Von Hase

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch?

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? Oooo. I like that too. Unlike the multi, an EC would require players to have a theme to the skills put in it. That takes a little pressure off of the GM to regulate somethting that could easily be abused, and it is more appropriate. Nice! That got me thinking. A Power Pool could also be used, and might end up being even more appropriate for 'background' skills. It would take some interesting limitations. For a pool to simulate a broad set of background skills, just define the pool to only be used for them. However, (this is a power dive into the metagaming pool...) the Power Pool could only be used for a list of skills at levels appropriate to the character's description, and only at those levels - effectively allowing a character to have all appropriate skills for the cost of their highest skill plus the control cost. I think between Levels, Enhancers, and Frameworks, we've got the costs issue taken care of for those who think it is problematic.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? It seems as if the most popular direction is to try to improve upon the Skills System without changing anything that already exists. I’ll call this the Expounding Approach. Here are some things that the Expounding Approach might be able to use. I think it would be a very good direction for someone(s) to take to try and set up more defined guidelines for Skills, especially on a skill by skill basis. Come up with a list of modifiers for each skill, detail situations that would warrant automatic success, and especially define a neutral roll situation for that skill. If we had these things to reference, our jobs as GMs and players would become a LOT easier. In those situations where there are no rules, at least we'd have more precedence. I know the powers that be are hard at work on The Ultimate Skill, and this might be the very thing they need to add to the book, assuming they haven’t already. I haven’t seen the proof yet, but I’m fairly certain it isn’t going to be a Skills sourcebook as it is going to be a Skills Character sourcebook. If we push for it, we might convince them to add what might be one of the most valuable supplements they’ve ever produced. I know the delineated Strength and Objects/Materials charts in The Ultimate Brick will see a LOT more milage than just on Brick characters. As for the Expanding Approach that is forming optional rules… I had a thought about the Skill Level vs. Characteristic mod concept come to me. What if the characteristic modifier was conditional? We are in effect buying ranks in Skills when we pay the points for them. What if GMs decide that there are certain instances where Characteristics can affect the outcome less (Char/10 or not even at all), or possibly more (Char/3)? To do this, all you would have to do is note how many raw ranks a character has in a skill, and the GM can do the rest. Denoting the ranks also helps set up the amount of description a character could get on a success. However, this would also require a table to outline just what each rank means regardless of characteristics. (However, I'm of the opinion that Characteristics should dictate costs and not ability. High INT characters learn faster, but they can't know a fact they haven't learned. High Dex characters can develop physical skills faster, but it doesn't mean they'll be a master swordsman with two weeks of training. Of course, this concept is WELL outside the scope of the Hero System, but it brings me to my next issue.) Costs is the other subject that seems to be an issue. While we’re torn on whether or not to reduce them, no one seems to be under the impression that they should be increased. That tells me that most of us wouldn’t mind some ways to cut the costs of Skills. Skill Levels and Skill Enhancers are a great way to do this. Dark Champions has a Skill Enhancer called ‘Expert’ that allows a character to define the skills it affects by their function and not their type. What if it was ruled that ‘Expert’ could apply to a very broad set of Skills and even Skill Levels? This would allow characters with a clear concept to be built much more efficiently by having the enhancer pretty much apply to most of their skills. Another method, and one that cannonballs into the metagaming pool, could be putting Skills in a multipower. Before you reach for that Quiver of Flaming Arrows, consider this – powers that go in a multipower are often put there because they can not be used at the same time as other powers. Attacks are a great example. Skills are seldom used at the same time unless complementary rolls are considered. Therefore, oddly enough, Skills are a prime candidate for a multipower. This method would require a shrewd GM, and players who truly are more concerned with the character’s concept than the character’s ‘power’ because they will have to avoid the temptation to max out every slot, and instead slot each skill as appropriate to the character. Since this multipower should not include combat skills (so as not to belly flop into the metagaming pool) I dare say we could call it a roleplaying multi. Here are some possible limitations for such Multipowers. -1 Skills Only – Obviously, this multipower should not include powers, characteristics, or talents. -1 ½ Non Combat Skills Only – As above, but characters may not place ‘combat skills’ in the multi such as Combat Levels, RSLs, Defense Maneuver, etc. -2 ‘Background’ or ‘Roleplaying’ Skills Only – As above, but characters are not allowed to place standard skills in the multi, such as Stealth, Deduction, etc. The GM will be the final judge as to what can be included, but the expectation is to create a pool for all of those skills that are seldom used (if ever), but make a lot of sense for a character on a roleplaying level and in effect give a character a points break for good roleplaying. -½ All Slots Must be Ultras – While few Skills are used at the same time, some characters may want to take this limitation. As for the Slots... while this might not be a straight roleplaying method, it has merit. Give those Skills that are almost never used a 'Charges' limitation. A gracious GM might allow 'rollover' Charges for those rare adventures where you might actually have to use the skill one or two more times than your Charges. There. My daily food for thought. Enjoy.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch?

