Untrained/trained Skills....Noooo!

[Zurai]

So you end up with situations where the best (and by default) only option becomes combat. No one has ranks in diplomacy? Roll initiative. Fighter's sneak scores too low? Initiative. SAGA, by giving characters a slow, steadily raising skill "rank" (raising like bab, saves, or hp) allows them to try other methods first (try to sneak past the guards, try to bluff the ogre) rather than look at their minuscule non-rank skill modifiers and saying "screw it, roll for initiative"

There's a simpler solution to this that doesn't require reworking the entire skill system:

Re-balance skillsets and skill points so that no one has no "notcombat" worth.

 

[Celebrim]

Remathilis: And yet it is amazing how many successful rules sets there have been where there wasn't an assumption of universal competancy. How did millions of gamers playing scores of systems manage?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Remathilis: And yet it is amazing how many successful rules sets there have been where there wasn't an assumption of universal competancy. How did millions of gamers playing scores of systems manage?

Less well than they will in the future, is my understanding from my experience in Saga.

Not that you'll believe me, of course.

 

[Stalker0]

Ok, this has been boiling in the back of my mind for a while now, and I'm generally secretive about both my house rules and my ideas for future house rules, but since 3.5 looks like its going to die, this is what I've been thinking.

I'll be honest, there was nothing there that 3e doesn't take into account. Size is already factored in, you receive a +4 to hide checks for being small (that's why kids are good hiders!). Its quick, clean, and easy.

If you have full cover or concealment, no one can spot you, you don't even need to make a hide check.

The one thing that is annoying in 3e is the range increment is WAY too small. Make it 50' or something and be done with it. Or simply say you get a +2 to hide if your more than 30' feet away, and a +5 if your past 100' feet. Something quick and easy.

 

[Nifft]

Remathilis: And yet it is amazing how many successful rules sets there have been where there wasn't an assumption of universal competancy. How did millions of gamers playing scores of systems manage?

D&D previously had no skills at all (unless you were a Rogue). We managed back then... but the game is better now, and easier to manage.

Lots of successful rule sets don't have dragons, or ninjas, or zombies, or monkeys, or dinosaurs, or spellcasters -- so what? D&D is better for having all those things, and D&D is better for having a better skill system.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Indeed. Kerrick's spot rules were the missing peice of the puzzle I'd been looking for. He had alot of good ideas, but there were still some spots that weren't quite right. It was too complex. It left too many abusable actions in it. I've been meaning to get back to him about how to fix his system ever since I spotted the change to how hide works, which is one of the reasons I didn't want to blurt out my idea.

Well, cast 'Raise Thread' and I will be glad to banter about a better, less complex way of doing it.

 

[Remathilis]

Remathilis: And yet it is amazing how many successful rules sets there have been where there wasn't an assumption of universal competency. How did millions of gamers playing scores of systems manage?

I think Nifft and Patryn did a good job answering that. Before 3e, D&D didn't have upward scaling ACs (something every other RPG did have in some form or another, higher was better). Things evolve.

 

[olshanski]

So the first thing you need to do is come up with some rules for what the base difficulty of spotting someone is depending on the available cover or concealment. If you hide in something that provides 100% cover, your hide skill doesn't have a large effect on the chance of going unseen. On the opposite end up the spectrum, if you hide in a bare room the sneaky guy is almost as likely to be seen as the non-sneaky guy.

Full Cover is, occasionally, extremely useful.

Aha!
So, putting together Celebrim's and Patryn's ideas, I've got a new strategy.

1. A person in total cover is hidden and doesn't need to make a hide roll.
2. A person with a tower shield can use the shield for total cover.
therefore: A person with a tower shield is hidden and doesn't need to make a hide roll.

This is great! so my party of 2 fighters and 2 clerics, all wearing plate armor and tower shields, can sneak up on a camp of hobgoblin mercenaries. I can just imagine the guards:

Guard1: "Keep a close watch: we've kidnapped the heir to the throne and the humans are sure to attack! Have you seen anything unusual?"
Guard2: "Nope. I've been watching the lands closely, all the way to the horizon. Nobody is approaching."
Guard1: "That's great.... but say, what are those 4 shields doing about 100 yards that way?"
Guard2: "Those shields? they are nothing. They've been creeping closer and closer for the past hour, but there certainly isn't anything to be worried about. I would have seen something by now."
Guard1: "Very well. Carry on."

 

[Celebrim]

Aha!
So, putting together Celebrim's and Patryn's ideas, I've got a new strategy.

1. A person in total cover is hidden and doesn't need to make a hide roll.
2. A person with a tower shield can use the shield for total cover.
therefore: A person with a tower shield is hidden and doesn't need to make a hide roll.

Funny, but true.

Of course, the strategy - while sound on one level - does have a drawback or two.

 

[Celebrim]

D&D previously had no skills at all (unless you were a Rogue). We managed back then... but the game is better now, and easier to manage.

Yes, as DM of both systems, I'm aware of that. But my particular complaint was that universal competancy was a rather rare thing in extant rule sets. I don't recall encountering it in RIFTS, GURPS, Chaosium CoC, WEG Star Wars, Chill 2nd edition, WoD, BESM, or well - anywhere. Now, on the other hand skill systems are pretty darn common. D&D's lack of a skill system was - though preferred by a small audience - frequently cited as a source of frustration for the longest time before 3rd edition came along. Certainly it was part of what sent me to GURPS.

I wasn't asking how people managed without a skill system. I know how people manage without a skill system. I was asking how players managed without universal competancy. Granted, that is also a rhetorical question, but it seems like the impression of everyone else here is that things never worked without it.

It's not enough to cite past improvements in the game to justify any particular change. Those past improvements or changes justify or don't justify only themselves. You have to justify this change on its own merits.

And I'm telling you right now, it isn't going to 'work'. By that I mean, it isn't going to accomplish what seems to be the key issue here - allowing a player to do anything he wants with a character with a reasonable chance of success. A year from now I can tell you what the reoccuring threads will look like. Just as people whined and whined about how they had to have per encounter abilities so that there Wizard wouldn't have to resort to using a crossbow, just like they complained about how low level characters weren't fun because they didn't have enough options, a year from now you are going to have threads were people complain that the system works 'ok' at high levels, but low levels no one 'has any options'. Everyone's nontrained skills are still too low to be useful, and so they have to resort to combat. And, they'll be complaining about how the 25% or 50% or larger gap in the chance of success is still too large.

Lots of successful rule sets don't have dragons, or ninjas, or zombies, or monkeys, or dinosaurs, or spellcasters -- so what? D&D is better for having all those things, and D&D is better for having a better skill system.

Yeah, by definition its better if its better. But, I don't see it as better. Mostly, its just going to be different and create different problems and be the source of alot of complaining. It's yet another power creep thats going to end up scaling up numbers, which scale up challenges, which scale up numbers, like we've seen ever since early in 3.X. This time next year they'll be whining about how multiclassing skills doesn't work, how they can't dabble, how there isn't enough diversity or flexibility, and this and that, and they'll still be reoccuring threads on how hide/spot doesn't work and so forth.