Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

[Mister E]

“Perfection does not exist in doing extraordinary things, but in doing ordinary things extraordinarily well.”

 

- Angelique Arnauld

 

 

Okay, so the "Basic RSR Limitation" is a -1/2 Limitation.

 

How much should the equivalent (but with a -10 to Skill Roll penalty) cost? That is, how should the "Requires an Extraordinary Skill Roll" Limitation cost?

 

-3/4?

 

-2?

 

...

 

It's for a magic system I'm working out, which is based on the premise that magic is merely a display of extraordinary-quality feats of skill in HERO terms.

 

 

~ Mister E

[Trebuchet]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

Okay, so the "Basic RSR Limitation" is a -1/2 Limitation.

 

How much should the equivalent (but with a -10 to Skill Roll penalty) cost? That is, how should the "Requires an Extraordinary Skill Roll" Limitation cost?

 

-3/4?

 

-2?

 

...

 

It's for a magic system I'm working out, which is based on the premise that magic is merely a display of extraordinary-quality feats of skill in HERO terms.

That would have to be based on how common 18- or better Skill rolls are in your campaign (and even on each specific character). If magic users with 25- or 30- Magic Skill are common, it'd probably not be worth more than -3/4. OTOH, if a 14- is the average, probably -2 is more appropriate.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

That would have to be based on how common 18- or better Skill rolls are in your campaign (and even on each specific character). If magic users with 25- or 30- Magic Skill are common' date=' it'd probably not be worth more than -3/4. OTOH, if a 14- is the average, probably -2 is more appropriate.[/quote']

 

Also to be considered is how many different skills will be represented? Are we talking a single Magic Skill, or does this work more like Super Skills where, say, a Mind Control Spell would require an Exceptional Oratory roll.

 

If the latter, then the Limitation should be AT least -2, IMO.

 

Would be very appropriate to a Mythic age genre game, BTW, like a Glorantha game.

 

Interesting idea. This might be reppable. Tell us more

[Trebuchet]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

Also to be considered is how many different skills will be represented? Are we talking a single Magic Skill, or does this work more like Super Skills where, say, a Mind Control Spell would require an Exceptional Oratory roll.

 

If the latter, then the Limitation should be AT least -2, IMO.

 

Would be very appropriate to a Mythic age genre game, BTW, like a Glorantha game.

 

Interesting idea. This might be reppable. Tell us more

There might well be other common factors in a magic game. For instance, a long enough extra time to cast the spell might well nullify any Extraordinary Skill roll penalties. "I take one entire year to prep my spell, so the 4- I needed becomes a 14-. I rolled 12! I did it!"

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

That would have to be based on how common 18- or better Skill rolls are in your campaign (and even on each specific character). If magic users with 25- or 30- Magic Skill are common' date=' it'd probably not be worth more than -3/4. OTOH, if a 14- is the average, probably -2 is more appropriate.[/quote']

 

Treb, how do you differentiate this from the regular RSR, which does not vary in value based on how common it is to have a skill roll great enough to make success fairly likely?

 

RSR is typically -1/2, as is Activate 14-. Activate 8- is 6 lower, and a -2 limitation. I;d be inclined to make the extraordinary roll a -2 limitation as well. This assumes, however, that the -10 is in addition to the usual penalty of -1 per 10 AP of the power to be activated.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

Treb' date=' how do you differentiate this from the regular RSR, which does not vary in value based on how common it is to have a skill roll great enough to make success fairly likely?[/quote']I don't know. I'm just trying to provide options for the OP. IMO RSR as is is adequate for what he's trying to accomplish. I would not use (or allow) this as a Limitation in any Hero game I ran. The whole point of Extraordinary Skill Rolls is they are supposed to be extraordinary (and extremely rare). Providing a standardized mechanic to make the supposedly rare commonplace seems counterproductive at best.

 

If he needs it to be harder than the standard RSR, I would suggest he apply Activation or some other appropriate Limitation.

[OddHat]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

I'd just do it as RSR at -1 per 5 Active Points. -1 Limit total. For a 50 point power your players will be looking at a -10, a fair enough base line for a Fantasy campaign.

