If it aint broke why fix it?

[Ndreare]

I have been playing with a simple alternative way of doing skills.

 

Instead of paying three points for a skill a characters skills would all be based on his Stat rolls plus or minus a penalty based on complexity/situation. In this version a character would buy skill levels but no actual skills. So to people sneaking in the same building would both make DEX rolls but if player two had +3 with all stealth rolls he would obviously have an edge.

 

 

This would fix what I have always considered a weak spot of HERO which was the no intermediate skills thing. While not completely changing the rules. Then I would have ties go to the character with the higher excess base stat over the break .

 

Using this system character would buy Skill levels as normal for the HERO system they simply would not buy any “Skills†Converting characters from the books would be as simple as for every two points spent in a skill the character is +1 to that roll. So there would really be no hard conversion or effort needed.

 

Example:

 

“The Juror†is trying to out think a bomb made by “Madcapâ€. Madcap has Int 17 and +3 with demolitions skills (6 points), The Juror has Int 13 and +2 with demolitions.

 

Madcap Rolls a 11 making his roll by 4, The Juror rolls a 12 making his roll by 4 equals a tie however since Madcap has a higher redundant level he wins the tie.

 

 

What do you think has any one tried anything simmular?

[OddHat]

It's all about how much detail you want. You're useing a basic skills default to stats system, with bonuses based on skill levels. Fair dinkum, GURPS uses something close, as does Shadowrun and other games. The first ed of Champions had very little detail in its skills system.

 

The problem is that you end up with everyone effectively having every skill; yes, the "best" will have levels in their prefered skills, but you still end up with (as in your example) any reasonably bright schmuck off the street having a good chance to defuse a bomb, build and program a computer, perform brain surgery, solve a physics problem, and do hundreds of other things that require special training. You can say that "only a brain surgeon will have a chance to perform brain surgery", but at that point you're talking about separating skills into everyman skills and skills that must be purchased, which is how things work now anyway.

 

Here is one alternative I used before just going back to doing things by the book;

 

Everyman skills default to 6+CHA/5, and everyone gets one "free" professional skill at 9+CHA/5. Non-everyman skills must be purchased. The advantage is that now Jack with his INT of 10 has an everyman AK:Home City of 8 or less, while Jill with her INT of 13 has that skill at 9 or less. The disadvantage (if you see it as such) is that it further encourages people to just pump up their base stats instead of buying skills.

 

Or you could just give everyone more free everyman skills, or make all skills free, or whatever. Your game and all that.

[Mr. Negative]

Many skills require training and prior knowledge to use them. I assume that for rolls using such skills, part of the penalty for "complexity and situation" would be the character's lack of training in that skill.

 

If not, then characters with good stats and a few overall skill levels could have a good chance with virtually every skill. This undermines the "Skilled Normal" conception in many games, where a PC has little or no superpowers/high attributes, but his knowledge and resourcefulness make him useful to the group.

 

If so, then the character has to buy skill levels to represent the training that offsets the penalty for untrained use. For instance, if using Computer Programming with no skill levels is at a -8 to your roll, then, wouldn't the Programming PC need to buy 8 skill levels with programming to offset this penalty?

 

Perhaps you apply a penalty for untrained situations, but remove it when the PC has spent character points on skill bonuses to represent training. If that is the case, what about skill levels with groups, such as +1 with all Int based skills. Does this represent training, and allow them to offset any "untrained" penalties, or not?

 

I'm not really critical of this system, but I don't feel that I understand it fully. All of this really boils down to:

 

How do you represent being untrained in a skill?

(Which HERO represents with no roll allowed, or an Everyman roll)

 

and

 

How do you represent being trained in a wide variety of related skills?

(Which HERO represents with skill levels with a group of skills, adding to the basic skills purchased in that group).

[Rene]

Silver Age Sentinels, Aberrant, the old Marvel RPG, and (to a extent) Mutants & Masterminds do it this way.

 

It's terribly irrealistic, but not inadequate for some four-color campaigns. Heroes really can do almost anything. Superman may not be a trained scientist, but he can roll to discern what that strange machine is about and have a pretty good chance to suceed (even though Batman would have a bigger roll).

