Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Skill / Combat unification mechanic (please help refine)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Arlough" data-source="post: 5924922" data-attributes="member: 79335"><p>Quick note, inherent bonuses are enhancement bonuses you automagically get at all levels ending in 2 & 7 for attacks and all levels ending in 4 & 9 for defenses. </p><p></p><p>The current DC table is set up thus</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Easy = 8 + level/2 + (level-1)/20</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Moderate can be calculated two ways<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Moderate ≈ 12 + level/2 + level/5<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">-1 on all levels ending in 6, 8, or 0</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Moderate ≈ 12 + level/2 + level/5.35<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">+1 on levels 5, 15, 21, 25</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">-1 on levels 6, 8, 18, 28</li> </ul></li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Hard ≈ 19 + level/2 + level/3.65<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">+1 on levels ending in 3</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">-1 on levels 4, 8, 18</li> </ul></li> </ul><p>All fractions are rounded towards zero before adding</p><p></p><p>This means that the current setup is designed so:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Easy checks are 100% successful so long as<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The attribute linked to the skill is at least 10<br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The subject is trained<br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The subject is focused</li> </ul>Even if you are untrained, you still have a 60% chance of success.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Moderate checks are 95% to 105% successful so long as<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The attribute linked to the skill begins as an 18<br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The player has been putting their +1 bonuses in said attribute<br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The subject is trained<br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The subject is focused</li> </ul>If you are untrained with an 18, you are still succeeding 75% to 85% of the time<br /> If you are trained, but not focused and have a 10 in the stat, you still succeed 45% to 65% of the time.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Hard checks are 50% to 65% successful so long as<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The attribute linked to the skill begins as a 18<br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The player has been putting their +1 bonuses in said attribute<br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The subject is trained<br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The subject is focused</li> </ul></li> </ul><p></p><p>And this is before item bonuses, racial bonuses, backgrounds, aid another, or anything else that may boost a skill. When you apply a +2 from backgrounds, a +2 from race, a +2 from items, you can’t fail hard checks in your area of expertise except at some levels on a 1.</p><p></p><p>And with anyone being able to sit out a challenge, you can effectively eliminate the need to even roll on an equal level challenge.</p><p></p><p>Of course, with skill challenges only allowing for 3 failures, perhaps 100% success at certain things is seen as necessary.</p><p></p><p>So we either build around that errata, or choose to modify the terms of success.</p><p></p><p>I think that a 100% success rate for a well-trained artisan is reasonable, but not very useful for adventuring. At most, an adventurer should have only had time enough to adventure, or he or she could be really old (which would also have costs.) They may be good at a few skills, but only a few and only good, as skills represent many related activities and not perfect, as that doesn’t create tension or challenge.</p><p></p><p>I’ve been pondering this more and more, and I think that there are two aspects to my proposed approach.</p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The expected success rate of skill checks should be about 50%<br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The players should be able to use their highest or second highest stat in most checks.</li> </ol><p>The first would mean adjusting the success/failure ratio back to the original DMG tables or perhaps even a bit more lenient.</p><p>The second would mean allowing for an option rule, that would allow for the players to describe <em>how</em> they do things, and then the DM tells them what stat-skill combination to use. (I’ve been using that lately because it forces my players to <u>think like their characters</u>. ) This means that almost always you will have someone who can perform the skill, unless you have a highly unbalanced party.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Arlough, post: 5924922, member: 79335"] Quick note, inherent bonuses are enhancement bonuses you automagically get at all levels ending in 2 & 7 for attacks and all levels ending in 4 & 9 for defenses. The current DC table is set up thus [list] [*]Easy = 8 + level/2 + (level-1)/20 [*]Moderate can be calculated two ways [list] [*]Moderate ≈ 12 + level/2 + level/5 [list] [*]-1 on all levels ending in 6, 8, or 0 [/list] [*]Moderate ≈ 12 + level/2 + level/5.35 [list] [*]+1 on levels 5, 15, 21, 25 [*]-1 on levels 6, 8, 18, 28 [/list] [/list] [*]Hard ≈ 19 + level/2 + level/3.65 [list] [*]+1 on levels ending in 3 [*]-1 on levels 4, 8, 18 [/list] [/list] All fractions are rounded towards zero before adding This means that the current setup is designed so: [List] [*]Easy checks are 100% successful so long as [list] [*]The attribute linked to the skill is at least 10 [*]The subject is trained [*]The subject is focused [/list] Even if you are untrained, you still have a 60% chance of success. [*]Moderate checks are 95% to 105% successful so long as [list] [*]The attribute linked to the skill begins as an 18 [*]The player has been putting their +1 bonuses in said attribute [*]The subject is trained [*]The subject is focused [/list] If you are untrained with an 18, you are still succeeding 75% to 85% of the time If you are trained, but not focused and have a 10 in the stat, you still succeed 45% to 65% of the time. [*]Hard checks are 50% to 65% successful so long as [list] [*]The attribute linked to the skill begins as a 18 [*]The player has been putting their +1 bonuses in said attribute [*]The subject is trained [*]The subject is focused [/list] [/list] And this is before item bonuses, racial bonuses, backgrounds, aid another, or anything else that may boost a skill. When you apply a +2 from backgrounds, a +2 from race, a +2 from items, you can’t fail hard checks in your area of expertise except at some levels on a 1. And with anyone being able to sit out a challenge, you can effectively eliminate the need to even roll on an equal level challenge. Of course, with skill challenges only allowing for 3 failures, perhaps 100% success at certain things is seen as necessary. So we either build around that errata, or choose to modify the terms of success. I think that a 100% success rate for a well-trained artisan is reasonable, but not very useful for adventuring. At most, an adventurer should have only had time enough to adventure, or he or she could be really old (which would also have costs.) They may be good at a few skills, but only a few and only good, as skills represent many related activities and not perfect, as that doesn’t create tension or challenge. I’ve been pondering this more and more, and I think that there are two aspects to my proposed approach. [list=1] [*]The expected success rate of skill checks should be about 50% [*]The players should be able to use their highest or second highest stat in most checks. [/list] The first would mean adjusting the success/failure ratio back to the original DMG tables or perhaps even a bit more lenient. The second would mean allowing for an option rule, that would allow for the players to describe [i]how[/i] they do things, and then the DM tells them what stat-skill combination to use. (I’ve been using that lately because it forces my players to [u]think like their characters[/u]. ) This means that almost always you will have someone who can perform the skill, unless you have a highly unbalanced party. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Skill / Combat unification mechanic (please help refine)
Top