MCDM RPG

[Finarvyn]

I'm seeing lots of ads for Matt Colville's new RPG, which is tentatively called the MCDM RPG. I'm guessing that I won't like it, as it's advertised as "Tactical and Heroic" but I'm wondering if anyone here has gotten into Matt's playtest and/or knows more about the game.

Here's what I think I know:

[1] You do damage on a miss, more damage on a hit. The way I've seen it explained is that you roll 2d6 for damage, then the opponent rolls a save for any extra damage you do. For example if you have a poison attack that does an extra 1d6 damage, the other guy rolls to see if he can shrug off that damage or takes the 1d6 poison on top of the damage already rolled.

[2] As a springboard off of #1, Matt said in a video that combat is boring. He heard a quote somewhere that D&D (I assume 5E, but might have been 3E or 4E) is 30 minutes of excitement packed into a 4-hour adventure. His solution, therefore, is the "always do damage" mantra to speed up play and let a player do something every turn. Roughly half of the people I talk to about this think it's awesome, half think it's the worst idea ever.

[3] I've heard that Matt's game style aligns closely with 4E, which is an edition that didn't really do it for me. If Matt is just recreating 4E in some manner, MCDM RPG has little interest for me. On the other hand, I enjoyed 13th Age and that was a blend of 3E and 4E which was pretty well done.

[4] Folks have said that if you look at Matt's other products you can see the key elements that will probably go into MCDM RPG, but I don't own any of those and am not interested in buying a bunch of stuff in order to determine if I want to buy a bunch of stuff.

[5] There are some sample photos on the backerkit page and I assume one can glean more from those.

And that's most of what I know at the moment. I'm guessing that MCDM RPG doesn't hit the interest for the demographic for the folks who post here, but I thought I'd launch a discussion thread to see what pops up.

[rredmond]

Some talk about his character generation ideas here: odd74.proboards.com/thread/15649/classes-skills-point-buy

Have a happy holiday season Fin!

[Starbeard]

Dec 25, 2023 5:46:55 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

not interested in buying a bunch of stuff in order to determine if I want to buy a bunch of stuff.

What kind of a copout gamer are you, anyway?

The game has only been on my radar because of a couple of forum
posts mentioning it, but I thought it was already released and just a d20/5e variant. Based on these descriptions, I think my reaction is pretty much the same as yours. Although, I have encountered his existing work in my 5e group, and we ditched it after initial tryouts because none of it was to our liking. It all seemed the classic example of the "successful playtest by ignoring what you've written" method of game design.

I'm sure he has enough of a following to spin this out into his own loyal group of MCDM players, at least for a little while. Props to him on that, if he knows what they like and can deliver on it, I like that the RPG community allows for smaller companies with loyal fanbases.

[Finarvyn]

Dec 25, 2023 9:48:33 GMT -6 Starbeard said:

I thought it was already released and just a d20/5e variant.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that playtesters would get something next spring and that the launch date for the game is some time in 2025. (But I've also read that playtesting is already underway, so that doesn't quite match.) Either way, not out yet.

More on the thing here: www.polygon.com/23989507/mcdm-rpg-backerkit-release-date-price

“We’re encapsulating decades of design experience into crafting an RPG experience that focuses on the heroes’ journey, filled with action and strategic combat,” Introcaso told Polygon in a statement. “It’s about making every character’s action significant, every battle a narrative in itself. Your character doesn’t just swing their sword. Monsters aren’t just bags of hit points. Every hero and monster turn is dynamic and full of cinematic action. We’ve been testing this game for months now. It’s already fun.”

The MCDM RPG will eschew the d20 system in favor of using primarily six-sided dice. Most challenges will be adjudicated by rolling 2d6 and adding d8s or d4s to represent situational advantages or disadvantages, or the strengths of your character class.

The game is focused on the cinematic rather than the more simulationist elements of D&D. The game runner, called the Director, is encouraged to only ask players for tests if the results of failure would be dramatic and not when they wouldn’t have much effect or would utterly derail the game. Similarly, there’s not all that much inventory management either. Characters are just assumed to have the gear they need to use their class features.

Initiative is determined by both the players and DM rolling a d6, with one member of the winning team acting first and then tagging an opponent to take their turn, going back and forth until every combatant has acted. Directors are also encouraged to call “Cut!” on an encounter if all of the major threats have been dealt with so fights end dramatically rather than feeling like a slog.

