Sadrik
First Post
1. I will define it. A skill system is a limiter of actions. It limits your character to only doing what is on the character's sheet, in the case of trained only, and gives you a significant boost in things that are on your character sheet. The more granular the skill system the more likely you are going to be in a situation where you do not have the appropriate skill for the task, effectively limiting the possible tasks. I think many people like this, especially hard nosed DMs. Some DMs prefer the opposite extreme and don't want to limit the PCs actions and tie it more to player ingenuity, this would be those DMs that would like the 6 abilities doubled as skills.It also strikes me that there are certain fundamental questions to answer:
- Why do we want a Skills system in the first place? (note: not arguing we shouldn't have it, just want to clearly define its purpose)
- If we assume DCs are the same between systems, should those who play with the Skills system have the same chance of success as the A-O system?
- In general, WotC has been getting great feedback about the Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic. Do we know how people have liked the Skill Die? Or have they preferred static bonuses?
- How do people feel about current Advantage stacking rules? For example, under the initial A-O proposal of getting Advantage on certain Ability checks (which I rather like), there is no difference between having advantage in a regular situation and having Advantage in an advantageous situation. Is this desirable?
2. Yes, but it depends. If balancing the two, you need to have some way to balance between the two. So I can see some gradation on how you roll or DC, something has to give to balance it.
3. I can only speak for myself on the skill die mechanic. I dont like it. I would rather have a flat bonus. Rather than adding two dice and adding a bonus or penalty on top, I would rather add 1 die to 1 modifier.
4. I think the advantage/Disadvantage system is applied unevenly. I also have problems with how it is applied in some cases. If the very nice mechanic were reapplied to just ability/skill checks it would be very evenly balanced. Then the other areas would be balanced too all bonuses and penalties, not sometimes bonuses and penalties and sometimes advantage and disadvantage.
So skill die to certain stats, or skill die to certain skills. I think this works, but would have to look at the math between the skilled and non-skilled rolls.All that being said, my own proposal is:
- In the A-O system, classes have primary stats (as proposed by @Meatboy ). Rather than gaining Advantage on those checks (as proposed by @Sadrik ), they can use a skill die for any associated checks.
- In the Skills system, classes do NOT have primary stats. They gain training on various skills through other means, such as backgrounds etc., and can use a skill die for those checks.
How's that sound?
I will be honest I do not like pooling dice in D&D for anything other than damage spells. It feels like another system. The bell curve of rolling the two dice makes the math denser for the average person to figure out odds at the table. D&D has always been a bonus. Outside of that historical perspective it is just my taste.