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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Frostmarrow" data-source="post: 6096209" data-attributes="member: 1122">The points are necessary, I'm afraid. -And they are quite useful. You see you can roll towards a low number and create a succeed/fail situation, you can pick a moderately high number and get a thrilling situation, you can pick a higher number that several characters must work together to achieve, you can compare the results of two characters (or more!) competeing. This is where skills should be.Imagine my character having Climb 1d6. If the DM sets the DC at 2 I will probably succeed in one go. If the DC is 6 I might make it in one turn (and get away from the orc) or require two turns and get whacked in the process. Mount Doom might require 1000 success points. When the entire party rolls for perception the highest scorer spots the enemy first.It's not more complicated. It's exactly as complicated as the 3Ed system but it produces comparable results that can be accumulated. Counting successes 4Ed-style was a complete dead end*. It also solves the old "can I try again?" question without add-on rules. The answer is "of course you can, but there will be a penalty".It also answers the question "when do I roll a skill check?" question. The answer is "whenever there is an obvious penalty". If there is no penalty then you don't need to roll.It's also intuitively compatible with special items, circumstances, and even combat. A cloak of elvenkind adds to your stealth roll, darkness halves your die rolls, and if you have 20 climb points you can autocrit the colossus.Lastly, any DM will quickly learn how to appreciate any challenge in terms of difficulty. In the same way we know 3hp is a kobold and 24 hp is an ogre.* A cool idea that just wouldn't work.</blockquote>

Verification