PDA

View Full Version : Thinking about removing skill checks from my game.



TempusCCK
2008-07-02, 09:29 PM
So right now I'm running a shipboard campaign, and I ran my first session yesterday and it went awesome, however, the more I think about it the more I dislike the way skill checks are being used in this particular setting.

Instead of a character falling from the crows nest grabbing onto a rope, cutting it and swinging to one of the ropes of the rigging of the foremast and sliding down from there, it became "roll climb" "-number-" rinse and repeat. It made what should have been an interesting action scene.... clunky at best.

So what ways can I change the issue to cut down the number of descriptions that I'm making for my players because I'm directing them through various skill checks?

I'm thinking for anything basic, you need at least training in the skill, for anything difficult you jsut need a certain number of points in the skill. 10th level characters should be able to swing and climb on ropes just fine, especially with 10 ranks in the skill. So, now, my character can describe his action instead of going through a ton of checks.

Ideas, thoughts?

Meat Shield
2008-07-02, 09:34 PM
Well, I don't know about doing away with all the skill checks, but if you want the PCs to be able to do Cool* things, give them a Cool* token when ever you feel they have earned it. Thus, they can spend a Cool* token to swing valiantly from the crows nest, swoop down upon the enemy captain, steal his hat, do a flip, and stand opposite him, cutlass at the ready and the captains hat on his head.

* trademark Meat Shield, 2008

** these things have also been called fate points, action tokens, etc. Just let them do thigns that make them very cool - nothing makes D&D fun like imagining you are Errol Flynn and doing everything he did.

KillianHawkeye
2008-07-02, 09:51 PM
You could just assume that they're always "Taking 10" on their rolls. Basically, add 10 to their skill bonus to get their "Skill Score". If it's high enough for whatever they're trying to do, they succeed. You might consider ignoring the rule about not being able to Take 10 under certain conditions.

This has the benefit of you as DM being able to get a sheet with all the characters' Skill Scores on it. Then all your players have to do is describe their action, and you assign a difficulty, check their scores, and say if they succeed or not. Then you can describe how close they came to success/failure depending on the difference between their Score and the DC.

EndlessWrath
2008-07-02, 10:05 PM
Here's the trick. House rule 4.0 skills. Redo skills. Make 1 check for athletics. 1 check for acrobatics. 1 perception check. etc. Now you'd have to figure out how to balance this using the 3.5 rank system. (4.0 doesn't use ranks) by either letting keep their # of skill points and just making the DC a little higher or something like that.

thats the easiest way I see it. The jump, catch a rope, and swing.... athletics check.. etc. One check..instead of multiple crazies.

of course by doing this you limit the number of skills total... some classes give ridiculous bonus's. 3+int mod x 4 at first level lets you max out 3 + int mod skills at first level and keep them maxed for rest of game. if you do this there will only be 10..maybe 15 skills...most being knowledge checks.

its a solution, not the solution.

holywhippet
2008-07-02, 10:07 PM
I'd say they can take 10 when under stress, but take 20 when things are calm.

RTGoodman
2008-07-02, 10:08 PM
thats the easiest way I see it. The jump, catch a rope, and swing.... athletics check.. etc. One check..instead of multiple crazies.

Or, you know, just use the "Acrobatic Stunt" use of the Acrobatics skill. :smallwink:


Personally, I always think about using the "Fate Point" system (or whatever you want to call it) as Meat Shield mentioned earlier, but I never actually do. It sounds pretty cool, though, for a very cinematic experience, which it seems like you're looking for. Just give 'em one "Fate Point" or "Cool Point" or whatever when they gain a level, and then add extras based on particularly awesome stuff (or, you know, whatever you feel like giving them for).

Chronos
2008-07-02, 10:11 PM
How is this any different from saying "Instead of the barbarian lopping the orc chieftain's head off his shoulders, it's 'Roll attack. Now roll damage. <number> rinse and repeat.'."? Sure, you could just run combats according to the Rule of Cool, and some folks do just that (it's called freeform roleplaying). But that's a very different game than D&D.

