Why I Hate Skills

[VHawkwinter]

I get what you're saying, but even without the meta-game reward of skill advancement

What if it's not metagame, and you advance skills and learn abilities by training or studying?

the "Can I roll, too?" thing is pretty common. The bard and wizard fail in their attempts to read the ancient runes, and the barbarian with Int 6 says, "Can I roll, too?"

Some systems have a group check mechanic for such things, and the roll is performed for the whole group at once, not everyone rolling on their own. I like that better for the knowledge checks.

Because, why not?

And in a system with small RNG range relative to bonuses and DCs, or untrained skill penalties - the "Barbarian with 6 int" is unlikely to waste his time if he cannot possibly succeed or if he can only succeed with a 3 on 3d6.

 

[Bill Zebub]

And in a system with small RNG range relative to bonuses and DCs, or untrained skill penalties - the "Barbarian with 6 int" is unlikely to waste his time if he cannot possibly succeed or if he can only succeed with a 3 on 3d6.

You haven't experienced players rolling when they have very little chance of succeeding because there's no penalty for doing so? I have experienced that throughout my gaming career. Players like rolling dice; it's not a waste of time. (Unless you mean a "waste of time" when the time is actually being measured.)

 

[VHawkwinter]

Though in some cases they may have chosen a class because they had good skill options. The only games where pulling skills out of an extent system aren't to some degree fraught are those where it was implemented pretty off-hand in the first place.

If the removal was known before they start building characters, you can compensate for that by giving those classes something else.

If the player chooses a class "because they have good skill options" which they already know were not present, and then wish to complain about it... That's like choosing to play a red dragon in a game where all dragons are red and have red dragon abilities and being angry it doesn't have lightning breath. "You knew that before you picked it, what is wrong with you. 'Red dragon' is the type of dragon available.

 

[VHawkwinter]

You haven't experienced players rolling when they have very little chance of succeeding because there's no penalty for doing so? I have experienced that throughout my gaming career. Players like rolling dice; it's not a waste of time. (Unless you mean a "waste of time" when the time is actually being measured.)

I suppose occasionally, if time isn't being tracked and there are no other consequences for failure. But I don't usually see them toll for something that only has a ~2% chance of success.

 

[VHawkwinter]

You haven't experienced players rolling when they have very little chance of succeeding because there's no penalty for doing so? I have experienced that throughout my gaming career. Players like rolling dice; it's not a waste of time. (Unless you mean a "waste of time" when the time is actually being measured.)

I'll also note, I prefer systems where what you notice and what you know and skills to influence others and stealth are secret checks. You don't get the meta knowledge of knowing what you or the other players rolled when knowing the number rolled pressures to influence how you play even without knowing the consequences of the check.

GM rolls it and gives you the in-character information.

So for a knowledge check, yeah I'll just roll for the whole group. Sure. If we have a VTT I want that roll logged And timestamped in read-only form, so that when the consequences are revealed, the roll can be revealed to the players for what it was 3 hours ago.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I'll also note, I prefer systems where what you notice and what you know and skills to influence others and stealth are secret checks. You don't get the meta knowledge of knowing what you or the other players rolled when knowing the number rolled pressures to influence how you play even without knowing the consequences of the check.

GM rolls it and gives you the in-character information.

So for a knowledge check, yeah I'll just roll for the whole group. Sure. If we have a VTT I want that roll logged And timestamped in read-only form, so that when the consequences are revealed, the roll can be revealed to the players for what it was 3 hours ago.

Ah, yeah, I don't play with GM making secret rolls on behalf of players. One of my core beliefs (expressed repeatedly in this thread) is that rolls should follow from players declaring actions that have risk and/or cost.

 

[VHawkwinter]

Ah, yeah, I don't play with GM making secret rolls on behalf of players.

They'll know I'm rolling for them, and when, and for what. They just won't see the number right away for some stuff, because knowing the number will often lead to metagaming.

One of my core beliefs (expressed repeatedly in this thread) is that rolls should follow from players declaring actions that have risk and/or cost.

Yeah. That's fair. But that'll basically never be knowledge skills, unless you consider "we don't know what we hoped we knew, and now if we want that information we will have to do legwork or research, which will take hours or days and could still fail, and that time spent will have repercussions." To be a risk of a cost (I do, you do not seem to).

Though search/spot, stealth, deception, and persuasion have clear risks and costs, and yet still either the consequences are delayed or k owing the number on the dice has an undesirable metagame effect on player behaviour.

 

[Thomas Shey]

If the removal was known before they start building characters, you can compensate for that by giving those classes something else.

Sure. I was just noting that just eliminating skills isn't always the simple solution; there's probably other overhead you need to do.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Though search/spot, stealth, deception, and persuasion have clear risks and costs, and yet still either the consequences are delayed or k owing the number on the dice has an undesirable metagame effect on player behaviour.

In some cases I postpone the roll. For example, in trying to forge a document it can be assumed the PC keeps at it until they think they got it right, so there's no roll there. But when they hand it to the guard...that's when they roll...

 

[Micah Sweet]

Ah, yeah, I don't play with GM making secret rolls on behalf of players. One of my core beliefs (expressed repeatedly in this thread) is that rolls should follow from players declaring actions that have risk and/or cost.

The roll does follow. It just isn't necessarily rolled by the player if they shouldn't have that information.