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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6095962" data-attributes="member: 82106">I'm not sure I totally follow your logic. Lets imagine there's an 'Insight' skill and there's a 'Suggestion' spell. Lets say Insight is a defense against Suggestion, then the character's passive Insight (10+bonus) can be used as a defense against suggestion (IE a DC that the attacker has to meet to make their spell work). I don't see any issue with this at all, in principle. Now, 4e has issues in that there are some fairly wide skill bonus spreads. OTOH I think it might work fine for specific things, or as a feat for instance where you get to use your skill in place of an ability score. As for skills on the ATTACK side, I think it makes perfect sense. I'm a wizard, I use my Insight to make Suggestion attacks. Assuming I build my character even vaguely effectively (or some packaging system insures that I have all the right stuff to be an 'Enchanter', etc) then it seems like a very nice system and quite similar to what is used in most skill-based systems. What's wrong with 4e's approach? It is just the same thing, a difficulty number. You don't even have to go look up on the DC chart, you just pick a number that works for the given situation. The chart is just a set of guidelines as to what the developers think will provide good numbers at different levels. Assuming the devs have done their job then those DCs should also give you a good handle on XP awards. The current 4e numbers seem to work quite well IME. Honestly I always thought 4e's EASY/MEDIUM/HARD was kind of redundant, but whatever.</blockquote>

Verification