If you think the numbers alone are too dry, you're free to describe the results in as much detail as you want. And if your players weren't enjoying the skill check part of the game as much as (say) combat, they wouldn't be making the attempts in the first place.

EndlessWrath
2008-07-02, 10:26 PM
And if your players weren't enjoying the skill check part of the game as much as (say) combat, they wouldn't be making the attempts in the first place.

Although I agree with your first point I don't agree with this one. Players love to show off. They don't think "gee, you know what would be cool for me to do next turn? Roll a normal attack with a +7 enhancement! and roll damage! That's something Nobody has ever seen!"

no. they think of something amazing their character would do... because people tend to make AMAZING EPIC ADVENTURERS...even at first level.

It makes perfect sense to me how a person would conceive the notion in a pirates game to jump off the crow's nest, swing down a rope and land, to make a grand entrance of some sort.

Simplifying skill checks in my opinion (so you only have to roll one instead of 15 complicated ones.) is the best possible option.

Deth Muncher
2008-07-02, 11:44 PM
Use a d% system for the checks? Like, say Bob the Fighter wants to valliantly swing down from the crows nest, cut the ropes and land on a pirate.
Roll the d%. The closer he gets to 100, the better. He rolled a 100? He does exactly what he said. He rolls a 80-99? He pretty much does what he said, but he gets a minus to the attack on the pirate he was trying to land on. 60-79? Misses the pirate completely, but lands safely. 21-59? He just barely makes it to the ground safely, and is shaken this round. The pirate on the ground he was trying to hit can make an AoO. 20 and under should be the really bad stuff. 10-19? He's prone on the ground, and is shaken. Pirate takes AoO. 3-9? He falls, possibly breaking a limb. He's prone, shaken, and needs a reflex roll to keep his...say...arm from snapping. If he gets a 2? Multiple appendages are threatened, and he's prone/stunned for more rounds. On a natural 1? He completely misses the rope when jumping out, takes falling damage, needs to make rolls to see if he keeps his appendages unbroken, and needs to make an attack roll on the pirate with horrible negatives to see if he actually falls on him. A successful pirate-glomp should deal them both d6 points.


And that's just off the top of my head. The d% system can be much simpler, though.

Waspinator
2008-07-03, 12:16 AM
I would go with the taking 10 thing. If 10 + their modifier is enough for them to succeed, just let them do it without the roll unless it's something that's very risky and dangerous where the chance of failure is meaningful.

nagora
2008-07-03, 05:42 AM
Roll the d%. The closer he gets to 100, the better. He rolled a 100? He does exactly what he said. He rolls a 80-99? He pretty much does what he said, but he gets a minus to the attack on the pirate he was trying to land on. 60-79? Misses the pirate completely, but lands safely. 21-59? He just barely makes it to the ground safely, and is shaken this round. The pirate on the ground he was trying to hit can make an AoO. 20 and under should be the really bad stuff. 10-19? He's prone on the ground, and is shaken. Pirate takes AoO. 3-9? He falls, possibly breaking a limb. He's prone, shaken, and needs a reflex roll to keep his...say...arm from snapping. If he gets a 2? Multiple appendages are threatened, and he's prone/stunned for more rounds. On a natural 1? He completely misses the rope when jumping out, takes falling damage, needs to make rolls to see if he keeps his appendages unbroken, and needs to make an attack roll on the pirate with horrible negatives to see if he actually falls on him. A successful pirate-glomp should deal them both d6 points.


And that's just off the top of my head. The d% system can be much simpler, though.
That's pretty good. I'd be tempted to add the character's level to that roll too. I'd drop having ratings for the skills completely - you either have athletics or you don't, although I might allow someone to have "secondary skills" which allow a roll but not adding the character's level.

So something like this:

If you have an applicable primary skill: roll d%+level, results as above.

If you have an applicable secondary skill: roll d%, results as above.

If you have no applicable skill: roll d%, results as above, treat any score higher than 2x an applicable ability score (Dex in this case) as 01.

Skills in 2e+ dilute the class concept and I think something like this might fix that problem.

