Skills?

[BryonD]

I said "pretty much as-is" in post #10, because -- as is clear from everything else I've said -- 4e =! SWSE, and naturally some adjustments would need to be made. The concepts behind SWSE are sound, and could (and should, in my opinion) be applied in 4e. This is not the same as the mythical "straight port" that you and F4NBOY are decrying, and against which you are now holding up an oddly-interpreted quote from Mearls' blog in order to declare victory.

If you're going to ignore my posts, as promised, please ignore them in their entirety, as opposed to just the words which you don't find conducive to your screeds.

Heh,

So my A leads to B leads to C reasonings are "screeds" while your posts which either simply make fiat decrees or completely reverse other statements you have already made are (I assume) quite sound in your view.

I mean, please, if you honestly think "pretty much" has any meaningful change to the context of the discussion then you are engaged in a major double standard thinking.

The flaws in an SWSE application to D&D type games have been described above and it is you that has shown an aversion to actually taking on those points.

Yeah, I said I'd ignore you. But the absurd claim that responding to your EXACT words is a straw man was just to much of a distortion to let pass. And I'll go back to ignoring you again, at least as long as don't try to misrepresent my statements again.

 

[Jim DelRosso]

Please come back after you've looked up "exact" and learned what it means. Hint: the meaning doesn't change when you use all-caps. Thanks!

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I wouldn't object to a straight port, as everyone is putting it. I do think it makes sense that as you gain levels, you become competent at a broad range of skills, through watching other people doing it and by taking your knowledge of other skills. The trained-only/untrained divide serves adequately to stop your 20th level Wizard ever intimidating an opponent to the point that they suffer penalties in combat, but still allows him to boss around low-level minions. Similarly, your hydrophobic elf can probably survive being flung into a pool of water (I'd impose a circumstance penalty for being afraid, which might make him fail), but won't be able to swim a rapidly flowing river.

The only adjustment I'd make would be to allow a multiclass character to pick up a skill from his new class instead of one of their feats (as the current Saga rules state). Oh, and it's Saga, not SAGA, a mistake I made a few times to being with - apparently the latter is an old RPG system.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Damn, Jim, get a few posts under your belt before you wreck a thread.

 

[Jim DelRosso]

Damn, Jim, get a few posts under your belt before you wreck a thread.

If I've ruined your enjoyment of this thread, or the utility it offers for you, then I am honestly sorry; it wasn't my intent. And if you feel I've broken the rules or guidelines over here, please report it, and I'll take what's coming.

Otherwise, I'm gonna keep talking about my experiences with the SWSE, and why I dig the concepts behind its skill system.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Let's just knock it down a notch and all calm down a bit. I think we should continue to express out experiences and opinions, with examples if necessary, but refrain from nitpicking others' posts and opinions. There's nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree.

 

[Rel]

Please come back after you've looked up "exact" and learned what it means. Hint: the meaning doesn't change when you use all-caps. Thanks!

See, Jim, this is what we call "intensifying the rhetoric". It doesn't really serve to further the discussion in the thread. It's not a flat out insult but more of a passive-agressive jab that hopes to goad the other side into a more blatant rules violation. And for that reason, I'd like to ask that you refrain from it. Thanks!

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

No, you are missing the point.
A +5 or +10 is a good deal more LIKELY to make the check than a +0. All the system being discussed would do is add some frequency of extra successes for characters who aren't otherwise built in a way to succed at the given task.

Perhaps we simply need to agree to disagree, but I think you haven't really looked much at how things work in Saga. Your chance of success at any given check vs a level appropriate NPC goes DOWN as you level.

Against static DCs, you might have had a point, but that's not how it works. If for every +1 I gain to my check, my enemies are gaining +1 to the opposed check, I'm not gaining anything in encounters. I do, however, continue to get better against level 1 peons and get to deal with mundane situations like climbing a bloody tree without having to make 12 checks.

So, all else being equal (which is a demonstrably poor assumption about 4e from what I can tell, but is the entire basis of this discussion ), the changes essentially make mundane tasks easier and do not effect chance of success against NPCs with names at all.

If you want your level 15 characters to continue to be chumps at basic tasks against level 1 characters, that's your prerogative. It is, in my estimation, NOT a heroic sort of game. I'd prefer them have a chance to look impressive when its fun to be so, and then actually challenge them with the level appropriate set pieces... you know... how ALL the books and movies we're inspired by work

 

[Jim DelRosso]

See, Jim, this is what we call "intensifying the rhetoric". It doesn't really serve to further the discussion in the thread. It's not a flat out insult but more of a passive-agressive jab that hopes to goad the other side into a more blatant rules violation. And for that reason, I'd like to ask that you refrain from it. Thanks!

My apologies. You're 100% correct: that comment was uncalled-for, and I'll try not to let my future posts sink to that level.

To the subject at hand: one of the neater things that SWSE introduced was the Trained-only uses of skills. For example: there's no Track feat in SWSE; if you're Trained in Survival, you can track, and if you're not, you can't. You're limited to the "foraging for food" end of the spectrum.

I find this pretty helpful with many of the suspension of disbelief issues that can arise when characters' skills increase with level. So your high-level Scoundrel is probably pretty decent at first aid, but hasn't learned how to perform surgery.

It's also a good way of letting characters gain distinctive abilities without spending feats on them.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

No, you are missing the point.
A +5 or +10 is a good deal more LIKELY to make the check than a +0.

Yep! The army troopers in the hallway are all walking around with their +0 or +1 level-based bonus to Perception, and Chewbacca's got a +5 level-based bonus (and probably a small Cha bonus, too).

Chewbacca is certainly able to bluff his way past the standard troopers.

The guard lieutenant in the detention block, however, is 8th-level himself, with a Wisdom bonus, and is trained in Perception. So, he's at +9-11 vs. Chewie's +6.

So, against the important challenge in the encounter, Chewie's got a chance, but it's a crapshoot. Against the terrain - the mooks - he'll do alright.