Skills: useful or just for flavor?

[Sveta]

Skills, aside from flavor, should have some sort of pertinence to a character. Both in what one can and can't do, as RDUNeil pointed out with Stealth. Having it or not impacts one's options. What I'm seeing from the current gauntlet of skills is that they are trying to encourage that sort of thinking. That what you have and what you don't has impact. However as it has split it into so many subdivisions and minutia, it detracts from that I believe. 

Say you would want a smooth and suave talker? Bureaucratics, Charm, High Society, Possibly Interrogation, Oratory, Persuasion... Any one of those could be what you are looking for at any point in time. That's all just... Talking things.
What about being Athletic? Acrobatics, Breakfall, Climbing, Riding, and perhaps Contortionist and Martial Arts. 
Even being sneaky could be covered by a few skills! Concealment, Disguise, Forgery, Shadowing, Slight of Hand, and the all powerful Stealth.

 

Personally I'm surprised no one has brought up Invention as a skill. The skill that defines the creation of almost anything the mind can conceptualize is a single skill.

 

All these options don't... they don't help convey the options that the Player has. It helps define the world by what they don't and aren't able to do. By defining them all as specific types, it limits the way one tends to think about a situation. Too few skills and they are often too wide and broad to specifically narrow down what one is capable of. Too many skills and each one the player doesn't have is a tool removed from their arsenal. 

Personally, and the rest of this and the rest is conjecturing and opinion, so feel free to disregard it, I'd try and stick with Archtype like skills. Have a dozen or so of them. Academic Learning, Street Learning, Athletic Capability, Stealth Capability, Driving, Empathetic Capability, Communicative Capability, ect... Then just define them by Skill levels in those groups. Sure you might have an 11- for Stealth stuff, but for Hiding specifically? 13-. Negative Skill levels work too there. Say a star athlete with 13- for most, can't jump to save their lives, so 8- or 7-. By defining it in broader strokes, one can grab most of what they are aiming for, and be much more likely to still specialize in areas thanks to the system already in place with Skill Levels.

The only area that sort of rubs me the wrong way would be the KS, PS, SS and such. Though, if one took it more at a general idea and said "They are XXX Profession, they would know YYY because it is related, just with modifiers," then it still works just fine. Then you just sort of grab the "Professions" that define them. Club-goer, Doctor, Nature Enthusiast, Gambler, Ect...

 

An easy way to conceptualize that is the classic question, "What is an Adult?" Understanding a touch of the tax code, property rights, food cost, local area knowledge, good grocers, places to find jobs, where the police can be found, the DMV and general Medical information, ect... All the little nuances that one could go out and specifically designate, but are more easily understood under the bow of being an Adult. Though admittedly, I use this example because nothing would be more saddening and amusing to watch a superhero fail at being an adult and take the day off, or sleep in...

Long story shorter: The further down you break down skills, the more people tend to think and limit themselves to those definitions. Because I have (perhaps misplaced) faith in the Hero Community, I'd recommend parring them back, and setting it up on hunks of related skills, and defining them further with Skill Levels. Same for PS.

[Chris Goodwin]

If I may... the Skill list from 3rd edition Champions consists of Acrobatics, Climbing, Computer Programming, Detective Work, Disguise, Find Weakness, Luck, Martial Arts, Security Systems, Skill Levels, Stealth, and Swinging.   3rd edition also included this note: 

 

The Skill List in Champions doesn't cover all possible Skills. If you want a hero to have a Skill not listed, the GM can create a Skill for him. Each hero is assumed to be skilled in his Secret Identity's profession (doctor, lawyer, scientist, etc.); the hero doesn't have to pay for this Skill. If a hero wants many such Skills, then the GM should consider charging the hero 1 Power Point for the equivalent of a college degree in the field. For 2 Power Points the hero has the equivalent of an advanced degree, and has a base roll with the particular Skill. The roll should be based on the appropriate Characteristic (such as INT for sciences), with the standard 9 + (Characteristic/5) formula. Some Skills might not be based on a Characteristic, but would be a base 11 or less. If you want a more elaborate Skill List, use the Skill List in Danger International, Hero Games' modern roleplaying game. Use the point costs listed there; in the case of Skills that appear in both games and have different costs, use the cost that's listed in Champions.

 

I don't know of anyone who ever used this; I and everyone I knew had at least the Champions II supplement, if not Danger International, each of which expanded the skill list greatly.  

 

If all you were using was the 3rd edition core book, the game assumed that whatever you wrote down as your profession in your secret identity, was something you could do.  It was sort of handwaved; like, if you were a scientist in your secret identity, it was assumed you had access to a lab, could do science, and so on, but that was usually off-screen.  The skills that were present were, as I think were mentioned elsewhere on this thread, more like powers; they were things the character could do as part of their superhero identity, that would happen "on screen" or on a comic page.  I'm honestly not sure many more are needed for a full on Champions game; I suggested to Ron Edwards that he might want to add a Super Science skill, which he enthusiastically agreed with, and I might also add Gadgeteering and maybe a Super Sorcery skill, possibly Paramedic.  Power Skill, if the characters want to buy it.  I would probably assume that if you had a profession in secret identity that wasn't covered by one of these skills, that you could just do it, like the background skills that 6th edition suggests you don't have to pay for.  I'll note that it's very seldom that the comics focus on Clark Kent's journalistic abilities, Bruce Wayne's finances, or Matt Murdock's legal and courtroom knowledge.  

 

That having been said, I can see Champions campaigns where the GM might want to have characters do things in their secret identities; their journalism and law and hobnobbing with rich people.  If so, great!  In general, the GM ought to be up front with the players about what Skills are likely to be most useful, and about whether the game is going to cover the characters doing things in their off time.  The GM might also let characters have, say, 50 free points worth of "off time", background/profession/secret identity/off time skills.  (I know I've built superheroes with 25-50 points worth, and been frustrated when other characters come in with their 5 points, if that, and the game never touches on the off time.  Frustrating.)