Human Paragon 3
2008-07-03, 08:55 AM
Or, you could give everybody a swasbuckling skill instead, which would encompass basically every heroic activity you can think of (especially on a ship during combat). On a player's turn, he announces he wants to swashbuckle and rolls a generic DC 20 check (or something like it). Success indicates that he can buckle swashes that turn, and each point over twenty they reach allows them to add an additional detail to their exploits. A roll of 25 or higher indicates that you win some sort of combat bonus, like making an opponent flat footed, or a dissarm. For instance:

Its my turn so I roll a Swashbuckling check. I get a 23 on my check, entitling me to buckle some swash, and add 3 extra details to my exploit. I then narrate my actions:

I climb up to the crows nest...
+1 I grab the rope
+2 I cut it loose with my sabre
+3 And I swing down to the deck below!

If I had rolled 24, I could add "landing next to the Pirate King!" and if I had rolled a 25 I could add "Taking him by surprise!" and the P.K. would be flat footed allowing sneak attack.

Alternatively, if I rolled a 19 or lower, I would know that I couldn't buckle swash this turn, and instead I would make some other action like untying a rope, firing my pistol, or just fighting the nearest pirate.

Another_Poet
2008-07-03, 09:04 AM
Here's the trick. House rule 4.0 skills. Redo skills. Make 1 check for athletics. 1 check for acrobatics. 1 perception check. etc. Now you'd have to figure out how to balance this using the 3.5 rank system. (4.0 doesn't use ranks) by either letting keep their # of skill points and just making the DC a little higher or something like that.

Paizo's Pathfinder RPG does this. And it's free. Just go to their website, register, and download.

The classes aren't all done yet but the skill system is in great shape.

xPANCAKEx
2008-07-03, 09:34 AM
let them roll the skill checks, but make the challenge for them to come up with descriptions for their rolls - that puts the excitement/creativity back in the players hands

then it becomes something along these lines:

"ok, im gunna try and swing on that rope. rolling check"
*dm checks behind screen* "you barely passed"
"Agathor the Mighty doesn't look so mighty as he barely manages to cling to the rope, getting some rope burn, wincing in pain as he tries to kick the boarding priate off the plank. rolling attack"

as opposed to
"ok, im gunna try and swing on that rope. rolling check"
*dm checks behind screen* "you barely passed"
"ok... now im going to hit that guy. Attack roll"

let the players add the flavour to it all and they soon won't mind the million and one skill checks, and will get a decent kick out of it

and extra points to anyone who recognises the PC name

Talya
2008-07-03, 09:55 AM
The DCs for many things get set way too high.

Think about it: You are likely an utterly untrained commoner in D&D terms for most skill checks. Could you do what the player is going to describe to you with any degree of success? If so, the DC should be well under 10. Perhaps even lower. At that point, you're looking at automatic success even on a roll of 1 most of the time.

TempusCCK
2008-07-03, 10:23 AM
I've been giving it some thought and it's not that I want to remove skill checks entirely from the game, I want to remove movement skill checks like, jump, climb, balance and tumble ( in some situations). To me, it just feels like I'm describing too much of the players movement when I'm asking them for all kinds of skill checks. I like things like spot, open locks, move silent, and all that other stuff that should prompt a response from the DM. I just feel like I'm railroading so much when I'm describing how a character clambers up the rope because he rolled me a climb check.

Epinephrine
2008-07-03, 10:43 AM
Sounds like house ruling it to just take 10 on these skills even under stress makes sense; you could add that if you are injured while doing them you have to roll, but takng 10 should allow players with a bit of an investment in the skills to simply state how they are getting somewhere and do so; the rules for moving through trees (climb and balance checks) would be pretty applicable to life on a ship; a well rigged ship would allow you to move about with a check of 15 or so, so it's a mere +5 you'd be looking for. Still charge them double move for going up rigging, and let them move double if they have a reasonable way to get down faster (swinging on a loose rope, sliding down).

