Skill Use

[Deleted]

Hi

How does AS&SH handle pc skills?

I like old school wherein a player has to describe what his character wants to do, and not just roll a dice and add his skill score looking to beat a certain DC

Thanks

[Ghul]

Hi traveller, and welcome to the ODD74 message board!

This game has no universal task resolution mechanic, and no sliding scale DC .

For example, if your 1st level thief is going to attempt to pick a locked door, in this game he has a 3-in-12 chance, unless he has a really high dex, in which he gets a 4-in-12 chance. This ability improves every other level. There is no DC for the lock, so you don't have to think about a level 28 DC lock. It's just a lock. A lock is a lock.

Other abilities might use a d6. For example, anyone can "listen" for a 1-in-6 chance of success. If the referee decides the noise being listened to is somewhat more audible, than that check might be a 2-in-6 chance.

There are many other examples.

Requiring a description is not necessarily mandatory. What if we are talking about "listen" again. Say the party is in a dungeon and they approach a door. If someone tells me they listen at it, I don't require an exact description of how they hearken to the door. That's usually good enough for me. If someone tells me their thief is going to hide, I want to know where in the room or where in the wilderness environment (say they are in the mountains) that they intend to hide. I don;t want just a roll in that case -- I want a bit more. But when we talk about all of this sort of thing, I think you are going to find differences in referees. Some just want the roll. Others want a full description of player character intent. Other want something in-between (which is about where I am).

Cheers,
Jeff T.

[blackadder23]

Sept 17, 2013 3:17:54 GMT -6 @traveller said:

I like old school wherein a player has to describe what his character wants to do, and not just roll a dice and add his skill score looking to beat a certain DC

You're in luck, because this is one of those games. The task resolution system is very similar to AD&D, so I assume most referees would run it the same way they run that game.

[Deleted]

Very encouraging!

Have you read that old school primer? There's a great narrative on how old school plays, and that's what I'm after

Can't wait the first time one of my players wants to stat a fire in the rain

[blackadder23]

I have read the Old School Primer, and that's exactly how I'm running my AS&SH campaign here.  No problems with the rules so far.

[chrisj]

I run the game similar to the way Jeff describes. I assume that the PC's are competent adventurers who have no problem doing things like climbing ropes, starting fires, riding horses, or whatever. My players just got a ship. Based on their backgrounds, I ruled that some of them were competent sailors.

Chris

[blackadder23]

Personally I don't have the players roll for anything unless it's life or death (combat, disarming a trap, climbing a high wall). Everything else is either automatic or flat out impossible. The idea of the characters all having a lot of piddling little skills, and the players constantly rolling for one thing or another, is absolutely intolerable to me.

[Ghul]

Sept 18, 2013 11:47:43 GMT -6 blackadder23 said:

Personally I don't have the players roll for anything unless it's life or death (combat, disarming a trap, climbing a high wall). Everything else is either automatic or flat out impossible. The idea of the characters all having a lot of piddling little skills, and the players constantly rolling for one thing or another, is absolutely intolerable to me.

I know what you mean in the context of some modern games that would have you check your ranks waste management, because if you don't have enough ranks, you are not going to understand how to leave your trash can by the curb, especially in a DC 15 city block.

But more seriously, what about non-life threatening checks like tracking, picking a lock, picking a pocket, and so forth?

[chrisj]

I have a similar philosophy as blackadder. I only want characters to roll for actions where determining success or failure is interesting. If it's crucial for the adventure that a lock be picked, I don't require a roll.

Chris

[blackadder23]

Sept 18, 2013 12:46:16 GMT -6 Ghul said:

I know what you mean in the context of some modern games that would have you check your ranks waste management, because if you don't have enough ranks, you are not going to understand how to leave your trash can by the curb, especially in a DC 15 city block.

Sept 18, 2013 12:46:16 GMT -6 Ghul said:

But more seriously, what about non-life threatening checks like tracking, picking a lock, picking a pocket, and so forth?

I suppose I should have said "life or death" in quotes. I mean when there's a chance of serious consequences for failure, and the PC is under some time pressure. If a thief has unlimited time to pick a mundane lock - if, for example, the party hauls a locked but non-trapped chest out of the dungeon and opens it between adventures - I won't make him roll. He'll get it sooner or later. But in a dungeon, by torchlight, with who knows what ready to jump out of the shadows and rend his flesh... he has to roll. And of course a failed lock pick, pick pockets, or tracking roll can lead to death. Especially in my games.

