Skills?

[BryonD]

http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=13496433&postcount=7 - James Wyatt's blog entry where he talks about the math behind the system.

I whole-heartedly hope they start with the math as the foundation, and build out from there. 3E tried to do that, but then they compromised by keeping some "sacred cows". Once a solid foundation is built, it's a lot easier to modify without throwing off balance elsewhere.

Funny, way upthread several of us were taken to task for taking a Mearls quote and stretching it, even though we didn't go nearly as far as the idea that this Wyatt quote about combat means that all character will gets ranks in all skills goes.

 

[IanArgent]

This is a tangent really, but it is one of my little hang-ups that people constantly confuse being "scary" and being able to use that fear to get what you want.
A 20th level wizard could easily be much more scary than a 10th level barbarian. But if the barbarian knows what he is doing he can use that fear to persuade his subject. Whereas if the wizard doesn't know what he is doing then he may simply create a "stiff back-ed" "Then I'll die first" response, or a subject that faints dead away, or a million other options. Being afraid does not equate to being compliant.

I don't mind if wizards get intimidate as a class skill. (or the 4e version thereof)

If all PCs get some automatic degree of competency in intimidate then the system will be stupid, boring, and counter-heroic.

Assuming that neither is "trained" and both have the same stat modifier, the 20th level wizard is more intimidating than the 10th level barbarian, as he should be. If the Barbarian is "trained" he is as intimidating as a character 10 levels higher than him! If the barbarian "focused" on the skill, he is significantly more intimidating than the 20th level wizard. Being focused at 10th level means he can perform acts of intimidation with ease (pass on a take-10/roll 10+) that the 20th level character with no training can only hope to do with much effort (take 20/roll 20). (As an aside, I wouldn't expect intimidate to be a "class skill" for wizard).

But both the 10th level barbarian and the 20th level wizard intimidate the heck out of the 2nd level non-heroic punk who threatened both of them before they left town on their adventures that made them what they are today.

Funny, way upthread several of us were taken to task for taking a Mearls quote and stretching it, even though we didn't go nearly as far as the idea that this Wyatt quote about combat means that all character will gets ranks in all skills goes.

I didn't say that. I said that James Wyatt is talking about making sure the math is solid for all levels of play, not just 7th-12th level. And as long as the d20 is used to generate successes and failures, I would expect the math to mean that at any given level, the difficulty of a level-appropriate challenge will fall somewhere within APL+5 to APL +15. That's all I'm trying to get out of Mr. Wyatt's post.

IOW

In Fourth Edition, we've totally revamped the math behind the system, and that's a big part of the way that we've extended the sweet spot across the whole level range. When PCs fight monsters of their level, they'll find that the math of the system is more or less the same at level 30 as it is at level 1.

If they are making sure the math works the same from level 1 to level 30, and they are still using a d20 as a resolution mechanic - a level-appropriate challenge will either have a DC ranging from 1/2level+5 to 1/2level+15 or so (probably more like +3 to +18 to take into account stat/gear mods) or a DC of around 10+heroic level+0 to +10 or so (again with the stat/gear mods).

Quoting James directly and summarizing my argument in quoteblock to show what James Wyatt is saying, and what I am taking away from that statement, and turning around and saying myself.

How they achieve this we do not yet know. But we can guess.

SWSE has already been stated as a "look at the design philosophy" of 4th ed, a snapshot if you will of the state of 4e game design as of about a year ago (given the timeline of development). And shockingly enough, those 2 formulae encompass most of how to figure out a level-appropriate challenge (they're very close to one another, incidentally, and converge at and around 10th level).

I'm including "level-appropriate" for a reason - the wall doesn't get magically easier to climb, the adventurers climb harder walls, because the stuff behind the easier walls isn't worth their time. At first level, it's hard to bamboozle Sgt Colon and Cpl Nobbs. At 20th level you've got a (small) chance at talking CMOT Dibbler into letting you have a discounted meat pie (why you would want to I don't know), but Nobby and Colon are no match for your fast talk. But, hey, you might have to talk them into something - it just isn't a challenge to you any more.

 

[pemerton]

I find less realism is less fun. The SWSE is just too cinematic for what I want in DnD. It may be good for Star Wars given it is based on the movies but the less the DnD game is like its movie the better.

Except that D&D combat is cinematic at mid to high levels, what with fighters who can beat lions barehanded, and wizards who can outfight the typical professional soldier.