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? I like this concept a lot. However, would it be easier to just list ranks? Spider-Man has "Combat Piloting" 18- (1). Captain Zero-G has "Combat Piloting" 17- (6). Creative GMs could come up with a way to define the scope of a skill based on its ranks. For example, a character with a high skill one rank in Egyptian History only knows specific facts, but could make very good deductions. This idol is "Egyptian and influenced by the interaction with the Greeks. It's probably from somewhere late in the period and to the north of the Kingdoms". A character with both a high skill and high ranks would have the keen eye AND know many details "Yes, it is from the burial tomb of Cleopatra's daughter. The markings are indicative of their royal sculptor Eyanaclus, a Greek." Both of them succeed, but one gets much better information.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? Thank you! That means a lot to me.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? Yes, but without those skills which describe him as an expert fighter pilot, he would not have the complementary rolls. It is cause and effect. The difference would be if Cyberknight only had Combat Piloting and the TF's, but in his background was described as an expert fighter pilot, and you still took the stance that Cyberknight would win the dogfight with a character who had the same but better skills because of his description and nothing else. If that were the case, then there would be no need for the extra skills to properly describe a character, and no more argument against spending the 20+ points for such things. However, on a mechanical level, those skills are needed to create a character that can perform as their roleplaying descriptions declare, and those skills cost points. I, personally, would not consider designing a character without these skills. My problem isn't that characters should pay for these skills, but rather that the costs of these skills do not balance to other elements of the Hero System because the costs of Skills are out of balance. My stance is that base level skills should cost less, but high level skills are fine where they are. I play as much Heroic level Hero System as I do Champions, and you hit the nail on the head when you stated that Heroic level characters pay more proportionally than Superheroic, but that cost is further inflated by demand. Heroic level characters need more skills, most of them fleshed out base level skills which, if they could cost less, would be much more in balance with the rest of the mechanics in the game. As an example, I built myself as a character. (Don't look at me like that. We've all done it at least once.) I went through and wrote appropriate scores, though I was very conservative with the values, and still ended up at over 100 points. 0 points were in Characteristics, 10 went to Talents, and over 90 points were in Skills, and a large percentage of that was 8- rolls. Granted, I put 27 points in combat oriented skills (which are by nature pricey) for WFs, a set of various +1 CVs, and two maneuvers because I've been practicing martial arts and swordfighting since the age of 5, but that still leaves almost 70 points for non-combat skills. For a guy who's highest skill is 13- Artist, that's too many points to have to spend on skills to describe a character properly. The biggest amount of the costs came from the 3 point chunks for Competent level skills in skills that would probably never be rolled over the course of an entire campaign, but that made sense for what I am about and able to do like 'Illustration' and 'Graphic Design'. Add a few ranks here or there, and wala, 70 points. That is far too much for a Normal like myself. Effectively, the costs of skills penalize good roleplaying because a character who didn't spend the points on those roleplaying skills has those points to spend somewhere else.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? Very much so! Wow, I want to play with you guys! This is exactly how a good game should be run. However, it is an example of adding things to the game that are not in the rules. Most of the Skills system is designed around the assumption that GMs will make these sorts of judgment calls, not only for modifiers, but also for game effects. Unfortunately, good (or perhaps a better adjective would be 'creative') GMs are much more rare than not, which is why I stand by the ground that the Skills system needs to be outlined in much greater detail - for all the rest of the GMs who wouldn't have come to those sorts of conclusions without a good set of suggestions and guidelines. I really hope TUS will have a lot of information on each skill, the sorts of modifiers that could apply to it, and the game effects that could be derived from these skills - or the lack of them.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? Not really. If you increase Characteristics by a factor of 3, your characters are going to be paying 15 points per d6 of damage, but able to spend 4 points for DCs or 3 points for a d6 of Hand Attack. Presence attacks -which have very limited effects - will cost 15 points per d6, but Mind Control -which can be much more versatile- will cost 5. Finally, a 20 DEX is going to cost 90 points, and a +1 to Speed is going to cost 30. Ouch. That points Characteristics well out of scale to Powers. Are you saying that everything except Skills costs 3x? If that's the case, adjustment powers are suddenly one third as effective. I'm not telling you how to run your game. I just want you to be aware of the effects. This might actually be what you are after.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch?

