Skills - what is your preference

[Sammael]

So far, the poll results are showing that most participants seem to be fine with the current implementation (as presented).

However, it bears mentioning that there is still a significant minority that desires a more complex skill system.

 

[Iosue]

I voted Lemoncurry.

I personally don't need any kind of skill system (aside from Thieves' skills). That's how me and BECMI roll. So the proposed D&DN system looks fine to me. A broad, simple system like 4e also floats my boat, adding a bit of mechanical support without requiring a great deal of page-turning and agonizing over skills during chargen. OTOH, in the particular group I'm playing with, no one will do a damn thing in a skill unless they've got trained. Worse than that, given the option between a skill that has, say, 7 in it versus a skill that has 8, they will always choose the 8. I know it's a group-playstyle problem, not a system problem, but it's a particular trap that such a skill system can fall into.

That said, I didn't vote for D&DN because no matter my personal preference, there's a whole generation of players who have had a complex skill system in their D&D for the last 12 years. I certainly don't want to deny them that part of their D&D. So, my real vote is for a D&DN core system with a detailed skill list module. I'm 99% sure that ultimately that's what we'll get, even if it hasn't been fully developed as of yet.

 

[SKyOdin]

I don't really like the idea of building everything around ability scores. I prefer skill systems that emphasize skill and experience over base talent. Ability scores as a whole can be a problematic mechanic, since more than any other mechanic they tend to pigeonhole characters into limited stereotypes. In a system that emphasizes training, a low-intelligence character can still have a decent grasp of arcane study. In an ability score based system, your ability at skills will be ruled by whatever is the primary ability score of your class. Much harder to customize or break out of molds.

 

[Sirot]

I don't really like the idea of building everything around ability scores. I prefer skill systems that emphasize skill and experience over base talent. Ability scores as a whole can be a problematic mechanic, since more than any other mechanic they tend to pigeonhole characters into limited stereotypes. In a system that emphasizes training, a low-intelligence character can still have a decent grasp of arcane study. In an ability score based system, your ability at skills will be ruled by whatever is the primary ability score of your class. Much harder to customize or break out of molds.

I think assuming there won't be better design over how attributes mechanics work to avoid pigeonholing seems unfair. If they made the attribute system more flexible, I am fine with having less emphasis on skills.

 

[Greg K]

If the game lacks a 3e type skill system it will be a deal breaker for my group and several groups that I know when it comes to choosing a version of D&D regardless of any other changes. While 3e skills has a few issues (e.g., not enough skill points for some classes), nobody I know whats to play pre-3e and the treatment skills (or lack there of) is one major reason. Similarly, the 4e skill system with overly broad skills and the +1/2 level bonus is viewed with ridicule.

To win us over the skill list will need to be roughly the same size as 3e. I know most (if not all) would not mind the designers combining Hide and Move Silent into Stealth and Listen, Spot and Search into Perception as well as an increase skill points for certain classes.

 

[Li Shenron]

My favourite way is the 3.0 way.

But I am fine with the 5e way as announced in the latest seminar.

 

[mach1.9pants]

So far, the poll results are showing that most participants seem to be fine with the current implementation (as presented).

However, it bears mentioning that there is still a significant minority that desires a more complex skill system.

Yes and I reckon we will see a 3e style skill system as an addon module, no problems.

 

[Lanefan]

I want a system that is easy to use and resolve.

Yes.

I want a system that doesn't punish a character in general skills that everyone should be able to do (climb, swim, basic knowledge, etc).

Except climbing and swimming are two good examples of general skills that *not* everybody can do. Climbing in particular in D&D is a skill germane to some specific classes (Thief/Rogue, Ranger, Assassin, maybe Monk and Bard on a good day) and not to others; so if everyone can do it some of the function of those classes goes away for no good reason.

Swimming is more general but not everyone can swim, or swim well; but it's certainly something you might have learned (or not) long before your adventuring career. This is one, along with riding skills, I'd advocate a random roll for during char-gen* - during your life so far how good have you become at these things? (I use a d10 for this in my game, mostly as a general measure of aptitude rather than something to roll against)

* - if someone's specific character idea revolves around one of these skills (I can'[t imagine one revolving around both) that's a discussion to have with the DM.

Lanefan

 

[Wormwood]

However, it bears mentioning that there is still a significant minority that desires a more complex skill system.

And they can make their voices heard here and at the playtest.

As for which system is the default and which is the module, it just makes sense to have the more complicated system be the optional one.

 

[Sammael]

As for which system is the default and which is the module, it just makes sense to have the more complicated system be the optional one.

I'm in full agreement with this. That goes for pretty much every system in the game.

I'd just like for one of the 4E guys to chime in and say "don't worry guys, there will be an optional skills module."