 

Many times, the unspoken assumption is that heroes can get by untrained depending solely on their character conception. SAS make this explicit. So, if your character had ANY prior contact with airplanes, no matter if he was really "trained" or not, he can pilot airplanes with his basic roll. I think only child heroes or savage landers can't pilot airplanes. You only pay points if you want to raise above you CHAR Roll in piloting.

 

Thinking about it, many Hollywood action movies are like that too. You need only pay points for some Perk called "I'm a hero", and then you can pretty much do anything. Only supporting characters have to worry about lacking training.

[badger3k]

Re: If it aint broke why fix it?

 

Originally posted by Ndreare

I have been playing with a simple alternative way of doing skills.

 

Instead of paying three points for a skill a characters skills would all be based on his Stat rolls plus or minus a penalty based on complexity/situation. In this version a character would buy skill levels but no actual skills. So to people sneaking in the same building would both make DEX rolls but if player two had +3 with all stealth rolls he would obviously have an edge.

 

This would fix what I have always considered a weak spot of HERO which was the no intermediate skills thing. While not completely changing the rules. Then I would have ties go to the character with the higher excess base stat over the break .

 

Using this system character would buy Skill levels as normal for the HERO system they simply would not buy any “Skills†Converting characters from the books would be as simple as for every two points spent in a skill the character is +1 to that roll. So there would really be no hard conversion or effort needed.

 

What do you think has any one tried anything simmular?

 

A few questions: What is an "intermediate" skill? For one point you can buy familiarity with a skill at 8-. To me this, or the base 11-, might be considered intermediate.

 

The other question is why? All that you seem to be doing is removing the 3 points it takes to buy a skill. Everything else is still by the rules. Basically you could achieve a similar result by making all skills Everyman.

 

As for heroes in movies and such having all sorts of skills, maybe they do. The characters in most movies would be fairly high-powered and high-skill characters. As for superheroes figuring things out, Superman, for example, the early comics had superman being a fairly smart and knowledgeable individual (he had learned all the knowledge from Krypton, after all). Most of the things that superheroes can do are pretty much untrained abilities - using straight stat rolls can simulate that, possibly with several levels in characteristic rolls (although as a GM I'd make that the 5 or 10-point level). That way you can simulate a character who is adept at a lot of skills without having a lot of training.

 

Thus spider-man might be able to land a plane, he wouldn't be able to fly one, or build one. In the comics, most characters with powers don't get into situations where skills are needed, unless they are skill-based (batman for one). When they do, they tend to be in skills they have (science for Reed Richards, chemistry for Peter Parker, etc). You'll rarely see a character without a skill attempt to use it, but that's strictly comic conventions and plot. No one wants to read about Captain America attempt to decipher alien science and fail, not while Iron Man (or whoever) can do it.

 

The only problem with the system I outlined above (if you can view it that way) is deciding a trained vs untrained limit. That is, if you want to make them a difference - if you want training in skills to be merely a case of skill level, you can do that as well.

 

To represent movie and comic skills you can also buy luck usable only with/as skills - giving characters a chance to be lucky and achieve the desired result.

 

Anyway, just some thoughts on the concept.

[Ron]

In your system, inborn stats will be much more important than training. Perhaps is my bias, but years of teaching have convinced me that the opposite is closer to reality.

 

I didn't understand what you mean with the problem of "no intermediate skills thing." Perhaps you could elaborate it a little bit.

[Farkling]

By no intermediate skills do you mean that there are no "marginally trained abilities?"

 

To me, an untrained skill is no roll.

A familiarity with the skill yields an (8-) roll (for 1 pt)

Trained usage of the skill now becomes (11-) (2 or 3 pts) (like a Bachelor's Degree) My gamers picture this as intermediate...

A PhD level of skill is around (14-) (3-9 pts)

Supreme Knowledge (best in the west!) would be upwards of (14-), maybe in range of (18-, 21-)...using the -10 rule that's about 25%-50% to complete the impoossible...