 

I'd also suggest setting a skill cap in the campaign, unless you're OK with most PC casters scraping together the points for a 24- Magic Skill.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

I'd just do it as RSR at -1 per 5 Active Points. -1 Limit total. For a 50 point power your players will be looking at a -10' date=' a fair enough base line for a Fantasy campaign.[/quote']I agree. That's only a 50% chance of success if the character has a 20- magic skill roll. That would probably make most characters opt to go with a lower-powered attack to increase their chance of success.

 

I'd also suggest setting a skill cap in the campaign, unless you're OK with most PC casters scraping together the points for a 24- Magic Skill.

Absolutely. Of course, in a 150 Fantasy Hero game that might be tough. In a 350 point Champions-level fantasy game that might be routine. (The megavillain archmage in my Champions campaign, the Emerald Mage, has a 35- Magic Skill roll - but then, he's working with a 150 point Cosmic VPP.)

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

I don't know. I'm just trying to provide options for the OP. IMO RSR as is is adequate for what he's trying to accomplish. I would not use (or allow) this as a Limitation in any Hero game I ran. The whole point of Extraordinary Skill Rolls is they are supposed to be extraordinary (and extremely rare). Providing a standardized mechanic to make the supposedly rare commonplace seems counterproductive at best.

 

If he needs it to be harder than the standard RSR, I would suggest he apply Activation or some other appropriate Limitation.

 

I'd just do it as RSR at -1 per 5 Active Points. -1 Limit total. For a 50 point power your players will be looking at a -10, a fair enough base line for a Fantasy campaign.

 

I'd also suggest setting a skill cap in the campaign, unless you're OK with most PC casters scraping together the points for a 24- Magic Skill.

 

I agree with both of the above. Requiring "extraordinary success" for a spellcaster to succeed has one of two results. First, "extraordinary" becomes "routine". Second, characters only rarely succeed with magic, so players are not motivated to use magic. If you want your game to have no wizards, you could simply say "no wizards". Alternatively, you could say "All spells must have the limitations RSR -5 per AP, Side Effects (caster takes 4d6 KA with no defenses) and 10x END, and all spellcasters must have the Physical Limitations Blind and Cannot Walk".

 

Either one will eliminate spellcasters as player characters. One does so by honestly stating the GM does not want spellcasters in the game. The other accomplishes the same thing in a more circuitous fashion.

 

If all you are doing is imposing a 20 point surcharge on spellcasters (the cost of +10 to their skill roll), why not use RSR as normal and charge a 20 point Perk for "Gift of Magic", without which the character cannot cast spells?

[Mister E]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

That would have to be based on how common 18- or better Skill rolls are in your campaign (and even on each specific character). If magic users with 25- or 30- Magic Skill are common' date=' it'd probably not be worth more than -3/4. OTOH, if a 14- is the average, probably -2 is more appropriate. [/quote']

 

It's for a Planescape campaign (ultra-high fantasy! )...so, yes... I think there's going to be a marginally significant number of multiversally-elite skill virtuosos popping up here and there. Far more common than in regular campaigns, I would guess.

 

Also to be considered is how many different skills will be represented? Are we talking a single Magic Skill, or does this work more like Super Skills where, say, a Mind Control Spell would require an Exceptional Oratory roll.

 

If the latter, then the Limitation should be AT least -2, IMO.

 

Right. Not just one Magic Skill... but a benchmark for establishing at what degree of skill things start becoming magic.

 

One of my players wants to play a Clockwork Mage, and another wants to be famous for possibly being the greatest cook in the multiverse. Both want to be able to create magical effects with their fantastic skills.

 

RSR is typically -1/2' date=' as is Activate 14-. Activate 8- is 6 lower, and a -2 limitation. I;d be inclined to make the extraordinary roll a -2 limitation as well. This assumes, however, that the -10 is in addition to the usual penalty of -1 per 10 AP of the power to be activated. [/quote']

 

That's what I'm planning on.

