Unskilled attempts!

[Dr Rotwang!]

I know I'm totally missing it, and I'm the world's biggest motard for it, but...how do ya handle those?

[GamePhil]

If I understand you, I think you're asking how to handle what happens when someone tries something he hasn't bought the Skill for, right?

 

If it's a Skill, the character doesn't have it, and you think its something that should be attemptable without training, it's an Everyman Skill, and has an 8- roll. There are sample lists in HERO 5th Edition, you can always add anything to that list you think is appropriate.

 

If its something anyone could attempt without training, and is based off of a Characteristic (effectively, it's not really a Skill), just use the straight Characteristic Roll, instead.

[Dr Rotwang!]

Yeah, sorry. I'm at work and we were busy.

 

So...if I'm not skilled at, say, Lockpicking, Lockpicking is not an Everyman skill, and is also not likely to succeed sans training...I don't get a roll, just to see if I get lucky?

 

Maybe a House Rule that says "You can maybe pick the heck outta that lock on a 4-". I dunno.

 

I guess it'd change from campaign to campaign, huh?

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by Dr Rotwang!

Maybe a House Rule that says "You can maybe pick the heck outta that lock on a 4-". I dunno.

 

I don't imagine anyone picking a lock without some idea of what they are doing, realistically.

 

But we're talking about HERO, realism is not a necessary component.

 

Another possibilty, if you're so inclined, is to allow an Impossible Dexterity Roll (that is, -10 to the roll) to pick the lock without the skill. You can modify the penalty up or down (probably down) depending on whether you actually want them to have a chance, a good (and character appropriate) desctription of what they are trying, and how easy the lock would be to pick. You could also allow Luck to modify the roll, giving a bonus like it gives to Gambling.

[austenandrews]

This is an area where I've noticed some injustice over the years. Here's the scenario:

 

- Player A wants to attempt something with which he has no skill. The GM tells him to make an appropriate Characteristic roll. He has a reasonably high roll, say 13-less. He rolls a 9. The GM awards him with a modicum of success.

 

- Player B wants to attempt something with which he has a Familiarity (8-less roll). He rolls a 9. The GM rules it a failure.

 

As someone who likes to buy Familiarities to round out a character's background skills, I've seen this type of imbalance quite a bit.

 

As a GM I've addressed the situation by assuming that any amount of skill (that is, points spent) makes simple tasks trivial (that is, requires no roll). I still allow characters to make unskilled attempts, but I -always- temper my decisions to allow that a character with a Familiarity has a better chance than blind luck.

 

-AA

[Chris Goodwin]

I wouldn't give a straight up characteristic roll to someone trying something unskilled. Probably let 'em try at characteristic roll -5 for starters. If it's something that's doable by someone unskilled, I wouldn't use the Extraordinary rule (-10), because something that's doable by someone unskilled is by definition not impossible.

 

Or, if it's up to random chance that much, I'd try a luck/unluck rule (a house rule my old group used, now playing at my house rules page linked below).

[Arthur]

This is an area where I really REALLY REALLY wish the designers had taken a page from GURPS and introduced Skill Defaults. It's only fair: GURPS got the idea of point-based character creation from Champions.

 

The implementation in Hero would go something like this:

 

 

3 points: 9 + CHA/5.

 

2 points: 7 + CHA/5

 

1 point: 5 + CHA/5

 

0 points: 3 + CHA/5

 

So to take the Lockpicking example, with a DEX of 18.

 

3 points: 13-

 

2 points: 11-

 

1 point: 9-

 

0 points: 7-

 

IOW, it defaults to a DEX roll at -6, and each of the first three points increases that by 2.

 

Needless to say, this is already my House Rule (as if I had any time to game anymore).

[Chris Goodwin]

Originally posted by Arthur

This is an area where I really REALLY REALLY wish the designers had taken a page from GURPS and introduced Skill Defaults. It's only fair: GURPS got the idea of point-based character creation from Champions.

 

#1. Skill defaults are another method of gaming the system and don't work out as well as it seems. In GURPS, in practice, everyone buys their stats up to ridiculous levels and lives on the defaults.

 

#2. Champions got it from The Fantasy Trip, written by Steve Jackson. Champions refined it, but GURPS didn't by any means take the idea from Hero.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Arthur

This is an area where I really REALLY REALLY wish the designers had taken a page from GURPS and introduced Skill Defaults. It's only fair: GURPS got the idea of point-based character creation from Champions.

 

The implementation in Hero would go something like this:

3 points: 9 + CHA/5.

2 points: 7 + CHA/5

1 point: 5 + CHA/5

0 points: 3 + CHA/5

 

So to take the Lockpicking example, with a DEX of 18.

