Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kenmarable" data-source="post: 3807453" data-attributes="member: 40359">Although I wish there was at least a concrete example of this (yeah, previews are never fast enough), comments by WotC R&amp;D indicate that in 4e skills won't just be &quot;make a check, then you succeed or fail&quot; but something more like &quot;make a check, that check impacts how things play out&quot;. It's a subtle difference (that might wind up being no difference at all), but to me it sounds like skill checks won't just be &quot;pass/fail&quot;, but &quot;how well you did&quot; and probably have scaled results. So if you roll only mediocre, you might still &quot;pass&quot; the check, but don't get any real bonuses. If you roll really well, then you might get bonuses or complete whatever action faster. With a roll giving you a 20 point swing on your final result, even if people are relatively equal in skill bonus, there can be some dramatically different results. So it's not just &quot;I have +10, so I can swim.&quot;For example, with the Climb check you mention - rather than &quot;Can you climb without falling? DC 15&quot;, it's more like &quot;DC 15 to not fall, DC 20 to manage the climb at normal speed, DC 25 to manage the climb and give your companions some cover from the attacking bats&quot; or some such. Some 3.x skills have this, but I could see it being built into the system for all skills perhaps. Will they do that? I don't know. But that have mentioned several times that &quot;skill checks impact the action&quot; and especially when one of them discussed social skills being more back and forth with numerous checks rather than just &quot;roll and see if you pass/fail&quot;. It's a slightly different mindset that make skill checks *feel* very different.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kenmarable, post: 3807453, member: 40359"] Although I wish there was at least a concrete example of this (yeah, previews are never fast enough), comments by WotC R&D indicate that in 4e skills won't just be "make a check, then you succeed or fail" but something more like "make a check, that check impacts how things play out". It's a subtle difference (that might wind up being no difference at all), but to me it sounds like skill checks won't just be "pass/fail", but "how well you did" and probably have scaled results. So if you roll only mediocre, you might still "pass" the check, but don't get any real bonuses. If you roll really well, then you might get bonuses or complete whatever action faster. With a roll giving you a 20 point swing on your final result, even if people are relatively equal in skill bonus, there can be some dramatically different results. So it's not just "I have +10, so I can swim." For example, with the Climb check you mention - rather than "Can you climb without falling? DC 15", it's more like "DC 15 to not fall, DC 20 to manage the climb at normal speed, DC 25 to manage the climb and give your companions some cover from the attacking bats" or some such. Some 3.x skills have this, but I could see it being built into the system for all skills perhaps. Will they do that? I don't know. But that have mentioned several times that "skill checks impact the action" and especially when one of them discussed social skills being more back and forth with numerous checks rather than just "roll and see if you pass/fail". It's a slightly different mindset that make skill checks *feel* very different. [/QUOTE]

Verification