Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bill Zebub" data-source="post: 9876421" data-attributes="member: 7031982">Lol. I wish I had the video clip from Aliens:Carter Burke: "He's just a grunt!  No offense."Corporal Hicks: "None taken."But addressing the point of your post, I do like character skill, but I like it tied to player declarations.  E.g., the swimming example I gave, where the players came up with a plan, but the character's Swimming skill determined success. But if the players aren't actually saying what their characters do, and there's zero consequence if they fail...in other words, if the player could be in the kitchen getting another the beer and the GM could both determine that a roll was needed and make the roll, informing the player of the results when they get back, e.g. "By the way why you were gone I rolled to see if you noticed something and you didn't".....then, yeah, no.  Not interested.EDIT: But I also want to point out that for decades I played with skills and Perception checks and knowledge checks rolling to pick locks and all that stuff, and never really thought twice about it.  So, yes, I'm familiar with that approach to RPGs.  All this criticism about consequence-free dice rolling is a conclusion that I've come to only in the last few years.Also note I titled the thread "Why I Hate Skills" not "Skill Are Bad Design".  Because, of course, YMMV.</blockquote>