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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="sheadunne" data-source="post: 6124291" data-attributes="member: 27570">Those are many of the maneuvers I'm currently using. I like some of your additional ones as well. The Leadership, aid other, for example. I guess the question I have, is do you require those maneuvers to be chosen, or are they just lumped in the skill and as long as you have ranks you can use them? Common as opposed to special? I'm not for or against either way, just curious on your method. All good points. I certainly could increase them, but I'm thinking about a very long list. My enjoyment of them simple comes as an inspiring function of character creation. I don't need or have any desire to roll on whether my cooking was good or bad. It's not that important as far a game play goes. But I would like it show that my cooking has a positive effect on my character's interactions with the game world. Rather than have an explicit skill in cooking or a fluffy note added to my character sheets, there should be some small token that represents that my character is a cook. I think traits is a better place for it than actually calling them skills (less confusing as well). You're a cook, great, let's say you get a +1 to your heal checks or diplomacy checks and leave it at that. I don't know, I just like looking at the list and getting interested in the "life" of the character. Hell, I'd probably be satisfied with just having the list available every time I create my character lol so I'm pushing for this to be integrated into the skill system. I'll probably do something similar. I'm not thrilled by it either. I actually prefer late edition 3.5 over PF, but we've all go our individual preferences. There's a few nice things in PF, but nothing really great about it. Which I suppose was their intent. I will.Perhaps, but I'll explain more down below.I disagree with this a bit, but not enough to get into a long discussion about it. Here's an example of what I want the skill system to be able to handle in the same way that combat handles fights. When I ran this it was fun but awkward, not from a DMing stand point but from a mechanical stand point using d20 rules. How would you do this from a mechanic stand point in a way that doesn't become a series of d20 rolls? Assume no magic and neither player is particularly good at swimming, climbing, or pulling (let's say 40% chance of success on any roll). Player A has fallen off a ship into the ocean at the conclusion of a fight. The water is rough.Player B throws a rope down from the ship.Player A swims to the rope.Player B pulls on the rope to help Player A on to the ship.Player A climbs the rope.When I talk about a "micro-game" this is an example of what I'm talking about. I've never been a fan of the CoC skill system, for the same reason I'm not satisfied with the d20 system. Roll and done never works for me when skill play is needed. I'm fine with it when the skill is secondary, like tumble in combat, but not when it's the primary method of resolution (as with my above example).Already working on that. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Agreed.Agreed.I agree. For skills to be useful they need to be useful for all levels and not just for those in the early part. Skills needed to be designed along with the system instead of tacked on at the end (which is what it feels like). Which either means toning down high level play or boosting up skills. I think somewhere in the middle is what I'm aiming for.</blockquote>

Verification