Most of the creature roles from Flee, Mortals!, like controller and minion, will also appear in the MCDM RPG. The 4th edition influence can also be found in rules for complex tests that resemble skill challenges, the use of the bloodied condition, and effects that can be shaken off by making rolls at the end of a turn.

The above is a Decembewr, 2023, article so it's pretty current.

[rayotus]

My impression is that it is as yet largely unfinished, and something about it smells off to me. It amazes me that people will pledge 3.5 MILLION bucks on smoke. Or ... maybe it doesn't amaze me. This is the result of Matt consistently making content for years and earning some measure of good will from his audience. His schtick really isn't for me, and even I have found a few of his videos I like and none that I absolutely loathe.

[skars]

The Dice mechanic sounds a lot like the custom dice FFG used for WFRP3/Star Wars/Genesys from that brief description. Not my cup of tea but we will see what becomes available.

[Starbeard]

Interesting rundown. I'm still chuckling that when I had first heard it mentioned I just assumed it was yet another 5e variant that MCDM was pushing extra hard after the OGL fiasco.

But I'm very out of loop on the RPG industry these years. Hoping to lure your 5e fanbase into something so drastically different seems like a bad idea, but maybe it isn't? All the outspoken 4e influence seems weird as well, but maybe it just shows that the new crowd of 5e players, who had no previous comparisons to set against 4e and color their perceptions, actually might have embraced 4e had it been out when they all started playing. It certainly leans into all the gameplay aspects that I think most 5e-only players find most gratifying.

Reading the overview of the system, it sounds very much not my cup of tea. It seems like the combat round will be even more involved and lengthy than 4e or 5e, which I already have little patience for, and all the stuff that I actually like about RPGs is getting chucked out as not important enough to bother with.

edit: I also feel like I've seen a range of games in the past 5-15 years that have touted pretty much all of these ideas mentioned in the MCDM blurb, and I don't think any of them made any splash at all once they hit market, except maybe for Monte Cook's system—which I also can't figure out, because I know a couple of people who are huge Cypher fans and read everything, but never seem to actually want to play it. But like I said, I'm out of the loop, so maybe this is exactly what everyone is looking for.

[dicebro]

He talks too fast for me. Like he’s on speed. If you talk that fast I reckon a referee could fit 5 hours of 5e into 1 hour. Buuuut, if you just play Oe then you can make 1 hour of d&d feel like 1 hour.

[jeffb]

I'm kind of mad I didn't hear about the KS until it was pretty much over, but I've avoided him in recent years because I really don't care for him on a personal level, so that's my own fault.

However, much (but not all) of this sounds right up my alley and a game I'd want to check out unless combat is obviously going to be a slog like RAW 4E. He understands the good bits of 4E and I'm glad to see him incorporating them (still, 13th Age will be hard to beat in that respect). He made a few solid vids in years past about using 4E ideas to enhance 5E play (like his 4E Monsters/MM vid).

If it's not over the top expensive, I may throw some $ down for a PDF of the game when it surfaces.

[phantomtim]

Dec 26, 2023 5:10:42 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

Dec 25, 2023 9:48:33 GMT -6 Starbeard said:

I thought it was already released and just a d20/5e variant.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that playtesters would get something next spring and that the launch date for the game is some time in 2025. (But I've also read that playtesting is already underway, so that doesn't quite match.) Either way, not out yet.

Patreon backers received the playtest today (December 26). It includes pre-gens, rules, and an adventure, which includes maps, tokens, and monsters. The rules document is 32 pages long, so it's more of a quickstart document at this stage, but there's plenty here to run a game.

[phantomtim]

Dec 26, 2023 10:07:07 GMT -6 skars said:

The Dice mechanic sounds a lot like the custom dice FFG used for WFRP3/Star Wars/Genesys from that brief description. Not my cup of tea but we will see what becomes available.

These are the rules for making a test roll:

MCDM RPG Playtest said:

Whenever you make a test, you roll 2d6 and add the appropriate characteristic score (as determined by the Director) to the total of the roll. The Director chooses a target number (TN) and interprets the test’s degree of success.