3 points: 13-

2 points: 11-

1 point: 9-

0 points: 7-

IOW, it defaults to a DEX roll at -6, and each of the first three points increases that by 2.

 

Needless to say, this is already my House Rule (as if I had any time to game anymore).

 

This still has he problem that a high stat overrides the benefits of spending points to have the skill. For example, using your example: So to take the Lockpicking example, with a DEX of 8, 18 and 33:

3 points: 11-; 13-; 16-

2 points: 9-; 11-; 14-

1 point: 7-; 9-; 12-

0 points: 5-; 7-; 10-

 

Of course, this issue exists regardless once characters have purchased the skill. It takes 10 points of "bonus to skill:" to offset the impact of an extra 25 points in the stat, and it's a lot cheaper to buy up a stat rather than buy up several skill rolls based on that stat. If you're willing to increase that stat dependency (and live with the consequences that paying for high stats beats paying for skills), this may be the solution.

 

The game as written provides familiarity and full skill. It also provides some everyman skills in which one is deemed to have familiarity.

 

If this were a real issue in my campaign, I'd be inclined to disallow "unskilled rolls" - either it's an everyman skill, or you have no clue where to begin withoput shelling out 1 point. The answer to "but anyone can try this" becomes either an addition to the everyman skills, or noting that one can effectively select any other skill as an everyman skill by selling back (say) driving for 1 point and using it to buy familiarity with a different skill.

 

Alternatively, if you feel the added house rule is worth it, set a middle ground of "untrained skills" where everyone has a base roll of 5 or less. Easy tasks can still be accomplished (a task with +5 or+6 on the roll provides a decent chance, and they can take Extra Time in many circumstances). There would always be some risk of failure - no "easy task by default" rule, but they can try. The guy who spent a point will always have better odds, though.

 

The choice depends on whether you want to focus characters more on their stats or their skills.

[Arthur]

Originally posted by archer

#1. Skill defaults are another method of gaming the system and don't work out as well as it seems. In GURPS, in practice, everyone buys their stats up to ridiculous levels and lives on the defaults.

 

Played GURPS a lot for ten years. I never noticed that as being terribly prevalent. Most players bought the skills they wanted to have. Rolling against defaults wasn't that common.

 

Whether or not it can be exploited by munchkinism is beside the point. The real point is that it makes sense. Most skills are something that an untrained person should have a small chance at. And the more talented the untrained person is, the better his chances. In this case, high stats represent raw talent.

 

#2. Champions got it from The Fantasy Trip, written by Steve Jackson. Champions refined it, but GURPS didn't by any means take the idea from Hero.

 

Whatever the genealogy, Steve Jackson explicitly mentioned Champions as an influence in the preface to GURPS Basic Set. The point is that Hero shouldn't feel "guilty" about cribbing ideas from GURPS. They are both great game systems, and have influenced each other. "A champion acknowledges another champion" - Gene Simmons of Kiss (when discussing the Kiss/Aerosmith tour).

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Arthur

 

Whatever the genealogy, Steve Jackson explicitly mentioned Champions as an influence in the preface to GURPS Basic Set. The point is that Hero shouldn't feel "guilty" about cribbing ideas from GURPS. They are both great game systems, and have influenced each other. "A champion acknowledges another champion" - Gene Simmons of Kiss (when discussing the Kiss/Aerosmith tour).

 

I think Champions came first (at least when the concept was created; never played GURPS so the publication history's a bit vague, but I think GURPS followed Champions, but not much later).

 

Speaking of cribbing, anyone here read Mutants and Masterminds? A lot of passages seemed to have been quotes from the Hero rulebooks over the years.

[schir1964]

GM Option

 

I think there was an option for the GM that said if the task being attempted is absurd, then the Skill Roll automatically get a -10 penalty to it. That would make almost any unskilled roll require a natural 3 roll.

 

Just My Humble Opinion

 

- Christopher Mullins

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by Arthur

This is an area where I really REALLY REALLY wish the designers had taken a page from GURPS and introduced Skill Defaults.

 

I can't agree, though this is a matter of taste. I think Skill Defaults add more complexity than utility. Also, HERO already has Complimentary Skills, Skill Levels, and generally broader Skills, so it has the idea of skill overlap well covered. However, it does bring us to another option in answer to the original question:

 

Find a Skill that you think is related, and decide what a good penalty would be on that Skill to perform the desired task. You can do this with a Default system, or on a case by case basis. I'd do the latter, but there is a perfectly usable Default just a few posts back, after all.

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I think Champions came first (at least when the concept was created; never played GURPS so the publication history's a bit vague, but I think GURPS followed Champions, but not much later).