 

I'd just do it as RSR at -1 per 5 Active Points. -1 Limit total. For a 50 point power your players will be looking at a -10' date=' a fair enough base line for a Fantasy campaign.[/quote']

 

I'd be a done deal, except that I'm digging on the extraordinary skill concept.

 

I'd also suggest setting a skill cap in the campaign' date=' unless you're OK with most PC casters scraping together the points for a 24- Magic Skill. [/quote']

 

Working on it.

 

Either one will eliminate spellcasters as player characters. One does so by honestly stating the GM does not want spellcasters in the game. The other accomplishes the same thing in a more circuitous fashion.

 

Sheesh...

 

If all you are doing is imposing a 20 point surcharge on spellcasters (the cost of +10 to their skill roll)' date=' why not use RSR as normal and charge a 20 point Perk for "Gift of Magic", without which the character cannot cast spells? [/quote']

 

... but if I require that the PC have an extraordinary level of skill (above and beyond mundane skill levels) it adds a degree of verisimilitude to the campaign that I like.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

... but if I require that the PC have an extraordinary level of skill (above and beyond mundane skill levels) it adds a degree of verisimilitude to the campaign that I like.

Why not just require Side Effects (with no defenses) on all spells if the RSR is failed?

[Mister E]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

Why not just require Side Effects (with no defenses) on all spells if the RSR is failed?

 

"Side Effects?" Are you talking about the added verisimilitude you would get from failure? Depending on the recipe/schematic, I totally see myself doing that anyway... since you mentioned it.

 

What I meant was, making it so that magic-class cooking requires the PC to have a 18- skill roll, appeals to my sense of rightness for how high the skill roll should be. It would bug me to let some "Magically Good Cook" buy powers without having the fantastic skill roll to go with it.

[OddHat]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

"Side Effects?" Are you talking about the added verisimilitude you would get from failure? Depending on the recipe/schematic, I totally see myself doing that anyway... since you mentioned it.

 

What I meant was, making it so that magic-class cooking requires the PC to have a 18- skill roll, appeals to my sense of rightness for how high the skill roll should be. It would bug me to let some "Magically Good Cook" buy powers without having the fantastic skill roll to go with it.

 

If you are going this route, have you taken a look through the Ultimate Skill? You can accomplish some very interesting things with extraordinary skill rolls, especially in the area of KS, even before paying extra points for a magic pool.

 

I kind of like the idea of Wuxia style flight defined not as Flight but instead as +X" Leaping and 18- Breakfall, Climbing and Acrobatics skills, and presumably a few levels on top. Way more expensive that way, but with some side benefits.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

"Side Effects?" Are you talking about the added verisimilitude you would get from failure? Depending on the recipe/schematic, I totally see myself doing that anyway... since you mentioned it.

 

What I meant was, making it so that magic-class cooking requires the PC to have a 18- skill roll, appeals to my sense of rightness for how high the skill roll should be. It would bug me to let some "Magically Good Cook" buy powers without having the fantastic skill roll to go with it.

Somehow it seems odd for an "ultra-high fantasy campaign" (your description) to require a wizard to attain insanely high levels of competence in the mystic arts simply so he can start a campfire, repair a boot, cook dinner, or some other utterly routine task. What's "ultra-high" about having to be the magical equivalent of Stephen Hawking in order to use what amounts to D&D cantrips; never mind using significant magic as in combat? If it's too hard to do even the simplest things magically, where's the "ultra-high" in that? This is going to make Tolkien look like a magical libertine.

 

I think what you're doing here (possibly unintentionally) is simply discouraging player characters from using magic in any way, shape, or form. You're going to end up with a campaign where only NPCs have magic while the PCs pray to their gods they never run into one.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

... but if I require that the PC have an extraordinary level of skill (above and beyond mundane skill levels) it adds a degree of verisimilitude to the campaign that I like.

 

I disagree with this logic. All it does is ensure that Magic skills will start at 24 or so and work their way up. If a character needs a roll at -10 to succeed, a simple 30 AP spell (not very powerful for high fantasy) will require an 11- roll. A character with a 14- or 17- Magic Skill is simply wasting his points, so you won't see any characters with magic skills below the level needed to cast spells with some reliability. Why spend 3 points for a "magic skill" at 14- or 13 for magic skill at 19- just to pay for spells that require an 8 or less ((much less for any significant spell) to succeed?