It doesn't feature the type of narrative dice that you find in Genesys and other FFG games.

[jeffb]

Dec 27, 2023 1:56:24 GMT -6 phantomtim said:

Dec 26, 2023 10:07:07 GMT -6 skars said:

The Dice mechanic sounds a lot like the custom dice FFG used for WFRP3/Star Wars/Genesys from that brief description. Not my cup of tea but we will see what becomes available.

These are the rules for making a test roll:

MCDM RPG Playtest said:

Whenever you make a test, you roll 2d6 and add the appropriate characteristic score (as determined by the Director) to the total of the roll. The Director chooses a target number (TN) and interprets the test’s degree of success.

Paging Ken St. Andre, paging Ken St. Andre

[Finarvyn]

Dec 27, 2023 4:49:25 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Paging Ken St. Andre, paging Ken St. Andre

I assume that this is a T&T reference, but I think that the all-d6 mechanic of T&T is very different from what I'm hearing about MCDM. Maybe I missed something?

[Starbeard]

Dec 27, 2023 12:14:08 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

Dec 27, 2023 4:49:25 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Paging Ken St. Andre, paging Ken St. Andre

I assume that this is a T&T reference, but I think that the all-d6 mechanic of T&T is very different from what I'm hearing about MCDM. Maybe I missed something?

Maybe he's referring to the saving throw mechanic, where you roll 2d6 and add your ability score against a number based on the danger level if the save.

[jeffb]

Dec 27, 2023 12:14:08 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

Dec 27, 2023 4:49:25 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Paging Ken St. Andre, paging Ken St. Andre

I assume that this is a T&T reference, but I think that the all-d6 mechanic of T&T is very different from what I'm hearing about MCDM. Maybe I missed something?

T&T SRs are 2d6+ ability score vs a TN (lvl1=20, Lvl2=25, etc). While the TNs are probably not in chunks of 5, that is what Tim posted is the check mechanic for MCDM (see what I quoted).

Personally I love T&Ts SR system- no modifiers for each ability score, just use the ability scores. Ive never understood why D&D never used the scores themselves for anything, but instead are converted to modifiers and/or percentages chances. Makes no sense.

[ochrejelly]

I have no idea who Matt Colville is but I've been absolutely bombarded with these ads. I watched a couple minutes of a video and considered offing myself. No thanks.

[Finarvyn]

Dec 31, 2023 14:06:13 GMT -6 ochrejelly said:

I have no idea who Matt Colville is but I've been absolutely bombarded with these ads. I watched a couple minutes of a video and considered offing myself. No thanks.

I thought he was a 3E or 4E D&D designer, but now I'm not so sure. General Google-Fu seems to indicate he has done a couple of 5E supplements (not through WotC) and a podcast and has some connection to the Critical Role comic and maybe Matt Mercer.

Honestly, from his videos I somehow expected a few more solid credits.

[tdenmark]

Dec 25, 2023 5:46:55 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

[3] I've heard that Matt's game style aligns closely with 4E, which is an edition that didn't really do it for me. If Matt is just recreating 4E in some manner, MCDM RPG has little interest for me. On the other hand, I enjoyed 13th Age and that was a blend of 3E and 4E which was pretty well done.

He speaks fondly of 4e, a lot. And has claimed many times that the best things in 5e are from 4e, just dumbed down and simplified for a wider audience.

I couldn't disagree more with his philosophy of game design and what makes an RPG "fun".

What he has going for him is he is very articulate and expresses his ideas effectively, his videos can be enjoyable to watch if you are into the deep nerdery (which I am).

[Punkrabbitt]

I know nothing of him. I have no interest in this new thing. But I wish him lots of financial success and hopefully a product that draws new people into the hobby.

[soundchaser]

The current $3.5m+ results from very successful past crowd funded campaigns. I think the Strongholds & Followers (with other stuff) hit over $2m. Then there was Kingdoms & Warfare, now Flee, Mortals!

Current traction? … likely the OGL debacle is a factor.

His design chops go way back. He has credits in pls es like Dune: Chronicles of the Imperium, and Star Trek (both of Last Unicorn Games).

I think he borrows from varied places, World Engine, 4th Ed D&D, and anywhere he sees interesting design DNA… I like that he has a clear pitch about what ‘fun’ means for them. Such an obviously help people steer away or toward as they figure out more clearly what the game is about.

