Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

[CaptainConcrete]

I hope this isn't a silly question, but when you increase a stat, do the skills figured by that stat increase as well if the skill was raised enough to get a +1 on the skill base?

[Bloodstone]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

Yep. Going from a 12 INT to a 13 will increase your skill roll for all INT based skills.

[Intrigue]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

I've never seen that done in a game before. Can you tell me where that would be in the rule book? That seems so unwieldy to me.

[beauxdeigh]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

I've never seen that done in a game before. Can you tell me where that would be in the rule book? That seems so unwieldy to me.

 

IDHMBIFOM* so I cannot answer your question, though I can assure you that it is true. However, I'm a bit surprised by your assertion. I mean, Dungeons and Dragons, the most popular RPG in the world, does this. What RPGs do you normally play? Why do you find it unwieldy? If a man grows stronger, his ability to perform strength related feats should increase, shouldn't it?

 

*I Don't Have My Book In Front Of Me

[Onyxclaw]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

it's in the entire skills section, p.42-...

 

Base skill roll=9 + (characteristic/5)

so yes, if you up your charateristic you increse your skills due to this formula.

Shich is similar to DnD and is part of the point of incresing your skills.

[Intrigue]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

I'm just thinking of Hero or Justice, Inc.. I find it unwieldy because, for example, let's say you have a knowledge skill for "Ancient Egyptian Games". Just because you gain INT, what would be the justification for suddenly knowing more about that subject? I have had someone mention "you remember more" as a reason, but I've always used INT rolls for memory issues. I don't see why more INT means you've suddenly cracked more books on the subject. Also, it means you have to keep updating all your skills if you up stats. As a GM I don't encourage upping stats without a seriously good reason, but still...

[MitchellS]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

I'm just thinking of Hero or Justice' date=' Inc.. I find it unwieldy because, for example, let's say you have a knowledge skill for "Ancient Egyptian Games". Just because you gain INT, what would be the justification for suddenly knowing more about that subject? I have had someone mention "you remember more" as a reason, but I've always used INT rolls for memory issues. I don't see why more INT means you've suddenly cracked more books on the subject. Also, it means you have to keep updating all your skills if you up stats. As a GM I don't encourage upping stats without a seriously good reason, but still...[/quote']

Yours is a valid point, and part of the reason I would drop characteristic-based skill rolls, but as the current game stands any increase in characteristic will also increase the skill rolls associated with it.

[Nadrakas]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

Yours is a valid point' date=' and part of the reason I would drop characteristic-based skill rolls, but as the current game stands any increase in characteristic will also increase the skill rolls associated with it.[/quote']

 

What would you suggest?

 

 

Nadrakas...

[Onyxclaw]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

the way the book explains INT is not that it represents knowlege (or lack there of), thus there would not really be any cracking of books perse. It represents someone's capacity to take in what they are exposed to or draw on what they already know. "it has more to do with the processing and reacting to information than with raw learning" p. 36 5th edition.

 

Your skill roll isn't really a representation of how much your character knows, just how likely it is for them to pull up information that they have already been exposed to.

 

For example, if I read a whole biology book I might not be able to recall most of what I read, but I still have the chance to know anything that was in that book. The higher int roll means I'm more likely to recall the specific information when I need it.

 

As a GM I limit the purchus of new stat points to when it makes sense, not how those stat points effect thier other rolls. But that is your choice. personally I think it makes sense that a really smart person is more likely to remember something they've learned. Besides, if you take this aspect of int away then you should do it to all of the other characteristics. Otherwise you've decreased the value of the characteristic and it wont still be balanced with the others.

[Onyxclaw]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

Yours is a valid point' date=' and part of the reason I would drop characteristic-based skill rolls.[/quote']

 

that is also a valid option

not my favorite...

but equally valid

[Intrigue]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

Yours is a valid point' date=' and part of the reason I would drop characteristic-based skill rolls, but as the current game stands any increase in characteristic will also increase the skill rolls associated with it.[/quote']

 

The problem I'm having is that the rules say that your *base* roll is derived from the stat. I take that to mean your *starting* roll, not a shifting base, and I've never known a GM who has used that as a shifting base.

