Skills Issues

[Jagged]

If you change the basis of skills to be less related to characteristics how will you deal with everyman skill rolls?

What do you do in a general game when someone has to make a roll for a skill they don't have? As a ref I just make the roll against the most appropriate characteristic.

I think you are in danger of making skills too important and too inflexible.

[nexus]

I would not want to see Skill decoupled from characteristics. Altering the balance would be okay but your native ability should have some impact on your performance. Otherwise you end up with things like Palladium where a person with who's functionally mentally handicapped is exactly as good a neurosurgeon as someone who's has slightly above average intellect (good IQ but not high enough to get a skill bonus).

[mudpyr8]

1. I like the language system as is - Hero is one of the few games that gets it when it comes to languages. I think adding an INT roll, at progressive penalties, when attempting to communicate a Fluency 3 concept to a Fluency 1 listener works well, providing a roll when needed, but not having a roll in general. My rule is if there is one level of difference, the listener makes an INT roll to comprehend (possibly complimented by the speaker's INT if he is aware of the communication gap), and then -3 per level of difference after that.

2. Unify CV and Skill progression. This also ties into your combat comment about wanting to have more of an 11 + OCV = attack skill. Here's what I suggest:

a. Every characteristic has a "Roll Mod" = CHAR/3.
b. Base target is 8- + Roll Mod - Difficulty.
c. Difficulty is DCV, ECV, or DIFF where DIFF = the difficulty of the task. An average, professional level task is a DIFF of -3. Easy would be +0, just like attacking a target of DCV 0. Every 3 levels of difficulty then reflects an order of expertise better (so, expert is -6, master is -9, grand master is -12, legendary is -15, etc.).
d. Each level of skill adds to your roll. The first 3 levels cost 1 point, the next 3 cost 2 points, the next 3 cost 3 points, etc. So, learning Breakfall at +3 with a DEX of 10 (Roll Mod +3) gets you an overall roll of 14-. However, the average task is a -3, so the net result is an 11-, just like now. There are a couple of pluses here as well:
d.1. Roll Mods can be applied as passive difficulty, like DCV. If the above skill were Stealth with a roll of 14-, the character would need to make the roll by the PER Roll Mod of the enemy. If the enemy were actively scanning for the characters you could use the same mechanic as Block, which would be PER vs. Stealth Mod - failure and the stealthy character still has to make it by their passive PER Roll Mod, success and, like a Block, the character is spotted.
d.2. This allows you to use the same modifiers for combat such as blind and so on with regular skills. Additionally, you can allow "casual skill use" at 1/2 value (or a flat -3) to do things in a casual manner

I think this provides more granularity in the skill system, which is something you were looking for and unifies the skill and combat rolls. There are many approaches to how this could be codified or presented, especially if you want to set the baseline at 0 instead of 3, but the gist is the same.

Thanks.

[mudpyr8]

Oh, I forgot to mention, although I'm sure you can infer from the above. This eliminates familiarities. In order to be skilled you have to invest 3 points in a skill, so investing 1pt gives you that skill at a -2. Skills which allow untrained use (weapons, certain everyman skills) would then essentially default to 8- (or a -3 penalty essentially), and other skills (breakfall, acrobatics, etc.) simply couldn't be attempted untrained.

[steamteck]

I posit that in fantasy/superheroics/science fiction supremely intelligent/athletic characters exist who in no way trained to get where they were (Spiderman's acrobatic prowess did not come from a lifelong dedication to Gymnastics, The Fixer did not train at the finest schools)
but some who lack these gifts become very skilled as well. Therefore the perfect system would take both into account.

Hey look! We've got that already. Yay us!

I agree keep skills linked to characteristics. Models heroic fiction outstandingly.

[StGrimblefig]

Here are my suggestions:

• Keep the skills based on Characteristics, but decouple them from point recursion -- by that I mean that the initial value of the skill is based on the Characteristic, but the skill is not automatically improved by later improving the Characteristic that it is based upon. You have to buy skill levels to improve the skill, always.
  
• Bring combat more in-line with the skill system. It is already very similar to an opposed skill roll, but the basic combat "skill" is different and confusing for new players. Instead of a Weapon Familiarity skill, make it a Combat skill, with subcategories for the different weapon types. Then Combat Skill Levels make more sense, because they modify the Combat skill.
  
• Introduce a new Background Skill, called "Social Environment," which is similar to Knowledge, Science and Professional Skills, in that the player must choose what social environment the character is experienced with. This skill would replace the current skills Bureaucracy, High Society and Streetwise. Additional subcategories could include Geek Culture, Goth Culture, the Entertainment Industry, etc.
  
• Clearly delineate Skills from Talents. If it does not require a roll and/or cannot be improved with practice/study, then it should not be a skill. Currently, there are several Skills that do not require a roll, they merely allow the character to do something (e.g. the Autofire Skills). These are not Skills, they are Talents.
  
• Familiarities should be used for Information about the skill domain, not as a cheap "Hail Mary" skill replacement. Just because you may have read something about bombs on the internet does not give you the ability to defuse one.

Thanks for listening.

[Sean Waters]

I agree keep skills linked to characteristics. Models heroic fiction outstandingly.

Is that cause or effect? I know a lot of science skills and I'm really smart. Sure being really smart gives you a good reason for buying lots of science skills, but Hero is fundamentally (at the moment) a system that relies on point balance.