[jeffb]

The following popped into my youtube feed this evening. A few minutes in it shows the section of the introduction where they are fully embracing/telling you the game uses minis and grids- which is a huge red flag for me. As I've said many times, I "13th Aged" 4E from the get-go to eliminate the complexity and length of combats. And I run fewer combats in general no matter what edition/game (another reason I pretty much ignore XP).

Last time I ran minis/grids was when I ran PFBB for The Kids about 13-14 years ago. We used the flip mats and minis/pawns. It was fun for awhile, but eventually created analysis paralysis for The Kids. And that is my experience as well with Adults. I get some people love that, but it's not for me.

[Finarvyn]

Jan 1, 2024 19:56:30 GMT -6 jeffb said:

...they are fully embracing/telling you the game uses minis and grids- which is a huge red flag for me.

Last time I ran minis/grids was when I ran PFBB for The Kids about 13-14 years ago. We used the flip mats and minis/pawns. It was fun for awhile, but eventually created analysis paralysis for The Kids. And that is my experience as well with Adults. I get some people love that, but it's not for me.

And that may be the issue I have with most RPGs nowadays. My group (all family) has bought into the "buy a mini for my character" vibe and once they buy (and often paint) a mini, of course they want to use it.

That has led to the evolution from my old "theater of the mind" campaigns to the newer "count and move" style games. I had always assumed that it was "the rules" to blame, but it's highly possible that in reality it's the whole mini/grid mentality as you suggested instead. Must ponder this further.

In a way I hope it's a function of the mini/grid thing, since I have spent a lot of time and money looking for a "better" rules set that makes me and my family happy at the same time.

[jeffb]

Jan 2, 2024 14:29:56 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

Jan 1, 2024 19:56:30 GMT -6 jeffb said:

...they are fully embracing/telling you the game uses minis and grids- which is a huge red flag for me.

Last time I ran minis/grids was when I ran PFBB for The Kids about 13-14 years ago. We used the flip mats and minis/pawns. It was fun for awhile, but eventually created analysis paralysis for The Kids. And that is my experience as well with Adults. I get some people love that, but it's not for me.

And that may be the issue I have with most RPGs nowadays. My group (all family) has bought into the "buy a mini for my character" vibe and once they buy (and often paint) a mini, of course they want to use it.

That has led to the evolution from my old "theater of the mind" campaigns to the newer "count and move" style games. I had always assumed that it was "the rules" to blame, but it's highly possible that in reality it's the whole mini/grid mentality as you suggested instead. Must ponder this further.

In a way I hope it's a function of the mini/grid thing, since I have spent a lot of time and money looking for a "better" rules set that makes me and my family happy at the same time.

I get it. Certainly one has to take the group into account, and what they want. At the same time, DMs do all the heavy lifting and at the end of the day if you are not running something you really want to run, it's no fun and you burn out- even with family.

My Kids group were all in the 11-13 range when we started and they were completely new and didn't know anything else- the PFBB looked cool, and it hooked them in with visuals- and as a ruleset presentation it was great- very much like a basic set of yore. However, over time the complication and analysis paralysis got to them, and it was taking forever to get much play done or get through a module/adventure. So I told them about more simple versions of the games where it was all easy to do in your imagination, there were less rules/more rulings, and you could do more in the game with less complexity. They were excited, and I started up a S&W game with some additions/ideas they liked from the PFBB, things I liked from other editions, and used my OGB Forgotten Realms as a baseline. They loved it, and we played it for about a year. As they got older we experimented/branched out with some other systems like DCC, 13th Age, 5E, C&C, Whitestar, RQ (actually OQ), Star Wars (FFG), Dungeon World, and a couple others for one shots.

The only time I ever pulled out a map/tokens was for the Star Wars game from FFG and that uses a range band system (as does 13th Age), and it was not bad. 13th Age also uses a range band system and I prefer that over anything hard coded for movement. And that would be my recommendation- use a simple range band system. That way they can throw a mini down, you can too and you don't need to use a gridded map and it gives them the visual with way less worrying about how many squares and diagonals and how much area they can cover with XYZ spell, etc. For 13th Age, there is very simple character class system out there (fan creation) that works flawlessly for people who want fun stuff to do, are creative/like to improvise (and you get to work with them on this stuff), and the classes are no more rules intense than a Moldvay Character. I adopted that with The Kids and it went over fantastic- and we used it thereafter playing 13th Age. The core game classes are really interesting and I feel are fun to play, but I think they work better for way more experienced/hardcore players.