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? I like this a lot. If it could be possible to tweak the Skills system without altering the scales or points costs, that would be ideal. There is one thing you might not have considered though. When you switch from a 'rolling under' mechanic to a 'roll and total' mechanic, you create a slight probablility shift. Even though the numbers look the same, and the targets have almost the exact probabilities, you've opened the other 'half' of the range of possible die rolls. For example, If a character can roll their Skill at 11-, then rolls over 12 do not factor in. If a character rolls Their Skill of 11 plus 3d6, then all the rolls 3-18 are a factor. It doesn't end up being a huge difference in success and failure, but it is a difference. However, I still like your method better. I agree. One of the issues with the scale is that it either scales too quickly for high end Characteristics, or it scales too slowly for Normal ranges. I like the (Char/3) because it would make Skills and CVs operate on the same scale. However, has anyone ever considered that (Char/5) might be better for CVs? It would put more emphasis on skill, and be more in line with the rest of the (Char/5) systems like Skills and derived defenses. For example, I have been swordfighting most of my life. I’m pretty good, but not a master. I have a friend who is astonishingly agile, one of those people who can watch someone do an acrobatic or dance move once and repeat it almost perfectly the first time, can catch almost anything that falls or is dropped, and hit small moving targets off the cuff. You know, the kind of raw natural talent that makes the rest of us sick. Despite the fact that he is obnoxiously more agile, and so fast that it is hard to see him move, he has a hard time beating me when sword fighting, and he has been practicing for years. The reason for this is simple. I know my way around a swordfight better than he does. I know how to keep control of the fight, and have the muscle memory to do it. I wouldn’t say he’s got a 20 DEX, but he’s clearly got a better DEX than me (and most people who aren’t in Cirque de Solei). He does very well against other fighters with his degree of training, but what this proves is that raw talent doesn’t go as far as one might assume compared to skill and know how. Conversely, one of the few people I train with that consistently beats me is an honest to goodness klutz. The man is always tripping, knocking over drinks, and has trouble tossing and catching. Yet he schools me because he knows his way around a swordfight even better than I do, and has over the course of 40 years developed an incredible amount of muscle memory for swordfighting. Eh, it’s food for thought. In either case, I think Skill and CVs should be on the same scale and mechanic, whichever it is. Edit: I replied to your previous questions as well, but the BB seems to have eaten my post.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? I very much agree. I think the CV system should be the standard for the Skills System. I would go even farther to say that the Skills should be (Char/3) Just like the CVs. That way everything can operate on the same scale, and finally allow for a description of how good of a fighter the various CVs make someone.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? ... but, Cyberknight spent a minimum of 22 points on that Skill set, which I would guess is simply to help define the character. While I'm all for doing such a thing, what I have a problem with is the cost. Skills, especially the ones characters rarely ever use and only have because they make sense for the concept should not eat up the amount of points that they do.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? Very true. Under the current system, the general consensus is to allow the description of the character to dictate exact effects of their use of skills, and the extent of their capacities... even though these descriptions don't exactly correspond to their mathmatical values. My money is on Cyberknight because he can make complementary rolls to his Combat Piloting with Tactics 14-, SS: Aeronautics 14-, Systems Operations 14-, and Weapons Systems 14-. Each of those 14-'s will average a +2 to his final roll. That will be an obscene bonus of +8 on average turning his 18- into a 26-. It won't matter that she has an unpronouncable name after that dogfight.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch?

