Help with OD&D for a skill junkie!

[arcadayn]

Okay, I ran my first OD&D session last Sat. Ironically, I played with an old buddy who I haven’t played with since the ‘80s (double old school points!). He hasn’t stayed active in RPGs, so old school is really all he knows. I, however, had a very hard time shaking my modern game habits. I found myself calling for tons of attribute checks and especially missed having observation/notice/perception checks.

By the time AD&D 2nd rolled around, I had already abandoned AD&D for Rolemaster. I was also big into TSR’s other RPGs (Boot Hill, Gangbusters, Top Secret) from the early ‘80s on. Needless to say, my DM habits are pretty firmly entrenched in skill systems. Does anyone have any good tips to help me shake the habit while running OD&D? The session I ran the other night was one on one, which I think partly contributed to my issue. I think I’ll start with re-reading Philotomy’s musings.

[coffee]

That's always a good place to start, yeah.

The thing about skill systems is that they can easily replace thinking. I'm not saying they ALWAYS do, but they can. It's easier to roll a die than to think your way around a problem.

So, to change from using skill rolls all the time, make the players do the thinking. Have them describe exactly what they're doing, and how. If what they do sounds reasonable, let them have it. Or give them a +1 (or more, if really good) on a d6. Most things can be done on a 1-2 on a d6; that +1 bumps it up to 1-3 (50%).

Using description and careful questioning puts people more into the situation than just rolling dice does. And using a d6 as your primary 'skill' die saves a lot of wear and tear on the d20.

Anyway, that's my two coppers.

[tavis]

arcadyn, I think the impulse to call for a skill check is to make the action more tense and/or rigorous. Especially when you're just playing with one person, it can feel like a giveaway - "OK, you go into the room, and you find a thousand gold pieces hidden under the bed! Next room..."

The things I like to say instead of calling for a skill check are:
- "What exactly are you doing?" This can be in addition to a skill check: e.g., they say "We search for secret doors; 2 in 6, because we have an elf, right?" and you go "Yeah, but first describe for me how you're doing it." This is most fun when you're listening for both a right and a wrong answer: pushing up on the torch sconce opens the door, down triggers a trap...

- "How long are you going to take to do this?" The implication here is that you'll get to make some wandering monster checks, or that the players will choose to do a slapdash job in order to not let you make them. You might combine this with asking for more detail: "A quick look through the chest shows only clothes, describe what else you want to do and I'll tell you how long it might take..."

- "How does your character know how to do that?" I do this for trained-only stuff; everyone can climb, only some people know how to use belaying equipment. The things this accomplishes are to a) establish how difficult the task is - you're not just giving it away, b) let the player tell about how awesome their PC is - "as new recruits we used to have to do this six times before breakfast", and c) let the player establish stuff about the setting that you can use later; what if one of the suspected traitors is another recruit from that same unit?

[waysoftheearth]

Perhaps try it without dice. If there are no dice handy, you will have to come up with another way of resolving things.

I usually allow any player who looks in the right place to find whatever is there to be found. No rolls whatever. This eliminates rules crunching for "modifiers" and encourages players for specifying where/what they are looking at/for.

I reserve die rolls for really risky things (e.g., leaping chasms) and things a player could not realistically describe (e.g., deciphering languages, concocting potions and so on).

[leon]

Sept 15, 2010 21:45:47 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

I reserve die rolls for really risky things (e.g., leaping chasms) and things a player could not realistically describe (e.g., deciphering languages, concocting potions and so on).

I agree with this. I don't like substituting good roleplaying with die rolls. If something can be described or role played, like an encounter with an NPC, searching a room or whatnot, I don't like to roll the dice.The die rolls are used only If something involves risk, can't be described or I don't know the first thing about (like picking a lock).

Of course, since there is no skill system in D&D, you have to come up with your own approach on how to resolve such issues, like the D6 system mentioned. For example there's the "Target 20 system" in Original Edition Delta (a set of house rules for D&D).

[cooper]

you could treat skills like the game treats "keen eared". whenever a player attempts something that the referee requires a roll for, say--tightrope walking over a ledge, intimidating a goblin. If the action is a success, then the character is retro-actively considered "skilled" in perform that function or even family of functions.