 

Does it say that the roll changes as the stat changes because the base then changes? I've been scouring my book and haven't found that.

 

I like having the base roll come from the beginning stat, but then my theory as a GM is that you have to spend some time actually working on the skill to up the skill. You can't just get smart and suddenly know everything or be able to use, say, upped dexterity to lift all your dex-based skills. It makes sense to me that you are able to do the skill at the base roll for the level your stat is when you learn it.

 

Let's say my dex is 10 and I learn to drive. My dex goes up to 13. Why would that make me a better driver? Wouldn't practice have more impact? I learned to drive with a dex of 10. It would take me a little time to work up to the level of skill that would go with my new dex. That's why I have my players buy the base skill roll, and then pay the points for more skill.

[MitchellS]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

The problem I'm having is that the rules say that your *base* roll is derived from the stat. I take that to mean your *starting* roll, not a shifting base, and I've never known a GM who has used that as a shifting base.

 

Does it say that the roll changes as the stat changes because the base then changes? I've been scouring my book and haven't found that.

 

I like having the base roll come from the beginning stat, but then my theory as a GM is that you have to spend some time actually working on the skill to up the skill. You can't just get smart and suddenly know everything or be able to use, say, upped dexterity to lift all your dex-based skills. It makes sense to me that you are able to do the skill at the base roll for the level your stat is when you learn it.

 

Let's say my dex is 10 and I learn to drive. My dex goes up to 13. Why would that make me a better driver? Wouldn't practice have more impact? I learned to drive with a dex of 10. It would take me a little time to work up to the level of skill that would go with my new dex. That's why I have my players buy the base skill roll, and then pay the points for more skill.

The easiest way to get an answer is to just ask Steve Long in the rules question forum then. We can debate back and forth all night but no "unofficial" voice is going to change your mind. Just ask Steve.

[MitchellS]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

What would you suggest?

 

 

Nadrakas...

The system we are playtesting right now is 1 points for an 8- roll and +1 to roll for +1 point. The rolls then go from 8- to 9- to 10-. In this manner you get more roll variance. Characteristic categories are still used so that you can purchase characteristic-based skill levels. It's just something we're testing to see if it gives more roll diverstiy. I've always hated the fact that the roll goes from 8- to 11- [meaning a 62% chance of success at the basic skilled level].

[Nadrakas]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

The system we are playtesting right now is 1 points for an 8- roll and +1 to roll for +1 point. The rolls then go from 8- to 9- to 10-. In this manner you get more roll variance. Characteristic categories are still used so that you can purchase characteristic-based skill levels. It's just something we're testing to see if it gives more roll diverstiy. I've always hated the fact that the roll goes from 8- to 11- [meaning a 62% chance of success at the basic skilled level].

Ok...I can kind sort of buy that.

 

Hmmm...see an issues -- players may start slighting certain characteristics (ie: Intelligence, Comeliness ["no skills anyway...so why up it?" might be the response]) Just a thought.

 

Didn't really like the "non-attribute" based system when it came out in AD&D Oriental Adventures (Page 52 to 55). Seemed too...disconnected from the Attributes/Characteristics too me.

 

I will admit that skills have been a source of concern in most game systems I've played (Those that had them that is), and Hero is no exception. Have some thoughts...but I'll wait for later to post them.

 

 

Nadrakas...

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

I'm just thinking of Hero or Justice' date=' Inc.. I find it unwieldy because, for example, let's say you have a knowledge skill for "Ancient Egyptian Games". Just because you gain INT, what would be the justification for suddenly knowing more about that subject? [/quote']

 

Maybe it isn't that you neccisarily gain more knowledge, but you have increased your int so you can cross-reference unconciously what you do know, allowing more cross connections in logic and memory to develop. So you are not neccisarily gaining more raw knowledge but more applicable knowledge from that raw knowledge you have in your brain.

