Testing a theory

[Elf Witch]

The simple answer - though likely not many 3e types would agree - is to get rid of all social and knowledge skills entirely; and let role-playing rule the day.

My namesake character here is a Fighter, and he makes it his business to know stuff. If he doesn't know it and he thinks he needs to know it, he goes and finds the right people to give him the right information so he does know it. Then he uses that knowledge (not always wisely, but hey) the best he can; and if he can't he just hoards the information until such time as it might come in handy.

In your example above, if it mattered whether a Baron outranked a Count, in character I'd just go and ask some scholar to rattle off the whole ranking system; and I'd write it down for future reference.

The 3e skill system would wreck the way I play him.

Lanefan

This is an old argument getting rid of the social skills hurts players who in real life are not charismatic or witty or glib of tongue. They get stuck playing the quiet one and never can have the fun of playing the witty bard.

I see both sides of this because I have players who want to play bards and without a social skill mechanics feel they can't.

There is a big difference in navigating successfully the ends and out of a royal court then just asking a knowledgeable person which is higher.

Your example is a perfect one where not every edition or RPG can't support every character concept.

 

[Elf Witch]

You're right that the system does not handle these things well. I've move things around to emphasize mental ability scores more, given out extra background skill points, and generally ignored/handwaved class skill restrictions. I recall that when I played it closer to the book I hada those kinds of frustrations.

Hopefully 5e isn't as restrictive. Fighters shouldn't be as skilled as rogues, but they don't need to be morons either.

I do this too. I have given out extra skill points to help round out a character concept.

I got rid of cross class skills awhile ago and I found it did not break the game the rogue was still the skill monkey and not everyone poured ranks into spot. I did notice that it gave people more ability to customize their characters.

How handle prestige classes because a lot are based on cross class skills to control when you can actually qualify for them, I just ruled what level they could be first taken at.

The issues comes in when you play with DMs who are slaves to the RAW.

 

[Ahnehnois]

The issues comes in when you play with DMs who are slaves to the RAW.

Amen. Most issues do.

 

[Elf Witch]

Amen. Most issues do.

Yep. I have played with DMs who are slaves to the RAW and I found that those games are often very frustrating to play in. The DM usual answer to everything is no.

I perdonally find games more fun when a DM says yes more.

 

[pemerton]

I do this too. I have given out extra skill points to help round out a character concept.

I got rid of cross class skills awhile ago

<snip>

The issues comes in when you play with DMs who are slaves to the RAW.

Amen. Most issues do.

Yep. I have played with DMs who are slaves to the RAW and I found that those games are often very frustrating to play in. The DM usual answer to everything is no.

I perdonally find games more fun when a DM says yes more.

If the game plays better when fighter PCs have more skill points, and without a cross-class skill tax, why not change the rules rather than rely on the GM to ignore them?

 

[Elf Witch]

If the game plays better when fighter PCs have more skill points, and without a cross-class skill tax, why not change the rules rather than rely on the GM to ignore them?

I do think they should get rid of the whole concept of cross class skills.

As for more skills I think that should be up to the DM. When I give out more skills it is usually to add to the background for example in my campaign the monk background included growing up on a herb farm. So I gave her profession herbology with 5 free ranks in it.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The simple answer - though likely not many 3e types would agree - is to get rid of all social and knowledge skills entirely; and let role-playing rule the day.

Yeah, player as resolution system. Greatly limits what a given player can actually play, works great for those who have gotten the DM's number and know how to push his buttons.

Makes about as much sense, conceptually, as tossing the combat system and resolving fights by going at eachother with rattan swords (which the SCA does fairly safely, so it's not totally stupid or impractical, just not a good way of modeling what your /character/ can do).

 

[Ahnehnois]

If the game plays better when fighter PCs have more skill points, and without a cross-class skill tax, why not change the rules rather than rely on the GM to ignore them?

Um, these are rules that should be changed. I've covered my dislike of cross-class skills before on these boards in particular. I'm not seeing that I said anything to the contrary. However...

I don't think it's ever possible to make a system that works RAW, and DMs always need to be proactive, but I do think it's possible to make improvements in the rules over time. Those improvements often involve making people's houserules official so everyone shares in their wisdom.

 

[pemerton]

I don't think it's ever possible to make a system that works RAW

OK. I tend to disagree with this. And not only in principle - I'm pretty sure that I've played systems that work "RAW" - Pendragon and Cthulhu come to mind, and probably also classic Traveller.

 

[Lanefan]

Yeah, player as resolution system. Greatly limits what a given player can actually play,

Given as it's in theory a role-playing game and that people are aware of this going in, any limits on what type or personality of character a player can play are - let's face it - self-inflicted. And asking the game to fix this only ends up putting rules-based limits on those who otherwise might be able to role-play what they want, how they want.

works great for those who have gotten the DM's number and know how to push his buttons.

No doubt an issue in some circles; this one comes down to the DM being able to recognize button-pushing and - while still happily accepting bribes - not allowing them to have any effect.

Lan-"the player who bribed me tonight ended the session with his MU in mid-melee, completely cut off from the rest of the party"-efan