 

For "low heroic" level games, in which Skills are front and center, the full Skill list would definitely be useful and necessary, and the available Powers might be reduced as above.  I've played in many games where powers were nonexistent, and Skills, Perks, and Talents were front and center.  These are more focused on investigation, exploration, and interpersonal interaction.   

 

I will end by saying this: the importance of Skills in the game should set by the GM, who should notify the players up front of their expectations on the matter; how likely off-time/background Skills are likely to come into play. 

[RDU Neil]

1 hour ago, Sveta said:

Skills, aside from flavor, should have some sort of pertinence to a character. Both in what one can and can't do, as RDUNeil pointed out with Stealth. Having it or not impacts one's options. What I'm seeing from the current gauntlet of skills is that they are trying to encourage that sort of thinking. That what you have and what you don't has impact. However as it has split it into so many subdivisions and minutia, it detracts from that I believe. 

Say you would want a smooth and suave talker? Bureaucratics, Charm, High Society, Possibly Interrogation, Oratory, Persuasion... Any one of those could be what you are looking for at any point in time. That's all just... Talking things.
What about being Athletic? Acrobatics, Breakfall, Climbing, Riding, and perhaps Contortionist and Martial Arts. 
Even being sneaky could be covered by a few skills! Concealment, Disguise, Forgery, Shadowing, Slight of Hand, and the all powerful Stealth.

 

Personally I'm surprised no one has brought up Invention as a skill. The skill that defines the creation of almost anything the mind can conceptualize is a single skill.

 

All these options don't... they don't help convey the options that the Player has. It helps define the world by what they don't and aren't able to do. By defining them all as specific types, it limits the way one tends to think about a situation. Too few skills and they are often too wide and broad to specifically narrow down what one is capable of. Too many skills and each one the player doesn't have is a tool removed from their arsenal. 

Personally, and the rest of this and the rest is conjecturing and opinion, so feel free to disregard it, I'd try and stick with Archtype like skills. Have a dozen or so of them. Academic Learning, Street Learning, Athletic Capability, Stealth Capability, Driving, Empathetic Capability, Communicative Capability, ect... Then just define them by Skill levels in those groups. Sure you might have an 11- for Stealth stuff, but for Hiding specifically? 13-. Negative Skill levels work too there. Say a star athlete with 13- for most, can't jump to save their lives, so 8- or 7-. By defining it in broader strokes, one can grab most of what they are aiming for, and be much more likely to still specialize in areas thanks to the system already in place with Skill Levels.

The only area that sort of rubs me the wrong way would be the KS, PS, SS and such. Though, if one took it more at a general idea and said "They are XXX Profession, they would know YYY because it is related, just with modifiers," then it still works just fine. Then you just sort of grab the "Professions" that define them. Club-goer, Doctor, Nature Enthusiast, Gambler, Ect...

 

An easy way to conceptualize that is the classic question, "What is an Adult?" Understanding a touch of the tax code, property rights, food cost, local area knowledge, good grocers, places to find jobs, where the police can be found, the DMV and general Medical information, ect... All the little nuances that one could go out and specifically designate, but are more easily understood under the bow of being an Adult. Though admittedly, I use this example because nothing would be more saddening and amusing to watch a superhero fail at being an adult and take the day off, or sleep in...

Long story shorter: The further down you break down skills, the more people tend to think and limit themselves to those definitions. Because I have (perhaps misplaced) faith in the Hero Community, I'd recommend parring them back, and setting it up on hunks of related skills, and defining them further with Skill Levels. Same for PS.

 

What is interesting in the point you make about "What you CAN'T do"... I think this mode of thinking is actually correct... in the right game. For Supers, it is all about what you CAN do, most often in amazing ways.

In Heroic level... the more "realistic" you get, the more likely you are defined as much by what you can't do as what you can. Because the closer you get to "real human" then every character is kind of the same... and having a few unique skills, compared to other PCs who CAN'T DO THOSE THINGS is very important. "I'm the kick as swordsman, but don't expect me to be sneaking past any guards any time soon." type of thing. Thus, in the origina 3ed age, it was the Danger Internation and Fantasy Hero type games that expanded the skill list, because you needed more particular skills to help differentiate one character from another. Once you were beyond the fighter or mage or cleric or thief trope... how did two thieves differentiate? It is the same reason that current D&D and such have a plethora of classes... because every fighter needs to be different from other fighters as PCs at least, and class distinction is how they do that.

 

Again, I'm all for detailed skill lists... for the right game. The Skill list actually goes a long way to defining the kind of game the system is trying to create. Thus, I think, the appeal of stripping things back to a 3rd Ed kind of level to some folks on these boards.

 

Personally I feel 4th hit the right level for me, and it went off the rails in 5th and 6th, but the discussion and understanding of what the "skill list" represents for the game concept and play... that's what is important.

[Cassandra]

Skills can modify existing systems in an emergency.  In Star Trek 6 Spock with Dr. McCoy's help used electronics, mechanics, and systems operation skills to modify a photo torpedo to track a cloaked Klingon Bird of Prey.

[dsatow]

I always thought Shadowrun's original skill tree an interesting way to do things.  The farther away from the right skill to do the job, the more penalties are assigned to the skill.

 

Example: Say you need to disable a bomb.  Tree might be Disarm Bombs -> Bombs -> Demolition -> Electronics.  If you have Disarm Bombs, you would just make a roll.  If you have the profession Bombs, you'd take a -2.  You'd take a -4 if you have the generic Demolitions and a -6 with electronics.