric option when a combat centric option is available. Siloing means that when story elements appear, I'm still able to do something. I like being useful outside of combat.

 

[delericho]

Siloing means that when story elements appear, I'm still able to do something. I like being useful outside of combat.

On a related note: one of the comparitive weaknesses of games such as Shadowrun, early versions of Star Wars, and others, was that characters were assigned exclusive roles: you would have the Pilot who was largely useless except when doing pilot-y things, but was also the only character who could do those things, or the decker who was useless outside the Matrix, but was the only character to do Matrix-y things.

This meant thta one player spent a lot of time sitting bored while others did things, and then all the other players spent a while bored while the spotlight character did his thing. It was 'balanced' in that everyone got their turn in the spotlight, but it made for a game where people spent a lot of their time bored (by design!).

Siloing prevents that - all characters can contribute in combat, and all characters can contribute out of combat. It's far from perfect, especially if the characters become too homogenous, but it's better than the team of bored ultra-specialists.