The characteristics that deal with skills are DEX, INT and PRE. Decouple them, adjust the charatceristic price if you like, but then build skill bonuses in as talents: Good with people - +2 SLs with interaction skills (10 points).

It is not even necessarily going to be more expensive than currently.

[Sean Waters]

Tell you what I would like to see: resistance skills. At present, if someone engages you in conversation it is unclear what you oppose that with. It would be nice to have a skill to do that with: Dissembling, perhaps.

Also I'd like to see interaction skills for bluffing (rather than hashing it with acting) and intimidation (rather than having to use interrogation). They seem sufficiently different to warrant their inclusion.

[steamteck]

Is that cause or effect? I know a lot of science skills and I'm really smart. Sure being really smart gives you a good reason for buying lots of science skills, but Hero is fundamentally (at the moment) a system that relies on point balance.

The characteristics that deal with skills are DEX, INT and PRE. Decouple them, adjust the charatceristic price if you like, but then build skill bonuses in as talents: Good with people - +2 SLs with interaction skills (10 points).

It is not even necessarily going to be more expensive than currently.

See Enforcer's example of Spider-Man. Base talent gives him high acrobatics.Well we'll never agree on this. I will say all this decoupling stuff is a deal breaker for me and leave it at that.

[eternal_sage]

Q: Should we make all the Skills “consistent” in terms of how they’re purchased?

mo'definately! a skill should be 3 points for a Char based roll (2 points for those KS/PS/SS etc) and 2 points per +1 bonus. things like Two Weapon Fighting are not skills, imho, because they are not rolled. they are talents, and should be moved there. if you roll it, its a skill, and they should all be costed the same.

Q: Should we change or streamline Combat Skill Levels?

depends on if you split DEX and CV, but i say yes, and towards cheaper as a point of CV is roughly 3 points (you get 1 point of CV per 9 DEX, 1 point of SPD for 9 DEX "close enough" and the benefits of initiative from actually buying up DEX +3) so that an overall level should be roughly 3 points, imho, but maybe 4 because it can be turned into DAM, which base CV cannot.

Q: Should Martial Arts be changed?

yes. they are not skills, nor talents, nor perks, they are a special entity unto themselves, and should be treated so. i don't think they need to be altered in one direction or the other as far as costing, etc, but i do believe they need to be upgraded to a unique position along with Char, Skills, Perks, and Talents.

[eternal_sage]

also, (having now read others comments) i agree that we need a Balance skill (instead of Breakfall, which doesn't even follow, imho), an Intimidate (although PRE attacks work for that, i suppose), a Perception skill, (because it doesn't make any sense being tied to INT, see my CHAR posts), and possibly a few other skills being split apart.

[Vondy]

Things to consider:

1. Assuming we keep characteristic links to skills, change the break point to CHAR/3 rather than CHAR/5; this would bring the system for skills in line with the combat system, which is extremely flexible and user friendly IMO.

The probelm with this is that it will result in higher skill rolls overall. The problem with that is that we're operating on a bell-curve and in terms of probabilities, those increases of +1 to +2 will be much more dramatic in terms of impact that at first they appear. We tried this in my game.... it was a problem.

[Edsel]

I printed off all of Steve's original posts in all of the 6th Edition threads and spent hours reading them last night and thinking. It is amazing how little I came up with to respond with though. However the opinions in this post are based only on what Steve has posted in message #1 of this thread, I haven't been influenced by what others have posted subsequently since I haven't read them yet. I will try to keep my comments brief since there is a hellava lot to read in these discussions.
[QUOTE=Steve Long;1536933]Q: Should we change the Skill rules so that Skills aren’t based on Characteristics?[QUOTE]
No, keep them as they are.

Q: Should we make all the Skills “consistent” in terms of how they’re purchased?

No. I like the current system.

Q: Should we reduce or increase the number of Skills in the core rulebook?

I am happy with the selection we have now. It is easy for the GM to add new skills if he thinks he needs them. I see no reason to mess with this much.

Q: Should we change or streamline Combat Skill Levels?

The only problem I see with CSL is that players try to abuse them unless the GM calls them down. For example, it is very tempting to spend 20 XP to buy +10 OCV with your favorite attack. This is simply a GM control issue. I suppose that you could institute some sort of an increasing cost structure. For instance +1 OCV costs 2 points, another +1 costs 4 points, the third +1 costs 6 points, etc. But I don't think that the added complexity is worth it. If the GM is running his game properly then this is a non-issue.

Q: Should Languages be done as Intellect Skills?

The write-up you referred to (TUS p216) is interesting. I would have no problems with it, but I don't feel strong either way.

Q: Should Martial Arts be changed?

I am pretty happy with them as they are now. I have heard some people decry the 5 point limit when designing maneuvers but I don't subscribe to that gripe. If you want a more capable maneuver then build it as a Power or Super Skill.

[Blue]

KS & PS. I think it would be easier to have "knowing" and "doing" be the same thing.

[Chris Goodwin]

KS & PS. I think it would be easier to have "knowing" and "doing" be the same thing.

What would rock would be buying a KS and a PS and somehow turning them into a full Skill. So, with KS: Law and PS: Law, you more or less have full blown Lawyer skill.

Uhhh, that was just a gratuitous example.