Untrained/trained Skills....Noooo!

[Primitive Screwhead]

Quote=Nifft]Yes, they should. All human beings should be capable of climbing, jumping and swimming. [/quote]

No they shouldn't.

Yes they should!

{sorry, failed Will save }


But seriously, I think the "No they shouldn't" side of this argument is missing a couple things:

A> SWSA Skill system is a 'preview', 4E may not work 'exactly' like it. My guess is that WoTC will change the system to more properly reflect a DnD approach to the game.

B> The SWSA Skill system has a mechanic where you cannot accomplish some skill tasks unless 'Trained', one example above was 'Take 10'

C> Adventure design is much easier if the max variance in skills is 20 points. With this spread, as noted upthread much more elequently than I can, the DM can challenge *all* members of the party. The current system does not enable that...
- which means either the GM balances for the skill-monkey and everyone else relies on magic, or the GM balances for the "What is the Ride skill for?" guy and the player who focused on Ride feels like he/she wasted the points and wont ever do that again.
{coming from a player who once had a Ride focused character, tons of skill points and feats that ended up having absolutely *zero* effect in play. DM marginalized the Ride skill in order to enable the rest of the group... I know, bad DM.. but the system could limit this.}



The way I see it panning out:
Levels 1 - 10, normal natural obstacles like cliffs and such are part of encounter design
- You must climb up the cliff to get the McGuffin
Levels 11 - 20, challenges on the natural obstacles are part of encounter design
- You must climb the cliff to get the McGuffin, but watch out for the Harpies
Levels 21 - 30, Natural obstacles are no longer part of encounter design
- You must climb the Cliffs of Despair, which are located on the plane of 'X'

If you dislike the 'super hero' aspect of this scaling as I do.. simply stick to the mid and lower levels.

Oh... and just a thought for reference. In LoTR, Frodo and Samwise.. two Hobbits from the pastures of the Shire, ended up climbing a very difficult path in the mountains of Mordor....

 

[BryonD]

Yes they should!

{sorry, failed Will save }


But seriously, I think the "No they shouldn't" side of this argument is missing a couple things:

A> SWSA Skill system is a 'preview', 4E may not work 'exactly' like it. My guess is that WoTC will change the system to more properly reflect a DnD approach to the game.

B> The SWSA Skill system has a mechanic where you cannot accomplish some skill tasks unless 'Trained', one example above was 'Take 10'

C> Adventure design is much easier if the max variance in skills is 20 points. With this spread, as noted upthread much more elequently than I can, the DM can challenge *all* members of the party. The current system does not enable that...

I'm not missing any of those points.
I cling to point A as a hope that 4E won't completely and totally suck.

I don't see point B as fixing the problem that it would still be a universal truth that wizards can climb fairly well. That is both dumb conceptually and constraining creatively.

I completely reject any truth in point C. The hand-holding baby treatment assumption that the party must be able to overcome any challenge with the most direct approach is a hideous idea that will never see my table. Capping my variance of skills available is capping my degrees of freedom in design. In 3X right now I can put a wall or river in the path of the party that is a lowish DC and therefore is easy for the rogue or fighter and a minor challenge for the wizard. So the claim that I am enabled by the handcuffs on skill differences is false. On the other hand, the SWSE skill system would completely disable me from putting real and serious challenges in front of the party with greater than 20 skill checks built in.

 

[BryonD]

Why? Let's look at the hp (20d4 ~ 51 hp, including 1st level). A 100 ft. fall deals 10d6 damage (~35 dmg). If they can survive an average 100 ft. fall, why should they not be able to climb a 1/10th of that (i.e. 10 ft.) distance down?

Cheers, LT.

OK, so if the logic of what you said holds then a wizard should be able to climb 10 feet down a wall of force based on nothing more thoughtful than the point that they could survive falling off of it.

 

[BryonD]

I've been through this in multiple threads already.

And all I have seen in SWSE defense is justification for dumbing down the system to make it more patty-cake for the DM and/or for hand-holding the player's hands for fear that they might actually need to find a creative solution to a problem.

If that is what the masses really want, then by all means that is what WotC should spoon feed them.

