D&D Abilities & Skills

[@TwinSteel]

🥳❤️👍🏿

[@TheGrandfathersCave]

Thank you ☺️

[@anarionelendili8961]

What I ended up doing in our BECMI campaign, I made the skill formula into: Skill value = (Ability + Level)/2 + 3 per extra skill slot By contrast, the Rules Cyclopedia skill value = Ability + 1 per extra skill slot, which meant that the 1st level character had the same chance to succeed as a 36th level one, assuming the ability score and the used skill slots were the same, which irked me somewhat. Spending more than one skill slot was also a waste, since it was just a 5% improvement. Also, having potentially a 90% chance of succeeding in a skill roll isn't really tense. Obviously, +5 for easy or even +10 for very easy modifiers help at the low levels. I also consolidated the skills to about 20, although there were several optional specializations, and also 'professional skills' that were bundling a few different skill specializations under a single skill. For example, a captain of a ship might have 'Captain Skill' which bundles Willpower (Leadership), Piloting (Ships), and Navigation (Sea). So instead of having to take three general skills, the would-be captain can take just one skill that is tailored to exactly what he is going to be doing. Oh, I should emphasize that the RC skill slots are 4+INT modifier, and then 1 more skill slot every additional 4 levels (so 5th, 9th etc), so they are much rarer than the skill points in Pathfinder. Thus, each skill slot is a major investment. I gave each PC one 'background skill' for free, essentially 'what would you be doing if you weren't an adventurer'? Different character classes got some skills for free, too, particularly the Thief, since the Thief Abilities were repackaged into half a dozen different skills.

[@TheGrandfathersCave]

As you might have figured out, something that really irks me is how the goal posts are always being moved in 3e/Pathfinder. It forces players into character specialization if they want their skills to remain relevant. I really want a simple and straight forward approach, with less focus on dice rolls and more focus on players participating in the narration 😊

[@anarionelendili8961]

@@TheGrandfathersCave I only played Pathfinder briefly, I have not GMed it, so I don't know that much about the scaling. What I like about the system I am using in BECMI is that apart from selecting the skills (and a new skill every 4 levels or so), the player doesn't have to worry about fiddly skill points, the skills scale up with the skill level automatically. I think some modifiers are necessary as the campaign progresses. But the circumstances need to change to account for it. The first level thief might struggle with even ordinary cheap locks, while the master thief doesn't start sweating until it is the masterpiece of a famed dwarven locksmith, with the regular locks opening for him just as easily as with keys.

[@TheGrandfathersCave]

@@anarionelendili8961 But is it really necesary to have scaling skills? Is it not just as good to have stativ values?

[@anarionelendili8961]

@@TheGrandfathersCave So a thief at 1st level would be just as good (if not better) at picking locks as a thief on max level? That doesn't sound right to me. :) The different difficulties allow for playing around with the danger. The same way that a humble goblin is a legitimate threat at a low level, you wouldn't bother pitting a high-level party against a similar number of 1 HD goblins, now would you? No, you put them to fight against giants or something that can actually challenge them. Same way, you wouldn't bother having a simple 10' jump as an Athletics test for a high level character proficient in such things. No, it would be a 20' jump, grab the tavern sign and swing yourself up to the balcony. That is way more epic, and shows that the character has grown, now doing things that the 1st level character only dreamed of.

[@TheGrandfathersCave]

@@anarionelendili8961 The way I do it the thief can improve their abilities by means of a class feature that gradually improves their thief skills, or with improvement points (1 gained each time they level up), by investing feats towards it and by aquiring better gear. The GM can also use skill increases as rewards (e.g. the thief has helped the guild and is tutored by the guild’s master trapsmith) 😃 While the heroes face stronger and stronger monsters, and legendary treasures are better protected than a merchant’s safe, many challenges remain the same. No matter how high level a fighter is it breaks my immersion if they can easily jump a 30’ crevasse. If a player invests heavily to become the best burglar or smith, there ever was, I think that is fine. But it should not automatically disqualify other characters, which is something I regularly experience in high level Pathfinder and D&D3.5 ☺️

[@dougpridgen9682]

I see what you're saying about moving the goals, but there is also the factor that (for example) locks that are impossible for you to pick at one stage because the DC is not even possible for you, becomes possible later, and locks that are currently difficult but possible become easier, so there is a progression. You can insert any other type of skill challenge in place of lock picking.

[@TheGrandfathersCave]

I think you are partly right. I have added a calsse feature for the scoundrel class to account for that. But I don’t think that logic applies to all challenges. Exceptions include jumping, perception, ridning a steed. While I agree locks or traps become more difficult much of that does not need to be quantified. The math will generally be the same regardless; your rogue will need to roll a 15 or higher on a d20 to crack that difficult lock and the wizard will still need a 15 as well to research that very rare arcane ritual. Managing a lot of skill points only serves the purpose of making those tasks impossible for other characters, which I don’t think is worth it. In a group without a scoundrel it is nice to have the option of having the smart wizard being able to pick a lock (even if a scoundrel would normally be better at it). I think having feats an an improvement point available at each level gives a lot of opportunity to either specialization or fill gaps in a characters skill set. But don’t get me wrong. I think the skill point system is great and have enjoyed the way skills work in Pathfinder. I just don’ see that all that micromanagement is necesary, and with the way I have reworked ability modifiers this system that I propose offers more variation.

[@dougpridgen9682]

@@TheGrandfathersCaveGood points. Micromanagement, not typically being fun, defeats the purpose of a game.

[@ForestFWhite]

I am always interested in ways to simplify systems without sacrificing flexibility. One scale of difficulty is elegant and I recommend it for ease of play. Other details depend on the dice system, for d20 a "roll lower than" system is pretty good and requires no reworking of abilities (Symbaroum and 2d20 systems use this as well). We have one player who really enjoys rolling high numbers for success, so we made a "roll higher than" system with a lot of adjustment, which I am not sure was the best choice and departs completely from the D&D systems.

[@TheGrandfathersCave]

It is very seductive to have a pure roll high game. One of my players also strugglere a bit with the when to roll high and when to roll low dichotomy. I am really going for simplicity in the player end. I have smart and experienced players, but sometime new players find the learning curve too steep.