My current character has pretty high checks on balance, climb, jump and tumble (for his level), so the DM simply lets me do some flashy stuff, and doesn't always bother to check dice if it suits the moment (and it's not pushing the limits - if it's a take 10 kind of moment).

If you want more cinematics, add that important NPCs and the players can also make acrobatic charges, that allows them to do fantasitc jump/tumble routines to get to their target. It's your game, don't be afraid to change the rules to suit it, just make sure that the players have fair warning about rule changes and that you're not screwing their character over with them (for example, if you give everyone the ability to take 10 on these checks, and someone has that ability through a prestige class like thief-acrobat, you should give them a different bonus to make up for it).

kladams707
2008-07-03, 11:48 AM
So right now I'm running a shipboard campaign, and I ran my first session yesterday and it went awesome, however, the more I think about it the more I dislike the way skill checks are being used in this particular setting.

Instead of a character falling from the crows nest grabbing onto a rope, cutting it and swinging to one of the ropes of the rigging of the foremast and sliding down from there, it became "roll climb" "-number-" rinse and repeat. It made what should have been an interesting action scene.... clunky at best.

So what ways can I change the issue to cut down the number of descriptions that I'm making for my players because I'm directing them through various skill checks?

I'm thinking for anything basic, you need at least training in the skill, for anything difficult you jsut need a certain number of points in the skill. 10th level characters should be able to swing and climb on ropes just fine, especially with 10 ranks in the skill. So, now, my character can describe his action instead of going through a ton of checks.

Ideas, thoughts?

Hmmm, I'd say jump check to reach the rope (unless it was fall, then ignore this), dex check to grab a rope, 2-3 str checks to hold onto the rope (the first one made after the initial grab, and the second one when swinging, though another might be included to hold onto the rope when cutting).

I definitely prefer other suggestions though considering this one has a bunch of rolls (just different skill/ability uses)

Chronos
2008-07-03, 06:44 PM
Is it just me, or are most of the posters suggesting ways to add more rolls to skill checks, instead of less?

nargbop
2008-07-03, 07:26 PM
When I DMed, I had most-recent copies of everyone's skill ranks. I did not ask them to roll anything they could get with a ten. There were drama beads in this game (give me one for a reroll or a +10 on your next roll, act well and I'll give you one back), so the Rolls of Awesome were truly excellent, and the generic acts of skill and craft were passed over in narration-mode.

Curmudgeon
2008-07-04, 08:45 AM
Always use their "take 10" numbers when there's no stress.

You can make most of the skill checks simpler. Feel free to reduce all DCs by 2 to represent familiarity with common shipboard tasks, and add situational modifiers when appropriate. Also note that the rules allow for using tools:
Tool, Masterwork

This well-made item is the perfect tool for the job. It grants a +2 circumstance bonus on a related skill check (if any). Bonuses provided by multiple masterwork items used toward the same skill check do not stack. Each tool is specific to a skill use, so your PCs can stock up on climbing, roping, and balancing tools at 50 gp each. (To save time, don't waste a lot of effort in deciding how the tools look or are used -- just as you don't waste time figuring out what specific tools characters use to prepare food.)

Don't remove skill checks unless you really want to screw over any skill-intensive characters (Rogues especially). If you wipe out half of a character's distinguishing characteristics with a hand wave, those players are going to hate you.

The Epic rules increase those +2 synergy bonuses which you get for having 5+ ranks in a skill up to +4 at 25 ranks, +5 at 35 ranks, & c. You can be consistent with this by making the synergy bonuses +3 at 15 ranks, which makes getting to 12th level sweeter.

TempusCCK
2008-07-04, 09:07 AM
I'm not talking about removing all skill checks, only movement based ones like jump, climb, tumble and maybe balance. They all have huge ranks in them anyway, being as they're on a ship, so I'm probably just going to say that they can do whatever basic things with their character movements including what my friend so wonderfully put it "Real Pirate Sh*t"

So, now the next question, how do I encourage players to include these movement skills into their action descriptions when all they've ever known is the DM describing their skill checks for them? (A bad habit I picked up from our other regular DM, now trying to rectify.)