Where did Ability + Skill 1st Appear?

[delericho]

That would kind of mean to remove an entire character concept/class which is not guilty of anything, to salvage a ruleset (skills) which doesn't work well enough.

Class? Sure. Concept? Not really - as I noted, the 'rogue' would just be a lightly-armoured Fighter.

For the rest of it... it wasn't really a serious suggestion - the "big four" are sacred cows, after all.

 

[Bluenose]

Earliest appearance of Skill+Stat Modifer I'm aware of is in Runequest, so 1978. It's interesting that the stat modifier is a relatively small component of the total skill, which sounds like it's close to the way WotC are thinking of going. There might have been something in Traveller where it applied, but generally in early-CT it was either Skill or Stat.

 

[Li Shenron]

Class? Sure. Concept? Not really - as I noted, the 'rogue' would just be a lightly-armoured Fighter.

I think my previous use of the word "concept" didn't make much sense because I actually removed the explanation of it so that it wouldn't derail the thread, but here it is part of it:

Spoiler

Let me try to summarize the problem, the way I see it...

- There are a few fantasy archetypes which are truly essential to a traditional fantasy RPG, the Rogue as "a character who gets along with a mix of manual skills, adventuring savvyness, improvisation, quickness, and uncanny luck" being one of them. The Rogue also deals with combat using the same approach, she is not a lightly armor fighter by concept, only by consequence.

- A class-based game is a game which starts off from a few essential archetypes and makes them classes so that players have a mechanical starting point to play such archetype, without having to figure out from a plethora of rule subsystems how to "build" i.e. properly represent such type of character.

- D&D has decided a long time ago (since the start) to be a a class-based game, and it's committed to stay that way. Other systems take a different approach, and maybe a variant D&D also can, but not core D&D.

 

[delericho]

I think my previous use of the word "concept" didn't make much sense because I actually removed the explanation of it so that it wouldn't derail the thread, but here it is part of it:

Let me try to summarize the problem, the way I see it...

Ah, gotcha. Makes sense, and by that logic, I agree.

(I would XP you for that, but alas I apparently need to spread some around first.)

 

[TheYeti1775]

Actually the Thief classes would have been the first within D&D.

A high dex meant a bonus to many of your thief skill percentages.

In the 1E AD&D see page 12 of the PHB Dexterity Table II.: Adjustments for Thieves.

An 18 Dex would give you a +10% bonus to Pick Pockets, Move Silently, and Hiding in Shadows. A 15% bonus to Opening Locks and a 5% bonus to Locating/Removing Traps.

I didn't see any mention of the bonus in the Basic Editon books when I just checked. Only looked in the Basic and Expert books so far.

 

[Fifth Element]

That would kind of mean to remove an entire character concept/class which is not guilty of anything

Not guilty of anything? Did the Rogue tell you that? It changed its name from the Thief just to seem more innocent, but we all know the truth.