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? The argument here is apparently missing some of you. There is a huge discrepancy between the description of the various ranks of skills and the reality of their success rates in play. This discrepancy is so great that GMs have to bend the stated descriptions in the rules to make them work. If a roll does not need to be made in neutral conditions, when does it need to be rolled? Ask 100 GMs, and you will get at least 50 different answers. That is far too many for a system that operates rather precisely on all other levels. The question here isn't whether or not the Skills system can be forced to work. It is whether or not having to force a mechanic is something that should be part of the Hero System. If the answer is no, then the Skills System needs to be fixed. And this is my other point. Skills are far too expensive for what they provide. If 3 points buys a character the chance to regularly fail when it matters at a skill, and most characters need to be described with 10 to 20 or more Skills – unless we are again bending things to fit – then most characters are spending 30 to 60 or more points to be able to do things that they would be able to do with some Familiarities. 100 to 150 points will make a character Competent in situations where they need to roll, but for crying out loud, that’s 100 to 150 points! You could work miracles with those points in Powers and Characteristics. Therefore, we’re left with two options. We can either come up with a way to fix the highly outdated Skills System, or we can accept it as the Hero System’s one major quirk and continue to squeeze it into performing sensibly by arbitrarily tossing numbers at it.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? Thank you. One of the biggest problems with the Skills system is that the rankings do not perform as they are described. When I have stated that the Skill Rankings are low, the arguments have been 'Well, an 18- is one of the greatest practitioners in History' or '11- is Competent'. The problem is, while the book describes rankings this way, they do not perform as such. While it is true that Skill Modifiers can turn an 8- into a 16- or more under ideal conditions, the fact of the matter is that Heroes and especially Superheroes seldom use their Skills in ideal situations. It is usually quite the opposite. If the Skill Modifiers listed in the book are canon, then the worst case scenario is a -28 or less. Let me repeat, NEGATIVE 28. A typical situation in which a Hero will need to use a Skill is probably akin to a -3 for Difficult, a -2 for Poor Conditions, -3 for Combat Conditions, and -2 for Improper Equipment. Wala, -10. That brings one of the greatest practitioners in history down to a 25% chance to succeed in your basic action scene, not to mention that the Competent character has a 1- roll. Tone those modifiers down a bit, and most characters still have a serious problem finding success. So, what you end up with is a situation in which GMs have to just wing it in order to keep the game exciting and balanced. Instead of deciding on appropriate modifiers for the tasks in his game, he has to take the Skill of the character attempting a task and arbitrarily modify it to make things 'dramatic'. The problem with that is simple. If a GM randomly came up with a number for the DCV or Defense of your opponents every time you attacked them, you wouldn't be enjoying the game that you spent so much time and effort crafting a character into a concrete set of points for. Having the Skills system operate like this is just plain arbitrary and goes against the design principles of the rest of the game. I think the most important thing that needs to be addressed in the TUS is what exactly constitutes an unmodified attempt with a Skill? Judging from the responses in this thread, there is not a clear answer, nor is there a gestalt understanding.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? I decided it would be better to offer solutions than debate theory. Here are some options that I have come up with for Skills. Skills Option 1 - Graduated Costs Rather than requiring characters to pay a flat 3 points for competence in a Skill, allow them to invest points in proportion to their efforts in the subject. Cost Value ½=(Char/5)+6 1=(Char/5)+7 2=(Char/5)+8 3=(Char/5)+9 5=(Char/5)+10 7=(Char/5)+11 +2=+1 Rank Design Notes: This chart is based on the 3/2 costs for Skills. While it may seem trivial, allowing players to save a few points here and there can really add up. However, the chart effectively replaces an 8- Familiarity with the ½ point value since an average Characteristic would be (Char/5)+6 or 2+6 or 8-. This also allows characters with higher characteristics to be inherently more competent with little training. If you do not like this feature, make the ½ point cost only buy a straight 8- roll or allow players to buy a straight 8- roll for ¼ point. Skills Option 2 – Open Skill Add a new Skill to the game that is open to be described, much the same way as the exact effects of Powers are. Skill – The character has competence in an area defined by the player or GM. This field of proficiency can be anything the player desires and the GM approves. Use the rules in the Hero System to provide examples of how to define the effects of a Skill. Costs: As per Skills Limitation – Specialization (–½) The Skill is especially limited. Ex: PS – Psychologist – Rehabilitation Counselor, KS: History - Mongolian, Paramedic - First Aid. These Skills generally used to augment other Skill Rolls. Advantage – Broad (+½) The Skill has especially wide scope. Ex: Academics, Science, Athletics. These Skills allow players to buy much fewer skills while retaining competence. Design notes: This is effectively what the game designers have at their disposal