 

Where precisely does the missing intermediate level of skill exist?

At about 9 or 10 ?

Between 11 and 14 ?

 

What is your requirement for intermediate?

 

 

Your system would make ALL high DEX characters competent at any DEX skill, unless you artificially inflate your penalties,

and a high INT character will be good at EVERY Knowledge and Science Skill...unless like the White Wolf Craft/Science systems you require them to obey different rules.

 

It does look like you want all the skills to be possible to everyone...and are forcing bonuses to be bought to gain the free skill usage.

[Ndreare]

Well I have not spent the time to flush out or trouble shoot the system yet. I see the points that some of you are making.

 

 

As for intermediate skills I am talking about If I have a character who is very intelligent 20 he will be either basic understanding (-8) for 1 point or professionally skilled (-13) 3 points. The jump is to big for my mind.

 

I understand the point of view that this system will make the “Skilled Normal†less useful and I agree that that would be a draw back.

 

My problem is I don’t like the way the skills are now but do not have a way to fix them. So I posted a quick think item I have been pondering off and on for a couple of days hopping that one of you has had time to make some other systems.

 

I do not like to post “I hate this†lines with out posting alternative ideas. So I will post what I am thinking.

 

HERO SKILL SYSTEM PROS & CONS

 

PROS

1: Easy to Figure out.

 

2: Players Are Already Familiar With It.

 

3: No Conversion Needed

 

CONS

1: No default skills (Bill with 20 Dex has the same untrained skill at being sneaky as Ted with 5 Dex.)

 

2: No Defined Guidelines For Levels of Education. (How many points should a character with a Doctorate, Bachelors or even a high school education have in skills? I know people who seem to have thirty or forty points in skills and people who seem to have 10 points in skills.)

 

3: Generally Sloppy. (The skill system seems to be a little sloppy I wish it was closer to the combat system. Example includes Pre Based Skills. How much do I need to make it buy to accomplish common tasks for each skill.)

 

For the last few years I have been just making it upo as I go but It would have been nice to get some better guidelines than the chart listed in the skills section.

[OddHat]

I do understand your point. I think that the simplest solution is just to look at the skill system as a rough approximation of knowledge; OTOH if you don't like that path, here are some very basic suggestions drawn from what I've done and from other systems;

 

1) No Default skills.

 

Possible Solution: Everyman skills default to 6+CHA/5. Everyman skills are skills that just don't require that much training, or skills that the vast majority of people will have been practicing all of their lives.

1 point in non-Everyman skills still gets you 8 or less, 2 points still gets you 11 or less. These represent basic levels of training. A person may be brilliant and well educated, but still know next to nothing about specialized fields (Surgery, Network Engineering, Auto Repair, etc.). 8 or less represents someone who has learned a little bit about the field, 11 represents someone who has attained basic profesional level skill. There are plenty of bright people who are only mediocre in their own fields; I've trained and worked with them. To boost things a bit at this level, apply skill levels to these skills. Allow Dr.Victory to purchase a dozen science skills at 11 or less through the Scientist skill enhancer, then let him buy four 3 point skill levels in Sciences. Now he effectively has a 15 or less skill in a dozen sciences for 27 points. Also, consider allowing Skills to default to closely related skills; You might let someone handle an electronic security system for their Electroncs skill -3 or more; the rules for complementary skills in FREd also apply here.

No major re-writing required.

 

2) There is a guideline for mastery of a field; 8 or less is basic knowledge, 11 or less is profesional level, 15 or less is expert. It's easy enough to extend that to degrees if you'd like. 8 or less for completing high school courses in computer programming, 11 or less for a BS, 15 or less for an MA, multiple computer related skills at least a few of which should be 15 or less for a PhD. As to number of points in skills, GURPS set a limit of age times two, then promptly ignored it. Guidelines might be useful. Here you run into a genuine "problem" if you choose to see it that way; the Hero skill system isn't all that textured. It's based on close approximations. A real world hacker has a suite of 3-4 primary computer skills and a half dozen minor computer languages and knowledge skills under his belt; making him pay points for all of them would be absurd in most settings, and so he gets them "free" as part of Computer Programming, SS: Computers, and maybe Security Systems (Computer). If you want to add more detail, you can; in many settings it would make no sense to do so.