As I've gotten older, I'm just not much for the typical (old or new school) D&D game experience- I much prefer Dungeon World where things like rounds, movement, initiative, etc. are thrown out the window, or 13th Age if I'm going to hew closer to D&D but still want some modern/fresh takes. But sometimes people want D&D- and at that point I'm just grabbing Whitebox or Moldvay/Cook/Marsh, jotting down some high level (overview, not experience level) house rules, and running with the same mindset as I do with DW and 13th Age (and did with that original S&W game for The Kids)

[geoffrey]

Jan 2, 2024 14:29:56 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

My group (all family) has bought into the "buy a mini for my character" vibe and once they buy (and often paint) a mini, of course they want to use it.

That has led to the evolution from my old "theater of the mind" campaigns to the newer "count and move" style games. I had always assumed that it was "the rules" to blame, but it's highly possible that in reality it's the whole mini/grid mentality as you suggested instead. Must ponder this further.

In a way I hope it's a function of the mini/grid thing, since I have spent a lot of time and money looking for a "better" rules set that makes me and my family happy at the same time.

I have a strong opinion on that:

It is NOT the rules. The problem is with the mini/grid mentality. I know this from experience:

My old group has always been pure theater of the mind. Perhaps 4 or 5 times over the decades, we tried miniatures and a grid. Immediately, as in without the passage of even a minute's time, all the focus was on the grid. Nobody was visualizing the fantasy world. Nobody was thinking about what his character could say or do in that world. No. None of that. Instead the game became nothing but the game board/grid. It became nothing more than counting squares. It's maddening and depressing to see a player bouncing his miniature along, counting each square: "Let's see. I can move 9 squares: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine." Gods, it's like D&D-themed Monopoly.

Anyone who likes that sort of thing or who can make miniatures work in D&D, more power to you. But me? I loathe it.

[hamurai]

Using grid maps changes play to a tactical board game. Some players enjoy this, some game systems (like 5E) encourage it because you'll get the most out of your character's abilities that way.

My now-online group started 5E shortly after it became available in Germany and we used theatre of the mind in combination with the maps from the starter set (Mine of Phandelver), which worked well. When most of our players moved, we changed to Roll20 and later Foundry, and we immediately became focused on tactical battles - playing online, we were even more focused on the battle map on our monitors. We tried several ways to get back the feel we had when we started, but it never worked out well enough until we ditched 5E and started a Warhammer FRP 4E group. And this also solved our problems in other systems when playing online, and it works well with minis at the table:

Combat encounters (as well as some other special scenes) are played out on an "atmo pic", a picture which delivers the atmosphere of the scene and which often features some of the scene's points of interest. Miniatures are placed on the parts of the picture where the characters interact, or somewhere in the middle or the edge, if they're at no specific place.
For example, I remember a picture of a cave, with an entrance, a little way deeper into the cave and an old witch hut at the end of the cave, with a small pond next to it. We investigated the scene - one player stayed at the entrance as a guard, two moved to the hut, one looked at the pond. We moved the miniatures to these features of the picture. More details were added via theatre of the mind (on the VTT we took notes on the atmo pic). In combat (2 zombies showed up), each feature was 1 zone of the map and we had to use a full move to get to the next one, except the pond, which was close enough to get to the hut more quickly.

So, we still use minis/VTT tokens, but without a grid on our "map". The map/pic can be anything from a true map to a picture which is easily generated by one of the great AIs to perfectly fit the scene our DM has in mind. The instant the grid was gone, the battles were more fluid again, we didn't count grids anymore and we used our imagination to visualize the scene, supported by the atmo pic.

[skars]

Dec 27, 2023 1:56:24 GMT -6 phantomtim said:

Dec 26, 2023 10:07:07 GMT -6 skars said:

The Dice mechanic sounds a lot like the custom dice FFG used for WFRP3/Star Wars/Genesys from that brief description. Not my cup of tea but we will see what becomes available.