 

That is how I have usually seen it, myself.

[Onyxclaw]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

Maybe it isn't that you neccisarily gain more knowledge, but you have increased your int so you can cross-reference unconciously what you do know, allowing more cross connections in logic and memory to develop. So you are not neccisarily gaining more raw knowledge but more applicable knowledge from that raw knowledge you have in your brain.

 

That is how I have usually seen it, myself.

 

that's what I had said earlier. and that's what it says int represents in the book. but yesh, I agree

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

I think this eliminates any natural inclination towards certain skills. It makes sense, to me, that high DEX individuals are going to have an advantage over low DEX individuals learning skills which require agility or manual dexterity.

 

A weakness of the system is that stats probably have too much influence over skill levels, but the only way around that would be to change the whole skill system away from 3d6 to greater dice, for more variance, making it harder for a base level of skill to succeed.

 

To the question "I learn to drive with DEX 10; should I get better if my DEX rises to 13", I say OF COURSE. Your reaction times have improved. You will be able to react to changing conditions faster and more accurately. And reaction time has a huge impact when driving.

[MitchellS]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

Ok...I can kind sort of buy that.

 

Hmmm...see an issues -- players may start slighting certain characteristics (ie: Intelligence, Comeliness ["no skills anyway...so why up it?" might be the response]) Just a thought.

 

Didn't really like the "non-attribute" based system when it came out in AD&D Oriental Adventures (Page 52 to 55). Seemed too...disconnected from the Attributes/Characteristics too me.

 

I will admit that skills have been a source of concern in most game systems I've played (Those that had them that is), and Hero is no exception. Have some thoughts...but I'll wait for later to post them.

 

 

Nadrakas...

You're always going to have power-gamers who are going to neglect characteristics but at the same time you're also going to have players who build to concept. Also keep in mind that not all characteristic-based skills are removed from the game. Perception/intelligence rolls and dex rolls, for example, are still part of the system in our playtesting. So there's still a reason to purchase things like intelligence.

[Intrigue]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

I'm just really blown away by the general response I've seen here. I thought the way I was doing it was the way most folks have done it, and to see that that isn't the case is kind of....shocking. It would never have occurred to me to raise skills when stats are raised. Figured characteristics, yes, but not skills.

 

I'm not going to change the way I've been running my game, but this has been interesting.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

You're always going to have power-gamers who are going to neglect characteristics but at the same time you're also going to have players who build to concept. Also keep in mind that not all characteristic-based skills are removed from the game. Perception/intelligence rolls and dex rolls' date=' for example, are still part of the system in our playtesting. So there's still a reason to purchase things like intelligence.[/quote']

 

To put this another way, why should the player whose concept includes a high INT, or a high PRE, be penalized with less benefit for that investment in points?

 

Intelligence generally manifiests in a greater ability to work effectively with knowledge-based skills, be they crimonolgy, mystic mastery or sciences, particularly in the source material.

 

It really irks me to constantly see people who question why one should pay excessive amounts for certain abilities be chastised for "not building to concept". Abilities should carry a coist commensurate with their utility so certain concepts are not favoured unduly over others.

 

If we make comeliness 5 character points per +1 point, is that OK because players should still pay this exorbitant cost when their concept makes it appropriate?

[MitchellS]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

To put this another way, why should the player whose concept includes a high INT, or a high PRE, be penalized with less benefit for that investment in points?

 

Intelligence generally manifiests in a greater ability to work effectively with knowledge-based skills, be they crimonolgy, mystic mastery or sciences, particularly in the source material.

 

It really irks me to constantly see people who question why one should pay excessive amounts for certain abilities be chastised for "not building to concept". Abilities should carry a coist commensurate with their utility so certain concepts are not favoured unduly over others.

 

If we make comeliness 5 character points per +1 point, is that OK because players should still pay this exorbitant cost when their concept makes it appropriate?