 

3) I think what you're actually asking for here is more examples. You'll probably get a better response by listing more clearly exactly what you want examples of.

[Jeff]

FREd has on the sidebars on pages 19 and 20 breakdowns of how good a given skill roll is.

 

You could use Characteristic Rolls as complementary skill rolls for 8-1 Everyman skills if you wanted to introduce some element of natural aptitude into them.

[badger3k]

more input

 

I think I understand better what you're looking for. Why not use the basic system, but done this way:

 

1) For 1 point you can get a skill at 8-

 

2) For 2 points get a skill at 11-

 

3) For 3 points get a skill at 9+CHA/5

 

This would allow characters to purchase low levels of skills without having doctorates immediately. If you wanted more "realism" you could impose limits on study time - say, the character can get an 8- immediately. An 11- takes 4 months of game time (or more), while the characteristic roll takes 1 year. Or 8- immediate, 11- 1 additional adventure, CHA roll 2 or more adventures. That way you could simulate the time it takes to gain a new skill and integrate it properly.

 

Adding bonuses to skills could take similar times, the length depending on the bonus. Of course, you could also do this as having the player state that he's studying a skill several adventures before spending the points, or pay and then spend the time.

 

To me that would add some of what I think you're looking for. Hope that helps.

[Ndreare]

I like the idea of having a set amount of time to learn skills as you suggest. I understand the idea behind skill levels in individual skills equating to proficiency. One of the things I was wondering is how many skills would a doctor have? I have a friend who just received a bachelors of computer science in addition to his normal computer skills he also had to learn very advanced math and some sciences along with a second language. Making for him having about six or seven skills above and beyond his mastery. I would like to see examples of this.

 

I have been using the Heroes Unlimited’s skill packages as guidelines in my mind but I would like to think that a game should be self sufficient. I would also like to see skill challenge examples like the following for more skills. (Perhaps thrown into sidebars.)

 

Persuasion

Roll + 3; Convince some one of something they were inclined to believe any way.

 

Roll +0; Convince someone of something of which they have no other knowledge. (Yeh can you believe she slept with Tim man that makes me think she has no morals.)

 

Roll -2; Convince some one of something they have heard is wrong. (I know bill told you that computer memory works like a Static Energy storage but he was wrong I read a book about this and can tell you from that book that the memory works based off of a stored magnetic charge it receives the “Gauss Pass†in the mother board.)

 

Roll -4; Convince someone of something they know from minor experience is wrong. (Yeh I know while you were driving in your mind it seemed like it was a couple of hours but I have timed that trip twice and it takes exactly 63 min. I mean after all what is better your perception or a timer?)

 

Roll -6; Convince someone of something they fully know is just plain wrong. (I’m telling you the sky is green dude look at it.)

 

[Rene]

Originally posted by Ndreare

I like the idea of having a set amount of time to learn skills as you suggest. I understand the idea behind skill levels in individual skills equating to proficiency. One of the things I was wondering is how many skills would a doctor have? I have a friend who just received a bachelors of computer science in addition to his normal computer skills he also had to learn very advanced math and some sciences along with a second language. Making for him having about six or seven skills above and beyond his mastery. I would like to see examples of this.

 

I agree with you in that I'd like to see more suggestions about how Skills work. But really, "how many skills would a doctor have" is the kind of question you won't see in FRED, because it's answer depends a lot on the individual genre and style of the game.

 

You can have a Silver Age superheroes game where a doctor get by with SS: Medicine and Paramedics, for instance. It's just his profession in his civilian ID. Then you can have a highly detailed and realistic modern-day game where a doctor needs some specialization and maybe one or two related skills. I dunno.

 

How to use skills in the game exactly also is one of those kinds that depends a lot on a individual GM's style. The more four-color the game, the more a character could do with a roll, for instance. And he can use his skill in a wider range of situations too.

