Why I Hate Skills

[Bill Zebub]

I'm not who you asked, but I really like this question. I think time spent can be a consequence, because I think time is a resource that can (and arguably should) be managed in most adventures. Many if not all dungeon adventures. Success = immediate results, to the point of maybe getting a surprise round on the orcs, failure = results, but the orcs are ready instead. Or, as even further back (or maybe a different thread at this point, I've lost track), each check = 5 minutes pass, roll random encounters or keep track of the number of checks vs. the necromancer's ritual timer or mention that torches are starting to flicker and the party's starting to get hungry or so on.

Taking 20 is a great tool because it removes pointless rolling when it doesn't really matter, and because it also demonstrates the folly of ignoring time. The necromancer runs deep into his dungeon and starts the ritual. On his way, he locks six doors on his way to his sixth basement's six-sided Evil Inner Sanctum of Evil. GM starts the clock in his head --- the PCs have three hours to stop the necromancer. That's 36 dungeon turns or whatever-you-call-thems (I like "stretches"). If the party takes 20 on two doors, they might as well have not even been there. If they take 20 on one door, they're really starting to push things --- so the thief needs to be good, the party needs to be resourceful, or the party needs to be risky and take the unlocked, combat-heavy route.

The way I do this in Shadowdark is that an attempt at something costs a "crawling round" which increases the chances of random encounters.

So even though I would typically grant auto-success at picking a lock, it would still consume the thief's entire attention for that crawling round. Other characters can either think of something they want to do while waiting, or just wait.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Yea, it isn't a big mechanical change, but I think it works well for @Bill Zebub's case of wanting the players to make their declarations within the fiction instead of using a mechanical option on the table. But at the same time, it also empowers character concept (and the mechanics supporting it) to play a major role in how the resolution actually occurs.

I do want to clarify that I want declarations within the fiction not just for narrative color, but to help determine what the stakes would be, if any.

If a player narrates a whole story about their background in order to justify why they might succeed at a 'knowledge check', there's still probably no consequences to failure, so I'm still not going to call for a roll.

 

[Bill Zebub]

If a character tries to climb a cliff, make an Athletics save to not fall or get stuck.

If a character has to pick a lock silently to not alert the guards in the next room, make a Finesse save.

If a character is interacting with a runic puzzle, make a Knowledge save to recognize this is a trap.

Having a tense negotiation with a merchant? Make a Presence save to not piss him off and he doubles the price.

Yeah, all of those work for me because they all have understood consequences.