There is a mismatch between the cinematic combat of D&D and its grim & gritty skill rules (there is also the maths problem Ian Argent has described, but that is a separate issue). My understanding is that 4e will try and fix this - and the reconciliation will be in the direction of cinema, not grit. If you want grit in both combat and skills, in a level-based points-buy system, try RM or HARP.

 

[Li Shenron]

How do I set up a skill check that isn't automatic for the rogue yet at the same time, isn't impossible for the non-skilled character.

You set it so that it is not automatic for the rogue, and ignore the non-skilled character.

The rogue will use the skill, the other character sits and watch.

Anyway I have the feeling that they are trying to make many things (skills, ST... maybe even BAB) work like the 3edition Epic rules, where basically the rate of advancement per level is fixed and the difference between classes is in a flat bonus... Funny since I've heard most people despising 3ed Epic rules, and now many like this idea, but perhaps the Epic rules were hated for something else.

However it feels like the switch to such an idea (one rate, different bonus) doesn't seem to me that it is really based on the fact that it works better, but rather on the fact that now they have to stretch the game to 30 levels. Previous system was perfect until 20th, but would create too much difference beyond; for some reason I don't know, they want 30 levels, so what used to work doesn't work anymore...

 

[D.Shaffer]

On the DM side of the screen I usually divide the total skill points by the number of class skills the NPC has and that is how many ranks he has in each class skill. Quick, and easy, and takes less than minute per character.

...Isnt this essentially what the SWSE does now? The mechanics might be a little different but the overall effect is just the same.

 

[IanArgent]

You set it so that it is not automatic for the rogue, and ignore the non-skilled character.

The rogue will use the skill, the other character sits and watch.

2 problems - if it's automatic for the rogue, it's not a challenge, particularly. And you don't even know what to set it at to be automatic for the rogue.

However it feels like the switch to such an idea (one rate, different bonus) doesn't seem to me that it is really based on the fact that it works better, but rather on the fact that now they have to stretch the game to 30 levels. Previous system was perfect until 20th, but would create too much difference beyond; for some reason I don't know, they want 30 levels, so what used to work doesn't work anymore...

Uh, SWSE doesn't have 30 levels and also doesn't have Epic rules, the 20-level-cap is a hard-cap as far as rules go. It's been pretty much assumed that the 30-level soft-cap for 4E is an attempt to make Epic level play core - what with 1-10 being called heroic, 11-20 being called paragon, and 21-30 being called Epic by the designers.

You don't need more than a 10-point delta between the focused character and the untrained character in a d20 system - so in the name of fun that's what the SWSE system does - it ensures there's only that much difference between focused and unskilled characters of the same level doing checks that can be done untrained.

 

[Cadfan]

I'll be happy if they fix the Swim problem. This is the problem that often comes up where you have a skill that is very rarely useful, but when it is useful, is incredibly important. As a result, half your players don't invest in it at all, and the other half over invests and regrets it if or when the skill never comes up in that campaign.

Its not just Swim that does this. Climb does it. So does Ride. Jump can do it on occasion. So can Hide and Move Silently. Also Balance.

Chances are for each of these skills you'll have one character in the party who succeeds with ease, while everyone else flounders hopelessly, drowns, falls to their doom, alerts the guards, etc, etc. Giving half ranks to everyone's untrained skills will finally fix this a bit.

I will miss the non combat skills though, like Craft, Knowledge, and Profession. I hope something is implemented to replace them.

 

[D.Shaffer]

not just Swim that does this. Climb does it. So does Ride. Jump can do it on occasion. So can Hide and Move Silently. Also Balance.

Chances are for each of these skills you'll have one character in the party who succeeds with ease, while everyone else flounders hopelessly, drowns, falls to their doom, alerts the guards, etc, etc. Giving half ranks to everyone's untrained skills will finally fix this a bit

That or the DM just glosses over when those skills would be useful anyways.

"Roll for initiative as the orcs spring from ambush!"
"...So I'm guessing that +15 Hide and Move silent I have does nothing, huh? And what about that +12 Listen? I get a spot roll but not listen?" :\

 

[Sun Knight]

...Isnt this essentially what the SWSE does now? The mechanics might be a little different but the overall effect is just the same.

The difference is that it also forces the players to do this and doesn't leave room for flexibility nor creating unique characters.

As for premades, you simply modify them to fit your group. It doesn't take that long to prep changes like that.

 

[D.Shaffer]

I'm not the biggest fan of the SW system, but how does it limit flexibility or keep you from creating unique characters? As much as I like tailoring my skills to get everything down to EXACTLY the right ratio of skills, a +1 difference in rank in Swim doesnt make me a unique character, that's part of your personality and background.