when creating new Skills. It seems only logical that in a game system as flexible as Hero that the players should have it too. While this might look like a simplified PS or KS, it is much more adaptable. Skills Option 3 – Degree of Success Just as a Skill can increase another Skill for each 2 points by which it made the roll, we can assume that this amount also indicates degree of success. Success by 0-1 – Marginal Success. (Up to a +0 Modifier) Success by 2-3 – Moderate Success. (Up to a +1 Modifier) Success by 4-5 – Serious Success. (Up to a +2 Modifier) Success by 6-7 – Decisive Success. (Up to a +3 Modifier) Success by 8-9 – Extreme Success. (Up to a +4 Modifier) Success by 10+ – Complete Success. (Up to a +5 Modifier) Designer’s Notes: This option is effectively retroactive difficulty. Use Difficulty modifiers that are directly related to the task sparingly, it at all, in conjunction with it. For example, a doctor may need to have Decisive Success to perform an operation. Do not increase the Difficulty of the roll for the operation, but do increase the difficulty for environmental modifiers such as stressful conditions. However, it may just be simpler to use Difficulty normally and use this system as a descriptor for when characters succeed to indicate how well. That being the case, the chart could also be inverted to describe how badly they fail. Finally, this chart could be used to generate modifiers for related or next actions to spice up game play.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? Yes, it looks like we approach the game from fundementally different perspectives, and that's certainly fine. I don't want anyone to get the impression that I don't think everyone has the right to enjoy the game however suits them best or interpret the rules as makes them most comfortable.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? I have to ask. If you disagree with my entire thought process, how is it I ended up agreeing with you?

Re: Exponential "Cost" System What you're considering is effectively GURPS. The game is on almost exactly the same scale and points costs, with the exception that it scales in cost. However, for the above noted reasons it is not exponential. As power increases so do prices. It looks less like doublings and more like this. 1-20 = 1 for 1 21-40 = 1.5 for 1 41-60 = 2 for 1 61-80 = 2.5 for 1 81-100 = 3 for 1 You'll have to adjust your own scales and come up with a ruling on whether or not this affects Active and/or Real costs, when and how. You also have to decide if this affects other things like Skills and Talents. You're looking at a serious amount of work, somewhere akin to writing your own supplement. But, if it's something you're willing to do. Give it a go. I would strongly suggest looking into Dark Champions: The Animated Series for advice on how to run a Street Level superhero game, which is effectively what you're going to end up with. But, it can be VERY fun and rewarding to play in a setting where characters are vulnerable to things we mortals can empathize with like guns and knives.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? No, this is all very much on topic. We're discussing the Skills system's effectiveness on any and all levels. A lot of good ideas have been mentioned. Sean, I really like where you were going with your degree of success idea. However, I am a huge fan of consistency in game design. There are no systems in place in the Hero System that operate under the 'roll close to your rating' premise. It's brilliant mind you, but it would be another convention added to a game that already has too many. Fortunately, the Hero System has several instances where the amount by which a roll is succeeded has an effect on play. Autofire for example, adds another hit for each 2 points by which a roll is made. So rather than rolling close to your rating, require players to roll under their rating for greater degrees of success. This would make it impossible for low skills to exceed their ratings by much. An 8- could at best roll a 3 and achieve a margin of success of 5. Take navigation: Succeed by 0: find north 1: find where you are on a map 2: plot a course to another point on a map 3: calculate journey times and fuel requirements for a journey 4: plot a route (a journey passing through several points) 5: calculate journey times and fuel requirements for a journey 6: correct for environmental conditions on one leg of a route 7: correct for environmental conditions on a whole journey 8: plot a journey that keeps you hidden from cetain viewpoints 9: plot a route that reduces journey time and fuel requirements by 10% etc... The only problem with this is that it is effectively a retroactive modifier system. I still like the idea. Either on the front end or on the back, it allows players and GMs to reap the rewards or plunder of their actions. In the Ultimate Skill, I would like to see a list of example modifiers for each skill much like the list you’ve presented. That is precisely my point. The Hero System is streamlined and balanced. The Skills system should be put in line with the design philosophies of the rest of the game. If it is done correctly, there will be less charts because the entire Skills system will function on the same premises, most likely ones that are already in the game such as its non identical twin the combat system. The more I read your posts, the more I think you are trying to turn Hero into another system, one of those free formed systems where the GM has ultimate power. One of the greatest strengths of the Hero System is so well balanced and defined that it could almost be played as a wargame without a GM. All except for Skills that is. What we’re (I’m taking you down with me Sean ;-) ) talking about would provide a more solid structure, along with better points