I personally don't care how much something costs as long as it gives me the desired benefit that I am looking for. I happen to like the idea that someone might be great at acrobatics but be only average at stealth. I'm looking for roll diversity so that scientists don't always end up being great at everything intelligence based [because most of them really aren't]. I don't like sweeping generalizations, and that's what characteristic-based rolls give me.

[Onyxclaw]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

I personally don't care how much something costs as long as it gives me the desired benefit that I am looking for. I happen to like the idea that someone might be great at acrobatics but be only average at stealth. I'm looking for roll diversity so that scientists don't always end up being great at everything intelligence based [because most of them really aren't]. I don't like sweeping generalizations' date=' and that's what characteristic-based rolls give me.[/quote']

 

that's what SLs are for.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

I happen to like the idea that someone might be great at acrobatics but be only average at stealth. I'm looking for roll diversity so that scientists don't always end up being great at everything intelligence based [because most of them really aren't]. I don't like sweeping generalizations' date=' and that's what characteristic-based rolls give me.[/quote']

 

I agree that greater diversity of the rolls woud be nice. I don't think the answer is making a 12- skill cost the same as +1 DC to your main attack (with no limitations, yet).

[MitchellS]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

I agree that greater diversity of the rolls woud be nice. I don't think the answer is making a 12- skill cost the same as +1 DC to your main attack (with no limitations' date=' yet).[/quote']

It's a 2 point difference between our playtest version and the official version [the official version costs 1/2 a DC]. Those 2 points don't bother us at all.

[input.jack]

Re: Stat Increase = Skill Increase?

 

Maybe its because Ive been playing HERO in one form or another for over 20 years now, but I find this entire discussion baffling.

 

....OMG I feel old...

 

Anyway, *Ahem*, where was I? Oh yes...

 

In all the games Ive played in HERO, there has -always- been the understanding that, should a character's stats improve over one of the "break points", the attendant skills would also improve by one, as well. I cant -fathom- not seeing it that way. As was mentioned, if your reaction time and co-ordination improve, so will your ability to drive in emergencies. Or to move quietly, or perform gymnastics. (Driving, Stealth, and Acrobatics). Thats just....common sense. To me, anyway. How could that not be the case?

 

The skill rolls we have in a HERO game represent not only the amount of practice or information that we have been exposed to in a given area, but also our ability to make -practical- use of it when the need arises in the field. Most campaigns are fairly action-oriented, and when the adrenaline is flowing and your heart is thumping, thats when you really find out how well you learned to do something.

 

Also, lets not forget that its very -very- hard for a person in real life to "raise their stats" once they reach adulthood. Physical exercise, unless its of an extreme nature, tends to raise your Strength and Recovery, but thats about it. I cant think of a way to raise your INT. (If I could raise my Int, I would, and then maybe I could think of something...) so its difficult to give examples of what the effects of doing that would "realistically" be.

 

But Ive always operated from the assumption that a character's skill rolls represent what the character can -do- with the information and abilities that they have. Sometimes you can remember what the defenestration of Prague was all about, and sometimes it slips your mind. How many of us have seen a particular actor in a movie or on tv, and spent several minutes trying to remember their name? Yet on other days it comes easily to mind. That, to me, is the difference between a failed or successful KS: Celebrities roll. (Just the other day I completely blanked on the name of Sienna Miller, the cute blonde from "Keen Eddie". Yet today her name came right to mind. Have I bought up my skill? I dont think I have since yesterday...)

 

So, yes, Id say that if a character's INT goes up past a break point for skill rolls, that all that character's skills increase by +1. Think of it as that level of Intelligence coming with its own +1 Skill Level Skills.

 

Approaching the matter from the standpoint of the "base roll" -only- applying during initial character creation doesnt really fit with the rest of HERO, where the formulas apply consistently throughout the game. That would be like saying that, even if your DEX goes up by 3 points, if it happens after initial character generation, your OCV and DCV are unaffected. That just doesnt jibe. If you dont believe me, try raising your character's INT over a break point in Hero Designer, and then go look at the skills