Siloing: Good or Bad?

[Ahnehnois]

Siloing doesn't apply to NPCs. Problem does not exist. Monsters are monsters with pretty much nothing but combat, NPCs are ungoverned by generation rules unless you want them to be. Give your ship captain a +900 in "running a ship" skill, nobody will care. Give him a 2000 point penalty to melee attacks. Don't have him make melee attacks. Have him stand in place screaming if combat takes place.

You seem to be making up problems that would not exist, purely to be contrary.

The issue of PCs vs NPCs is a separate one, suffice it to say I run everyone by the same rules, which, to me, is the point of having rules.

If I had to break the rules to create a character that isn't a career adventurer and a polymath, I'd rewrite the rules. The siloing concept I agree with others contributes to balanced PCs, I just don't think it's worth the loss of simulation and flexibility.

 

[bardolph]

Another benefit to silo-ing is that it has the PCs make most of their tactical decisions on the battlefield, instead of during character creation. This is a Good Thing.

As a side note, the Skill Challenge system is the most complete non-combat "roll-playing" system I've seen to date. While it does nothing to inhibit role-playing, it makes sure that, even when the players aren't so good at role-playing activities (like speaking in character), the game still has a mechanical system to get through the encounter.

(EDIT: I'm referring to the REVISED skill challenge system found in the DMG 2 and not the original draft, of course!)

So, hats off (again) to the 4e design team.

 

[On Puget Sound]

I'm reminded of Minmax, a fighter in the "Goblins" webcomic. He knows 38 ways to kill a foe using only his thumb, but can't start a fire or even dress himself. He can't read because he traded literacy for +1 to hit.

 

[Kzach]

Maybe we need a definition of siloing here as there seems to be some differences in understanding.

As I understand it, siloing comes from the word 'silo', which essentially means a storehouse for grain. As it applies to D&D, it was my understanding that you can have a 'silo' for combat abilities and a silo for non-combat abilities.

A little from column A, a little from column B.

Now when discussing siloing, it was further my understanding that a character would have completely separate ability slots to fill from each column. So you would have combat slots and non-combat slots, and there would be combat abilities, and non-combat abilities, and you can't fill a non-combat slot with a combat ability, and vice versa.

Is that incorrect?

Because that's how I would like 4e to be. I've even considered making a houserule system with parallel non-combat ability slots so you can flesh out your character with non-combat oriented feats and powers.

I think that would be cool.

 

[Wycen]

Siloing? All I will say is that this categorization needs a better term.

 

[Vartan]

I think that "siloing" is good for D&D and that it has been going on for a while now. Even the 2E Nonweapon Proficiency system allowed room for non-combat mechanics, as did several class-specific mechanics.

IMO the most important element of a successful D&D campaign is finding common ground amongst the players. If your group likes a lot of combat then there are a lot of rules to accomodate that style of play. If your group prefers a game centered on social interaction and "simulationism" then there are enough rules to make that work. The important thing is to make sure that everyone at the table is getting what they want out of the game: that's more than possible in D&D 4E.

Most of the rules in 4E deal with combat, but this edition offers a lot of options for non-combat play. Skills are well-defined, there are Utility powers and race/class based abilities geared towards non-combat encounters, and there's nothing to stop an imaginative group of players from running an entire campaign that doesn't involve battle.

Most groups play in the middle ground that exists between these two extremes, which is why it's good that there are skill, power and feat options for both combat and non-combat situations. Just as one could play a battle-intensive World of Darkness game one could play a roleplay-intensive game of D&D 4E. I'm so confounded by the idea that some would compartmentalize RPG systems when the genre, by nature, is so flexible.

 

[yesnomu]

I am unabashedly a Power Gamer. I want my characters to be as effective as possible in their chosen field, and I loathe the thought of wasting an opportunity to improve them. When I'm playing Shadowrun, every spare point possible has to be spent towards improving my hacking, because I need to succeed at the hacking challenges thrown at me. If I fail because I put a point into shooting instead (a point that will still leave me fairly unskilled with guns), I'm a waste of space.

Therefore, siloing is absolutely wonderful for me. Having a clear ceiling for power in a given area means I can reach it, know that I'm as good at it as I can be, and feel free to spread the rest of my resources around. The limitation on investment is very freeing.

People who want to be able to put all their eggs in one basket seem utterly alien to me. I've played games that allow it, and they just make me panic. I like being required to be good at several things, and I like not being able to tower over everyone else at one thing.

 

[AllisterH]

Yeah, that's one of the disadvantages with freform/point buy games.

Technically, such systems doesn't encourage or discourage specialization overtly, but it's the DMs/GMs later on that make it so that jacks of all trades are very poor choices.

I mean, is there even such a thing as an "Average" hacker challenge in Shadowrun?

 

[On Puget Sound]

team/ ensemble games highly reward specialization. If everyone can heal a tiny bit, sorta kinda pick some easy locks, do mediocre damage at range or close up, and get hit about half the time, the party will fail at everything. The Renaissance Man / polymath is dead weight in a typical party.

Siloing prevents hyperspecialization, and ensures that when the campaign goes into situations you didn't plan your character around, you aren't left behind to guard the mules.

 

[Khairn]

Siloing is fine for players and GM's who are looking to play a combat-centric game. 4E is a great example of that type of system where siloing works well.

Those who are looking for more from their RPG will probably want to find a system that is designed to support and enhance more than combat. There are plenty of games on the market (both new and old) that can work for this type of gamer.