 

[Nifft]

The hand-holding baby treatment assumption that the party must be able to overcome any challenge with the most direct approach is a hideous idea that will never see my table. Capping my variance of skills available is capping my degrees of freedom in design. I 3X right now I can put a wall or river in the path of the party that is a lowish DC and therefore is easy for the rogue or fighter and a minor challenge for the wizard. So the claim that I am enabled by the handcuffs on skill differences is false. On the other hand, the SWSE skill system would completely disable me from putting real and serious challenges in front of the party with greater than 20 skill checks built in.

Huh?

1/ The "most direct approach" to overcome any challenge is to kick in the door and roll initiative. In my experience, folks who want to use skills as a party are trying to do something indirect.

2/ If you're playing at low levels, the dynamic is unchanged. If you're playing at high levels, the dynamic is actually inverted: the Wizard spends a per-day resource and everyone walks across, or walks through, no skill checks necessary! He may wish to rest after 15 minutes of this skill-free adventure style...

3/ How is anything tying your hands? Why can't you put a DC 30 skill check in? A 20th level dude has a slim chance of making it, and a talented, trained & focused 20th level dude has a reasonable chance of making it.

I feel I understand less about why you're upset than I did before your post.

-- N

 

[Daztur]

No they shouldn't.

Think about all of the adventures that a wizard has been through by the time they've hit 20th level. They've leveled armies, they've crossed continents, they've fallen off 100 ft cliffs and walked away, they've looked the Gods in the eye.

But they can't swim.

 

[Mallus]

I don't see point B as fixing the problem that it would still be a universal truth that wizards can climb fairly well. That is both dumb conceptually and constraining creatively.

It's 'dumb conceptually' that a person who isn't infirm and/or kitten-weak can climb?

A wizard, assuming he's got enough levels and HP, can jump off a reasonably high cliff without even the possibility of breaking a limb. Given that context, your point seems a trifle silly.

The hand-holding baby treatment assumption that the party must be able to overcome any challenge with the most direct approach is a hideous idea that will never see my table.

Which is far worse than the current assumption that every challenge can (and should) be met most effectively by spells or off-the-rack magic items purchased at a store.

 

[Stalker0]

You can also explain a high level wizard climbing with a simple flavor change:

The wizard isn't climbing, he's calling upon the bound spirits of earth and air to aid his ascent, he calls upon a favor from the god of athletics, he invokes the truename of the mountain he's about to climb, and it opens its arms to him and carries him upwards.

All of those make perfect sense for a level 15+ wizard. This guy has done it all, seen it all, etc.

 

[Zurai]

Think about all of the adventures that a wizard has been through by the time they've hit 20th level. They've leveled armies, they've crossed continents, they've fallen off 100 ft cliffs and walked away, they've looked the Gods in the eye.

But they can't swim.

Not neccesarily on ANY of those fronts. I've got a 10th level wizard in a campaign that has only fought maybe five dozen creatures total, hasn't traveled more than 400 miles in the campaign (which isn't nearly cross-continental even if 75% of that travel wasn't retreading the same ground), hasn't even seen a cliff let alone fallen off one, and would be far more interested in asking God for some pointers on magic than getting into a staring contest with Him.

I don't see him suddenly single-handedly leveling armies (considering that the only armies in this world are either made of dragons and half-dragons, or allied with him), crossing the continent (considering that the DM hasn't even mapped out the rest of the continent), taking inspiration from lemmings, or challenging God (considering this is a low-magic, no-planar-travel campaign where there weren't even NPC clerics until two sessions ago) in the remaining 10 levels til he hits 20.

And, after all that - what do leveling armies, walking way too many miles, being suicidal, or being really damn suicidal have to do with knowing how to swim?

 

[Zurai]

You can also explain a high level wizard climbing with a simple flavor change:

The wizard isn't climbing, he's calling upon the bound spirits of earth and air to aid his ascent, he calls upon a favor from the god of athletics, he invokes the truename of the mountain he's about to climb, and it opens its arms to him and carries him upwards.

All of those make perfect sense for a level 15+ wizard. This guy has done it all, seen it all, etc.

Right. So how do you re-flavor the desert nomad fighter who's never seen more than a wellful of water in his life taking to water like a fish the first time he sees the ocean?