Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Theories regaurding the change in rules of D&D.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RFisher" data-source="post: 3703588" data-attributes="member: 3608"><p>It's not! Most of what I wrote applies equally to combat, because attack bonus is a skill even if 3e doesn't put it in its "skill" system. But it is interesting to look at how the use of combat skills often differs from the use of other skills.</p><p></p><p>Failing a single combat skill check usually doesn't mean total failure in the combat. It means only a minor setback. (You failed to damage your opponent for one round.) Failing a single jump, balance, craft, or knowledge check can mean falling to your death, ruining a creation (& loss of the 100% of the time & money spent on the attempt), or complete ignorance of an important fact. (Of course, the important word there is "can".)</p><p></p><p>During combat, not only do you make several combat skill checks, but you have decision points between them. You have the chance to refine your tactics based on new information & unexpected developments. You can correct mistakes. You can thus continue to tilt the odds in your favor. You can choose to cut your losses. With a "one roll task", you have to make all the right decisions up-front.</p><p></p><p>Combine the "one roll task" with the tendency to set difficulties, IMHO, too high too often; & you get a session that consists mostly of PCs failing tasks with no partial credit. And the players feeling more out-of-control because of the one-decision-point→one-roll→total-success-or-total-failure model.</p><p></p><p>Note, I'm not claiming this is the fault of 3e. I'm saying that these are trends I've noticed under many systems. The expansion of skill systems have generally not meant new challenges for the players, but rather the PCs seeming more & more incompetent. If you haven't seen even a hint of these problems at your table, bully for you. But this is something I have seen.</p><p></p><p>So, what should I do about this?</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Set lower difficulties</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The more peripheral a skill is to the focus of the current campaign, the more I should consider making success/failure be more GM fiat than a roll. (Predisposed towards success.) Thus, I may--<em>may</em>--want to drop the skill completely. (Skill levels can be handy for informing GM fiat even if you never call for a check against it.)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If the skill isn't peripheral, consider using more of an "extended task" model like combat. (Not a new idea there, but very seldom applied in my experience.)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Give partial credit on "one roll tasks". Consider using adequate-success/exceptional-success rather than success/failure.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Do something along the lines of Tweet's "there is no try" article: Failing a roll means that the PC knows not to attempt the task. There should probably be a minor setback associated with this. (Like losing your action for that round.) Also, I like the idea of giving the PC a karma/action/drama/fate/whatever point if the player chooses to go ahead & have the PC <em>actually</em> fail after a failed roll. This is something I hope to try next time I GM.</li> </ul><p></p><p>Note that some of my fixes don't require changing mechanics, just how you use the mechanics. (So, arguably, these aren't problems with the rules but problems with their application.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RFisher, post: 3703588, member: 3608"] It's not! Most of what I wrote applies equally to combat, because attack bonus is a skill even if 3e doesn't put it in its "skill" system. But it is interesting to look at how the use of combat skills often differs from the use of other skills. Failing a single combat skill check usually doesn't mean total failure in the combat. It means only a minor setback. (You failed to damage your opponent for one round.) Failing a single jump, balance, craft, or knowledge check can mean falling to your death, ruining a creation (& loss of the 100% of the time & money spent on the attempt), or complete ignorance of an important fact. (Of course, the important word there is "can".) During combat, not only do you make several combat skill checks, but you have decision points between them. You have the chance to refine your tactics based on new information & unexpected developments. You can correct mistakes. You can thus continue to tilt the odds in your favor. You can choose to cut your losses. With a "one roll task", you have to make all the right decisions up-front. Combine the "one roll task" with the tendency to set difficulties, IMHO, too high too often; & you get a session that consists mostly of PCs failing tasks with no partial credit. And the players feeling more out-of-control because of the one-decision-point→one-roll→total-success-or-total-failure model. Note, I'm not claiming this is the fault of 3e. I'm saying that these are trends I've noticed under many systems. The expansion of skill systems have generally not meant new challenges for the players, but rather the PCs seeming more & more incompetent. If you haven't seen even a hint of these problems at your table, bully for you. But this is something I have seen. So, what should I do about this? [list] [*]Set lower difficulties [*]The more peripheral a skill is to the focus of the current campaign, the more I should consider making success/failure be more GM fiat than a roll. (Predisposed towards success.) Thus, I may--[i]may[/i]--want to drop the skill completely. (Skill levels can be handy for informing GM fiat even if you never call for a check against it.) [*]If the skill isn't peripheral, consider using more of an "extended task" model like combat. (Not a new idea there, but very seldom applied in my experience.) [*]Give partial credit on "one roll tasks". Consider using adequate-success/exceptional-success rather than success/failure. [*]Do something along the lines of Tweet's "there is no try" article: Failing a roll means that the PC knows not to attempt the task. There should probably be a minor setback associated with this. (Like losing your action for that round.) Also, I like the idea of giving the PC a karma/action/drama/fate/whatever point if the player chooses to go ahead & have the PC [i]actually[/i] fail after a failed roll. This is something I hope to try next time I GM. [/list] Note that some of my fixes don't require changing mechanics, just how you use the mechanics. (So, arguably, these aren't problems with the rules but problems with their application.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Theories regaurding the change in rules of D&D.
Top