 

Oh, Champions certanly came before GURPS, but the response was to archer's contention that HERO got the idea of point-based systems from The Fantasy Trip. Quite possible, though the level of detail is so different that it's hard to see the similarity at first glance.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by GamePhil

Oh, Champions certanly came before GURPS, but the response was to archer's contention that HERO got the idea of point-based systems from The Fantasy Trip. Quite possible, though the level of detail is so different that it's hard to see the similarity at first glance.

 

Seems to me I recall an old interview with the dreators that dated the system design back to a less than inspiring college lecture.

 

Point based wargames (army design, etc.) have been around forever, so this might have been the initial inspiration for either or both.

[Derek Hiemforth]

I realize I'm coming into this late, but how about this idea...

 

Make unskilled attempts a CHA roll at -8.

 

This is close to an Extraordinary Skill Roll, but not quite as impossible. It's also the same penalty as a Familiarity's roll value is, so you could say on some level that buying a Familiarity was like "buying off" this penalty. Lastly, it happens to be the same penalty as a very difficult combat task as well: targeting the opponent's head.

 

I think this value for the penalty fits well with the rest of the system.

[schir1964]

House Rule

 

I use the following house rule:

 

Character want's to do something they have no skill in.

I determine how common such task is in general and also take into account anything in the character's background that might have exposed him to the task.

 

If the task is extremely common (like replacing an oil filter on a car) or the character's background suggests that they woul d have been exposed to the task (like being part of gang who steals cars), then the character get to make a 5- Skill Roll.

 

If not the above, then it's the ole' 3- Skill Roll.

 

Just My Humble Opinion

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Arthur]

Originally posted by Derek Hiemforth

I realize I'm coming into this late, but how about this idea...

 

Make unskilled attempts a CHA roll at -8.

 

This is close to an Extraordinary Skill Roll, but not quite as impossible. It's also the same penalty as a Familiarity's roll value is, so you could say on some level that buying a Familiarity was like "buying off" this penalty. Lastly, it

 

That is essentially the same as my GURPS-derived "Skill Defaults" approach. You can look at it as "unskilled attempts are at -7 (or whatever), and each point up to 3 buys off the penalty". Different wording, same effect.

[Talon]

The problem I have with allowing 8- rolls is that people with Familiarities feel gypped; everyone else gets the same thing without having to spend a point.

 

Thus, I use a house rule: unskilled characters get a roll (usually 8-, but depends on the Skill and task in question). However, the consequences of failure are much more severe than for someone with an 8- roll, to reflect the fact that the character really doesn't know what they are doing. An unskilled Mechanics check, for example, would be very likely to cause further damage to the car if it failed.

 

This is something I'd hope to see addressed in The Ultimate Skill.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Originally posted by Geoff Speare

The problem I have with allowing 8- rolls is that people with Familiarities feel gypped; everyone else gets the same thing without having to spend a point.

Did someone suggest this? I didn't see it. Arthur and I were talking about a CHA roll at minus 8... not an 8- roll.

[Blue Angel]

Originally posted by GamePhil

I don't imagine anyone picking a lock without some idea of what they are doing, realistically.

 

But we're talking about HERO, realism is not a necessary component.

 

Another possibilty, if you're so inclined, is to allow an Impossible Dexterity Roll (that is, -10 to the roll) to pick the lock without the skill. You can modify the penalty up or down (probably down) depending on whether you actually want them to have a chance, a good (and character appropriate) desctription of what they are trying, and how easy the lock would be to pick. You could also allow Luck to modify the roll, giving a bonus like it gives to Gambling.

 

From personal experience I can say that even a most basic knowledge of what you are doing can lead to success. The lock example is a good one as I have no special skill or training in it and yet I have successfully performed that skill just by thinking it through and trying (just for fun of coarse). Mind you I was not in combat and there was lots of time.

 

But it depends on situation and skill. Some could be tried and possibly succeed by anyone. Other skills would require training and practice. Acrobatics is an example. You just can't backflip through a window without prior training and practice.

 

Some skill limits are social. Pretty well everyone in a modern society has a concept of how to operate a computer, even without formal training. A medieval Knight wouldn't have a clue.

[Talon]

Ah, saw -8, read 8-, flashed back to previous campaign house rules.

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by Derek Hiemforth

Did someone suggest this? I didn't see it. Arthur and I were talking about a CHA roll at minus 8... not an 8- roll.

 

Actually, I did: I initially suggested expanding the Everyman Skill list if it was felt that more skills should be attemptable without training. If this were done, though, I don't think anyone should feel gypped, since they wouldn't have to buy the Familiarity.