[mabon5127]

Sept 18, 2013 12:46:16 GMT -6 Ghul said:

Sept 18, 2013 11:47:43 GMT -6 blackadder23 said:

Personally I don't have the players roll for anything unless it's life or death (combat, disarming a trap, climbing a high wall). Everything else is either automatic or flat out impossible. The idea of the characters all having a lot of piddling little skills, and the players constantly rolling for one thing or another, is absolutely intolerable to me.

I know what you mean in the context of some modern games that would have you check your ranks waste management, because if you don't have enough ranks, you are not going to understand how to leave your trash can by the curb, especially in a DC 15 city block.

But more seriously, what about non-life threatening checks like tracking, picking a lock, picking a pocket, and so forth?

I would only have them roll if they were opposed in some way. I would have them roll to see how well they succeeded. Picking a lock would happen given enough time. A roll would tell me if they did it before the guards shift change. Tracking is automatic unless they are tracking something that cares If they are followed. Picking a pocket....well most folks are opposed to losing a purse so a roll it is!

Morgan

[odysseus]

Just read the primer and, while I agree with most of it, its " player's skill not character's skill" seems wrong to me.
I see no reason why Int/Wis/Cha should be related to the player but not the physical attributes and why have those attributes in the char sheet if you're not going to use them for anymore than deciding if the char knows some foreign languages or can cast extra spells.

Also, resuming modern games to a badly DMed D20 system game sounded a bit like he was preaching the converted and not trying to reach to the modern games players.

And I was surprised to find that what he was looking for in his game could be also found in games like Vincent Baker's "Apocalypse World" and its hacks.

Anyway, regarding dice rolls I try to stick to the "say yes or roll a die" and "make every roll counts" rules.

[Ynas Midgard]

Assassins have the ability to disguise themselves; the base chance of failure is 1-in-6. How would you handle disguise attempts of non-Assassins? What would their chances of failure be?

Second, I noticed that Scouts have the ability to determine the depth of a pit (2-in-6 chance of success). Again, what would the chances of non-Scouts be (say, they drop a lit torch into the pit)?

[joseph]

For disguise- I would increase the base chance of failure to at least 3-in-6 and apply modifiers.

For determining pits, I could see doing a 1-in-6 chance or increasing the die to d8 or d12... so 2-in-8 or 2-in-12 chance, depending on the difficulty. Really its totally up to the referee's discresion, these are just my thoughts.

[Ghul]

Assassins have the ability to disguise themselves; the base chance of failure is 1-in-6. How would you handle disguise attempts of non-Assassins? What would their chances of failure be?

Second, I noticed that Scouts have the ability to determine the depth of a pit (2-in-6 chance of success). Again, what would the chances of non-Scouts be (say, they drop a lit torch into the pit)?

Feb 14, 2014 10:41:20 GMT -6 joseph said:

For disguise- I would increase the base chance of failure to at least 3-in-6 and apply modifiers.

I would do the same, but I would also take into account the costuming at the PC's disposal. I mean, are we talking about a PC who just killed a priest of Apollo and is now dressed in that one's gown, prepared to enter the temple? Or are we talking about someone who had a local seamstress put a gown together that looks similar? There are so many factors that could sway my personal determination of the probability

For determining pits, I could see doing a 1-in-6 chance or increasing the die to d8 or d12... so 2-in-8 or 2-in-12 chance, depending onto he difficulty. Really its totally up to the referee's discresion, these are just my thoughts.

I would do pretty much the same thing as Joseph.

[chrisj]

I like to protect class skills as much as possible. Anyone can drop a coin down a pit, but only a scout is likely to get a precise result. Everyone else gets a vague "it's deep" or "it's really, really deep." Same idea with tracking or disguise or sucking venom out of a wound (hint: don't try to suck venom out of a wound in my game if you aren't a barbarian or shaman.)

I also assume that characters with a class skill are experts with that skill. They only need to roll if performing the skill under difficult or rushed circumstances.

[blackadder23]

Feb 14, 2014 14:54:05 GMT -6 chrisj said:

I like to protect class skills as much as possible. Anyone can drop a coin down a pit, but only a scout is likely to get a precise result. Everyone else gets a vague "it's deep" or "it's really, really deep." Same idea with tracking or disguise or sucking venom out of a wound (hint: don't try to suck venom out of a wound in my game if you aren't a barbarian or shaman.)