 

I can't speak for everyone else's experience, but mine is that players won't build characters who can only succeed with their abilities a third of the time or so.

 

What you will most likely end up with is either no magic-using characters (since the entry cost is too high) or, more likely (with a significant limitation for RESR), all magic using charactrers havings skill rolls in the mid to high 20's. And when the typical skill is a 25-, it's really not "extraordinary" any more.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

And when the typical skill is a 25-' date=' it's really not "extraordinary" any more.[/quote']My thinking exactly. In a campaign setup like that, being truly extraordinary will require being 30- or better in the appropriate Skill. Since I rather doubt the campaign's magic system will provide MP's or VPP's for free, that inevitably means few - if any - magic using PCs in a 150 point FH campaign.

 

I'd expect a run on thieves and various types of warriors. The MU will probably be an NPC.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

I can totally see where you're coming from, Mister E, but they are raising a few valid concerns.

 

After some contemplation, If I were gonna do this, I might jibe with Oddhats suggestion in a fashion and NOT require spells to be bought, but rather, as a campaign ground rule, consider and skill at 18- or greater to be used as if it were an appropriate Power Skill for performing Power stunts with appropriate penalties(usually the -10 for Extraordinary Skill use, possibl with additional AP penaties)

 

 

I still see this as an interesting idea. I can see it fitting well with a "realstic" mythical high fantasy type game.

This feels to me like the kind of "magic" you'd see in the hands of characters such as Weyland Smith, Pecos Bill, Paul Bunyan, or John Henry, and I can see the appeal of using Extraordinary skill levels as an power acquisition requirement rather than going with the usual approach for Super Skill type powers, which do kinda raise the question of "Why can Bob do this with his Stealth skill if Fred has Stealth at the same roll?"

[OddHat]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

I still see this as an interesting idea. I can see it fitting well with a "realstic" mythical high fantasy type game.

This feels to me like the kind of "magic" you'd see in the hands of characters such as Weyland Smith, Pecos Bill, Paul Bunyan, or John Henry, and I can see the appeal of using Extraordinary skill levels as an power acquisition requirement rather than going with the usual approach for Super Skill type powers, which do kinda raise the question of "Why can Bob do this with his Stealth skill if Fred has Stealth at the same roll?"

 

Yup, much more something from a myth and folk tale game than a D&D or High Fantasy game, unless you allow a list of "spells" characters could pull off just with the skill roll.

 

You could do it all with just the Extraordinary Skill Rules from 5thER and TUS, but then you'd need to specifically outlaw superskill constructs (much cheaper most of the time than Extraordinary Skills to accomplish the same thing). I'd also be surprised, in a 150 point game, to see any character with more than one "magic" talent.

[casualplayer]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

Funny, but I've never ran a Fantasy HERO mage with less than a 20> Magic Skill, but when you are running from Orcs, wounded and trying to cast a 40 AP spell over your shoulder the minuses add up quickly. Do you really want a modified Skill Roll of 12> when your life depends on it?

 

The thing you may see if you do enforce this is mage players looking at Age and salivating at the ability to buy up to 25 INT at 1:1 because of the figured bonus to their Magic Skill roll, so you may end up with some greybeards.

[Mister E]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

I disagree with this logic. All it does is ensure that Magic skills will start at 24 or so and work their way up. If a character needs a roll at -10 to succeed, a simple 30 AP spell (not very powerful for high fantasy) will require an 11- roll. A character with a 14- or 17- Magic Skill is simply wasting his points, so you won't see any characters with magic skills below the level needed to cast spells with some reliability. Why spend 3 points for a "magic skill" at 14- or 13 for magic skill at 19- just to pay for spells that require an 8 or less ((much less for any significant spell) to succeed?

 

I can't speak for everyone else's experience, but mine is that players won't build characters who can only succeed with their abilities a third of the time or so.

