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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BoldItalic" data-source="post: 6829262" data-attributes="member: 6777052">Upon reflection, I think you are right. Auto-success is a bad thing for anything other than mundane actions that any PC is assumed to be able to do, and that can be hand-waved. Also, there is another problem with it: a contest between, say, a creature with auto-success on Stealth opposing another creature with auto-success on Perception results in the universe imploding.Potentially, there's the same problem with auto-fails, though it might not be too serious and one could rule that, if creature A auto-fails in a contest against creature B who also auto-fails, it's status quo and nothing happens.I'm a bit worried that mini-maxers would never build a character with any auto-fails, but that's no different to the vanilla situation where they don't exist.Back to Lefty. As initially designed, he is +1 on Investigation (logical deduction tasks) but -3 on Lore-based checks and any un-typed Int checks. I would role-play him as normally intelligent but that seems to offend some people, and I'm rather bluntly told that I'm doing it wrong. Suppose we change him to Int 12(+1) with autofail on lore-based checks, and everyone is happy with me role-playing him with normal intelligence. Now, I can't give him Investigation as a skill (let alone expertise) otherwise it comes out too high at +5. I have to find some other, possibly irrelevant skills instead. But that seems wrong for Lefty as I envisage him; Investigation (as applied to puzzling out complex locks) is one of his strengths, along with being clever with his fingers.No, I'm going to stick to my guns and role-play according to Ability+Skills totals, and not just according to Ability rolls in isolation. I think ignoring skills is too simplistic for my tastes, but I'm not offended by people who take the other view.I'll let Lefty have the last word: "Cut the red wire."</blockquote>

Verification