I also assume that characters with a class skill are experts with that skill. They only need to roll if performing the skill under difficult or rushed circumstances.

I agree with this. I see people denigrating the idea of thieving skills all the time on the grounds that "anybody can pick a lock" or "anybody can hide in shadows" and my response is: Really?  Have you tried it?

Picking a lock requires expertise IMO, and if you don't have it, your chance of success is zero. Sorry about that; I guess you should have played a thief.

[mabon5127]

Feb 14, 2014 15:07:21 GMT -6 blackadder23 said:

Feb 14, 2014 14:54:05 GMT -6 chrisj said:

I like to protect class skills as much as possible. Anyone can drop a coin down a pit, but only a scout is likely to get a precise result. Everyone else gets a vague "it's deep" or "it's really, really deep." Same idea with tracking or disguise or sucking venom out of a wound (hint: don't try to suck venom out of a wound in my game if you aren't a barbarian or shaman.)

I also assume that characters with a class skill are experts with that skill. They only need to roll if performing the skill under difficult or rushed circumstances.

I agree with this. I see people denigrating the idea of thieving skills all the time on the grounds that "anybody can pick a lock" or "anybody can hide in shadows" and my response is: Really?  Have you tried it?

Picking a lock requires expertise IMO, and if you don't have it, your chance of success is zero. Sorry about that; I guess you should have played a thief.

Brain surgery is easy too. Its the fella waking up afterward that takes some skill. You can try to walk quietly and generally be better than not trying at all...as the thief looks back shaking his head at the noise you are making. I've played skill based and class based systems and like them both. Class based skills represent a giving up of something to be good at something else. The thief is not as good a fighter because much of their time was spent otherwise. I think this is an advantage of a class system rpg. I've played some skill based systems that over time the characters resemble each other.

Morgan

[Ynas Midgard]

Thanks everyone!

[Ghul]

Feb 14, 2014 15:07:21 GMT -6 blackadder23 said:

Feb 14, 2014 14:54:05 GMT -6 chrisj said:

I like to protect class skills as much as possible. Anyone can drop a coin down a pit, but only a scout is likely to get a precise result. Everyone else gets a vague "it's deep" or "it's really, really deep." Same idea with tracking or disguise or sucking venom out of a wound (hint: don't try to suck venom out of a wound in my game if you aren't a barbarian or shaman.)

I also assume that characters with a class skill are experts with that skill. They only need to roll if performing the skill under difficult or rushed circumstances.

I agree with this. I see people denigrating the idea of thieving skills all the time on the grounds that "anybody can pick a lock" or "anybody can hide in shadows" and my response is: Really?  Have you tried it?

Picking a lock requires expertise IMO, and if you don't have it, your chance of success is zero. Sorry about that; I guess you should have played a thief.

Well, I'll let my players "try" almost anything, but it doesn't mean they are going to succeed at it. And even if they do, it does not mean that they will display the same level of proficiency as a character with the skill in their portfolio. For example, anyone can try hiding in the shadows of an alley. When a thief does it (successfully) it is done so with preternatural skill, granting nigh invisibility. Anyone can don the gown of a specific priest and wear a wig that's similar to the priest's hair. This might allow the disguised PC to enter a temple with his head down and get by an otherwise hairy situation unscathed. However, when an assassin does the same, he can step up to the altar and appear before his congregation, all eyes upon him and no one knowing the difference. Hell, I might even allow a non-spell caster to try reading a spell out of a book. The results, however, may not be as desired...

[blackadder23]

To me it's a difference of kind as well as degree. I'll permit any class to successfully disguise themselves in a basic way: for example, draping themselves in ceremonial robes and adopting a slumped posture and loping walk in order to infiltrate a temple full of ghoul-priests. But that kind of disguise will only survive the most casual examination. IMC assassins (and only assassins) can create disguises that could possibly survive serious scrutiny. Any other class wearing a fake beard is obviously wearing a fake beard, if anyone looks closely. So in that sense, no roll is needed for non-assassins who attempt to wear a disguise IMC. Either it automatically succeeds (concealing clothing in poor light without much scrutiny from the guards) or it automatically fails (pretty much every other case). In borderline cases, I would probably make a reaction check for the guards or other observers, rather than having the unskilled PC roll.