These are the rules for making a test roll:

MCDM RPG Playtest said:

Whenever you make a test, you roll 2d6 and add the appropriate characteristic score (as determined by the Director) to the total of the roll. The Director chooses a target number (TN) and interprets the test’s degree of success.

It doesn't feature the type of narrative dice that you find in Genesys and other FFG games.

It was the part about adding the d4 or d8 to the roll for situational advantage that reeked of the narrative/stance effects from wfrp3+ games

[tkdco2]

What I'd like to know about the MCDM rpg is what makes it different from the rpgs I already have. What can it do that other rpgs can't or don't? Are the mechanics different from D&D, and are they playable? I'm not interested in getting yet another D&D clone, but I've seen games where the game mechanics were just terrible.

[thegreyelf]

Dec 27, 2023 4:49:25 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Dec 27, 2023 1:56:24 GMT -6 phantomtim said:

These are the rules for making a test roll:

Whenever you make a test, you roll 2d6 and add the appropriate characteristic score (as determined by the Director) to the total of the roll. The Director chooses a target number (TN) and interprets the test’s degree of success.

Paging Ken St. Andre, paging Ken St. Andre

Sounds a little like my Powered by O.R.C.S. games: Spellcraft & Swordplay and (if you like) Wasted Lands.

[havard]

Jan 3, 2024 6:33:39 GMT -6 hamurai said:

Using grid maps changes play to a tactical board game. Some players enjoy this, some game systems (like 5E) encourage it because you'll get the most out of your character's abilities that way.

My now-online group started 5E shortly after it became available in Germany and we used theatre of the mind in combination with the maps from the starter set (Mine of Phandelver), which worked well. When most of our players moved, we changed to Roll20 and later Foundry, and we immediately became focused on tactical battles - playing online, we were even more focused on the battle map on our monitors. We tried several ways to get back the feel we had when we started, but it never worked out well enough until we ditched 5E and started a Warhammer FRP 4E group. And this also solved our problems in other systems when playing online, and it works well with minis at the table:

Combat encounters (as well as some other special scenes) are played out on an "atmo pic", a picture which delivers the atmosphere of the scene and which often features some of the scene's points of interest. Miniatures are placed on the parts of the picture where the characters interact, or somewhere in the middle or the edge, if they're at no specific place.
For example, I remember a picture of a cave, with an entrance, a little way deeper into the cave and an old witch hut at the end of the cave, with a small pond next to it. We investigated the scene - one player stayed at the entrance as a guard, two moved to the hut, one looked at the pond. We moved the miniatures to these features of the picture. More details were added via theatre of the mind (on the VTT we took notes on the atmo pic). In combat (2 zombies showed up), each feature was 1 zone of the map and we had to use a full move to get to the next one, except the pond, which was close enough to get to the hut more quickly.

So, we still use minis/VTT tokens, but without a grid on our "map". The map/pic can be anything from a true map to a picture which is easily generated by one of the great AIs to perfectly fit the scene our DM has in mind. The instant the grid was gone, the battles were more fluid again, we didn't count grids anymore and we used our imagination to visualize the scene, supported by the atmo pic.

I feel the same way. My group plays a wide range of more recent and older editions as well as a bunch of non-D&D games. However, for the most part we only use theatre of the mind these days. I do enjoy collecting and painting miniatures, but I use them more as inspiration rather than moving them around on a grid. We started playing online during Covid and have kept that up, but in general we just play via Discord as we would have in person using theatre of the mind descriptions. Sometimes a bit more visualization is useful online, but we decided not to keep using platforms like Roll20 after a few early attempts.

I really like Matt Colville's videos on youtube (even though I don't agree with everything) and I have supported most of his Kickstarters. However, I decided to pass on the MCDM RPG Kickstarter. I may pick up the game later, depending on how it evolves.

-Havard

[jeffb]

Jan 7, 2024 6:49:33 GMT -6 thegreyelf said:

Dec 27, 2023 4:49:25 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Paging Ken St. Andre, paging Ken St. Andre

Sounds a little like my Powered by O.R.C.S. games: Spellcraft & Swordplay and (if you like) Wasted Lands.

Has something changed in recent editions of your games, Jason?

As I recall in my old old S&S copy, it was a 2d6 roll plus the ability Score modifier VS a static target number..?