Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 9209188" data-attributes="member: 70468">I’m not a fan of BRP’s skill system. I like a little more focus and also prefer to use EXP as part of a positive feedback loop to drive play (assuming you also mean that usage = skill progression like in TES and BRP games).Thanks for the suggestion, but having checks become certain is a non-goal since my homebrew system is not using task resolution. Checks are generally¹ made to determine outcomes, so there always needs to be some uncertainty. Aside from when the system prescribes it, they’re made when the following conditions are met:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The player wants to change the status quo; and</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The referee can (and does) foreground consequences that could happen.</li> </ol>The roll resolves whether the PC gets what they want and whether any consequences occur (see <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/whats-your-sweet-spot-for-a-skill-system.696411/post-9194935" target="_blank">this post</a> for more on that). If the roll becomes certain, then it breaks the consequences engine. That’s an important way for the referee to get to say things (what some games would call “make moves”), so it needs to be functional.I’ve been using static difficulties because I don’t like the progression treadmill, but (as noted in the post you quoted), I’m having to make adjustments. You should get better, and the challenges shouldn’t be resetting the chance of success based on your difficulty, but I can’t keep things static with the modifiers I want to have.What I’m going to do is have some base (probably 8), and apply factors to adjust the difficulty. These factors are going to be systematized, so players can reason about them and (hopefully) come to the same conclusion as the referee. To an extent, it should be possible to change the situation to eliminate factors (and reduce the difficulty).As also noted, I’m thinking of having factors for scale and quality as well as for transient effects. Distance is arguably one too, but I’ve so far really only considered that in terms of ranged attacks. It should probably be considered though if you want, e.g., to leap a chasm.These will probably be ranked, so a quality +1 and a scale +2 results in a difficulty of 11. But I still need to look at the math and make sure they’re calibrated right (which it’s not currently). Using ranks would provide a nice symmetry with the rest of the system, but it’s not required. There will probably be a table or two with factors.[HR][/HR]1: Combat is a little more task-oriented in that it is broken up into rounds with discrete phases (equip, initiative, fast PCs, monsters, slow PCs) and has an action economy (you get one plus a reaction in addition to your movement). To attack a creature, you use an appropriate action, which prescribes the check (e.g., a Melee Attack uses <proficiency> + Strength) and the result (deal damage = margin [adjusted by mitigation] + weapon dice).</blockquote>

Verification