It doesn't matter if the DM likes to roll a d20 vs an ability score, or even assign target numbers, nor does it require lots of time during character creation where the danger is "customizing characters" before play begins. If a player successfully determines what direction North is while underground the first time they try, then simply write:

Find direction +1

If a player successfully performs said function on three separate occasions successfully with no failures then perhaps a +2 is in order. Still no failures after 5x? +3 etc.

This allows a character's personality to evolve during the game as well as decouple skills from levels which I don't particularly like.

[tavis]

Sept 15, 2010 21:45:47 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

I reserve die rolls for really risky things (e.g., leaping chasms)

Note that wandering monsters can make a routine task risky. In a place of safety you might say "after about half an hour you pick the lock", while in a dungeon you might make it a tense sesries of dice rolls: you have a 2 in 6 per turn to do it, % have 1 in 6 wandering monster, let's roll off to see who gets it fitrst!

[arcadayn]

Thanks for all the info everybody! There are some very cool ideas here. If anyone has more, please keep them coming!

tavis and Coffee- Tavis, you nailed my situation exactly. I feel like I have to make them roll to make it more tense. I will definitely by trying out you and Coffee's suggestions.

waysoftheearth - risky situations...good rule!

leon - I haven't seen Delta 20 yet. I'll have to take a look at that one.

cooper - I like your thoughts about separating skills from character creation. It's kind of like '78 Runequest in that you have to use the skill to increase it. Even though I'm trying to stay away from a skill system, that is a very interesting idea.

[waysoftheearth]

Sept 16, 2010 10:14:16 GMT -6 cooper said:

whenever a player attempts something that the referee requires a roll for, say--tightrope walking over a ledge, intimidating a goblin.

I have no issue whatever with Cooper's keen-eared suggestion... but "intimidating a goblin" is exactly the kind of thing that I would not recommend throwing dice for because it is something that a player could reasonably be expected to explain, or even role play.

[calithena]

We have had a couple good skill systems published in Fight On! I'll look them up - at least one of them is also on line somewhere else, so I should be able to find a link to that one for free.

[arcadayn]

Sept 27, 2010 17:21:32 GMT -6 calithena said:

We have had a couple good skill systems published in Fight On! I'll look them up - at least one of them is also on line somewhere else, so I should be able to find a link to that one for free.

Thank you!

[aldarron]

Sept 16, 2010 6:01:35 GMT -6 leon said:

Of course, since there is no skill system in D&D, you have to come up with your own approach on how to resolve such issues, like the D6 system mentioned. For example there's the "Target 20 system" in Original Edition Delta (a set of house rules for D&D).

Well, the saving throw categories are a skill system - how skilful a character is at handling a given type of event. Not that I'm reccomending this, because I wholeheartedly agree with Tavis, Coffee and the like, but if you are looking for target numbers to work with, you could extrapolate the saving throw categories to cover other things.

[coffee]

Oct 15, 2010 5:18:35 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Well, the saving throw categories are a skill system - how skilful a character is at handling a given type of event. Not that I'm reccomending this, because I wholeheartedly agree with Tavis, Coffee and the like, but if you are looking for target numbers to work with, you could extrapolate the saving throw categories to cover other things.

Oooh, never though of it that way. Nice! Have an exalt for that.

[talysman]

I'm firmly of the opinion that most of the time, players shouldn't be rolling to see if they can do something, but instead rolling to see if something unforeseen or unpleasant happens. I take the roll to see if a spike slips (after spiking a door) as an example. It's not that the character only has a 2/3rds chance of successfully spiking a door shut; it's that no matter how good the character is, there's a chance that something may go wrong. Similarly, I don't see Hear Noise as a skill, but as the chance that a monster will make an audible noise, even if it's behind a closed door and trying to be quiet.

That being said, I do have a semi-skill system, based on backgrounds. Here's the simplified system: players pick how old their characters are. Every year older than age 15 can be assigned to a professional background, like "sailor" or "hunter". If a particular task requires training, an appropriate background can cover it. If an appropriate background has 7 or more years of experience, they may get a +1 on relevant rolls. If there's some kind of contest or struggle, the one with more experience gets the +1. No one gets more than a +1.