 

Still, I think they'll publish someday the "Ultimate Skils Book" with lots of suggestions about how to deal with Skills.

[Farkling]

We've always felt that the skill chosen by the player (in knowledges and sciences especially) defined the field it applied to. If the character wishes to roll in a field that is plausibly related, the GM applies a penalty to the roll for being "outside" his general education.

 

EX:

SC: Quantum Physics (14-) could roll on a Nuclear Physics question at -3 to -5 for outside of field. Subatomic Physics might get -1 to -3....

 

but we are very , um, comics oriented in our interpretation.

I think White Wolf suggested this in the Mage system...and it follows the "similarity" rule HERO set up in the language charts...a truly intrepid chart oriented person could make a whole chart of their own up like the language one...duplicating the system I vaguely remember from Traveller (buy this skill, get all these skills at -3)

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Farkling

We've always felt that the skill chosen by the player (in knowledges and sciences especially) defined the field it applied to. If the character wishes to roll in a field that is plausibly related, the GM applies a penalty to the roll for being "outside" his general education.

 

EX:

SC: Quantum Physics (14-) could roll on a Nuclear Physics question at -3 to -5 for outside of field. Subatomic Physics might get -1 to -3....

 

but we are very , um, comics oriented in our interpretation.

I think White Wolf suggested this in the Mage system...and it follows the "similarity" rule HERO set up in the language charts...a truly intrepid chart oriented person could make a whole chart of their own up like the language one...duplicating the system I vaguely remember from Traveller (buy this skill, get all these skills at -3)

 

It's also built in to GURPS, though there most skills have only one or two defaults. Almost all GURPS skills default to a stat.

[BNakagawa]

IMO, all this is going to cause is INTs in the 40s PREs in the 30s and still more DEX inflation.

 

Why put any points into demolitions when dumping another 5 points into INT makes me better at it for free and gets me a +1 perception roll, makes me better at programming computers (even if I'm a caveman) and everything else that isn't a PRE or DEX based skill...

 

$0.02

[Agent X]

Something I've been considering for some time and will never do (I don't like too many house rules. Makes your play group harder to be inclusive) is lump the skills into skill categories. A character buys the category and then chooses specialties by buying more detailed skills. "Hard Science" Skills, Area Knowledge Skills, Linguistics Skills, etc.

 

This would reflect a basic knowledge that any scientist, scholar, or world traveller would have. However, I will just stick to buying a skill in general science, world travel, Sci: Linguistics, etc.

[Farkling]

 

Was I not specific enough?

 

FIELD related...

 

Yon nuclear physicist cannot roll on an "Archaeology" problem with his Nuclear Physics skill, unless he is attempting to decipher the remains of a SIVA generator or Stargate inside the pyramid. He certainly wouldn't get much relevant information that way either...there's time...and lack of knowledge of PHYSICAL decay...

[Dust Raven]

Originally posted by BNakagawa

IMO, all this is going to cause is INTs in the 40s PREs in the 30s and still more DEX inflation.

 

Why put any points into demolitions when dumping another 5 points into INT makes me better at it for free and gets me a +1 perception roll, makes me better at programming computers (even if I'm a caveman) and everything else that isn't a PRE or DEX based skill...

 

$0.02

 

How is this different from the current system?

[Dust Raven]

The best idea I've heard so far is the 6+CHAR/5 one. Only don't just apply it to Everyman Skills, but also those 1 point Familiarities with Characteristic based Skills. For Background skills and such, it would still be 8- for 1 point, 11- for 2, and optionally based on a characteristic for 3 points.

 

This would give the brilliant scientist (18 INT) a 10- Deduction roll for free, while the brilliant detective (alto 18 INT) has a 13- with the Deduction skill he payed 3 points for, and the schmuck off the street (10 INT) would ony have an 8-.

[BNakagawa]

Originally posted by Dust Raven

How is this different from the current system?

 

skills that are not everyman skill default to no roll possible, as opposed to a stat roll with penalties.