 

What you will most likely end up with is either no magic-using characters (since the entry cost is too high) or, more likely (with a significant limitation for RESR), all magic using charactrers havings skill rolls in the mid to high 20's. And when the typical skill is a 25-, it's really not "extraordinary" any more.

 

If a character was going to play a classic type of spellcaster... a necromancer let's say... I wouldn't require extraordinary skill rolls on its powers. The power skill "Necromancy" is already inherently a magical subject of study, after all.

 

After some contemplation' date=' If I were gonna do this, I might jibe with Oddhats suggestion in a fashion and NOT require spells to be bought, but rather, as a campaign ground rule, consider and skill at 18- or greater to be used as if it were an appropriate Power Skill for performing Power stunts with appropriate penalties(usually the -10 for Extraordinary Skill use, possibl with additional AP penaties)[/quote']

 

I'm seriously considering not requiring spells of this nature to be bought.

 

It depends.

 

For instance: the player with the Clockwork Mage... I'm thinking of having him buy any automaton pets (that he designs and builds) with character points; but the Magically Good Cook character will probably just be able to learn and make recipes without paying for them, simply using his extraordinary cooking skills (and the character points he spent on his Cooking skill).

 

I still see this as an interesting idea. I can see it fitting well with a "realstic" mythical high fantasy type game.

This feels to me like the kind of "magic" you'd see in the hands of characters such as Weyland Smith, Pecos Bill, Paul Bunyan, or John Henry, and I can see the appeal of using Extraordinary skill levels as an power acquisition requirement rather than going with the usual approach for Super Skill type powers, which do kinda raise the question of "Why can Bob do this with his Stealth skill if Fred has Stealth at the same roll?"

 

Yeah, I like the idea. I'd be really happy if the Planscape campaign turns out to be a bit like Baron Münchhausen with some Time Bandits action going on. I know for certain the "Magically Good Cook" player is definately attempting to play a living multiplanar legend.

 

Yup' date=' much more something from a myth and folk tale game than a D&D or High Fantasy game, unless you allow a list of "spells" characters could pull off just with the skill roll. [/quote']

 

I'm glad you think so. This is the feel I was shooting for.

 

There's already going to be tons of D&D tropes in the game, simply because of the setting content... and since the majority of the campaign is going to take place in the Outer Planes, having the ability to add potentially mythic/folkish-type flavor to the character builds is cool to me.

 

So... I take it you would allow a character that bought a non-magical skill up to an extraordinary level to have a list of "spells" that he could execute with just skill rolls? If so, I think that's what I'll do.

 

You could do it all with just the Extraordinary Skill Rules from 5thER and TUS' date=' but then you'd need to specifically outlaw superskill constructs (much cheaper most of the time than Extraordinary Skills to accomplish the same thing). [/quote']

 

I haven't bought TUS, yet. From everything I've heard (and can imagine), it's a great book.

 

I'd also be surprised' date=' in a 150 point game, to see any character with more than one "magic" talent. [/quote']

 

I like to think of them as, "schticks."

 

Wait... do you think this is a bad thing?

[OddHat]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

So... I take it you would allow a character that bought a non-magical skill up to an extraordinary level to have a list of "spells" that he could execute with just skill rolls? If so, I think that's what I'll do.

 

Sure, just use Power Skill and Extraordinary Skills as a model. 5thER, TUS, and the USPD I&II all have examples that can help you work out the feel, but the only one you need is 5thER for the basics. There are also some guidelines and examples for this type of magic system in Fantasy Hero iirc, but again it's not a must.

 

I haven't bought TUS, yet. From everything I've heard (and can imagine), it's a great book.

 

Very solid, one of the better Ultimate books.

 

 

I like to think of them as, "schticks."

 

Wait... do you think this is a bad thing?

 

So long as its what you're actually going for and not an unintended consequence, its all good.

[Mister E]

Re: Costing "Requires an Extraodinary Skill Roll"

 

Sure, just use Power Skill and Extraordinary Skills as a model...

 

/hallelujah!

 

 

Okay, then. Sweet.