balance. Rest assured, there will certainly be a need for a GM to make interpretations even with that structure. A roleplaying game has never been able to account for all possible situations, nor will it. What we’re looking for is a greater degree of guidelines so that everyone has a clear sense of what is possible and how probable. In real life I have a very good idea of how far I can throw a baseball, and to what degree of accuracy. This knowledge allows me to avoid foolish mishaps when I throw it. In a game of Hero, I know that my 10d6 will roll a 35 on average. Knowing this allows me to better pick my targets so that my choices as a player make the difference for my character and my party. This is one of the most important things we want for the Skills system – not just a set of arbitrary numbers for a GM to toss out on a whim, but a concise set of suggestions to allow us the ability to make educated decisions and calculated risks. This is what makes the Hero System a game. It is what makes it fun and rewarding. Knowing that my wits as a player are what will decide the outcome is the reason to play a table top roleplaying game. Otherwise, you're either letting the character run on autopilot by using the same set of abilities regardless of the situation or you're just hanging out with your buddies coming up with a story. It is the merger of all three of these things that keeps us coming back to the table. If you take one out, it's dull. The thrill lies in taking those calculated risks and hoping your dice don't betray you. And when it all works out, oh how sweet the victory because you as the player earned it! Clearly, the GM is still going to have to make a lot of judgment calls, but they’ll be within a few points of players’ expectations instead of wherever he pleases.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? I was making an exaggerated point with the 2- that was the Skill Level doesn't matter in that situation, whether it is pathetic or unbelievable. If someone did have an INT of –35, they could still perform the same routine tasks with a Skill as someone with an INT of 10 or 350 without fail according to the system laid out so long as they paid the 3 base points. I've played enough dogfight style video games to qualify for minimal Combat Piloting, but I don't know squat about the important things that go along with flying a plane consistently safely. My father is a pilot, and has told me about enough of these things that I am very clear on the fact that even though I can ‘fly’ a plane when he takes me up and even do tricks like a roll over and loop, I would certainly wreck the thing in hazardous conditions. For example, if I had to fly instruments only, something any pilot knows how to do, I'd make a Cessna pancake. Whether or not you would assume that Combat Piloting includes all of that knowledge is the question, but according to a strict interpretation of the rules it does not. While the TF would allow the pilot to use the radio, if the radio experienced a minor malfunction, would the TF allow him to correct it? If so, what are his chances of doing so under pressure? A free INT roll? Combat Piloting? …All of that to reiterate the fact that if a character is to be competent at what they intend to, they will have to spend an inordinate amount of points on Skills with the current system unless you’re effectively metagaming by allowing skills to apply to situations where they do not. If a GM is going to do that, they effectively invalidate the point to having a system for Skills, and would be better served by having characters skills be based on a description and arbitrarily toss a number out for them to roll in any case of important uncertainty. It would save a lot of points, that’s for sure. However, that’s not what the Hero System is about, and not why we love it. It is a balanced architecture upon which we can create stories that both intrigue and challenge us – literally. When a game is balanced, the deciding factor is the innovation and skillfulness of the players. While we all like to have ‘reality’ closely approximated, we also accept that balance is more important to have fun in a game. The rest of the game mechanics are artfully crafted to do this, and are balanced to one another. The Skills system is not. For instance, why would someone go to the trouble of buying separate ‘2 points for a +1’ increases to their Skills if they have more than four? The 8 point Skill Level applies to all non-combat Skills, which are pretty much all of them except for CSLs and RSLs. There are three obvious reasons. First it is counter intuitive. Just because someone becomes better at Juggling doesn’t make them understand Biology any better. The second is because it’s counter intuitive, it goes against descriptive sensibilities and makes characters less of what we want them to be and more a pile of figures. And finally, when you put those two together, you end up with something that smells a lot like metagaming. So not only is the Skills system unbalanced from the rest of the game, it doesn’t function like it should either. Worst of all, it doesn’t follow the design logic of the rest of the Hero System, which is why we love the game in the first place. As an example of what I mean about the Skills system not matching up with the design logic of the rest of the Hero System, the special effects and specifics of an ‘Energy Blast’ are defined by the player, but special effects and specifics of a ‘Skill’ are not. One could place an array of related powers into a framework, but to do so with related skills would be truly bad form. Could you imagine a ‘Skills’ Multipower consisting of several dozen one point ultra slots of 10 point skills? No. It’s ludicrous, but that’s exactly what we would do to simulate a weapons array, only using Powers instead of Skills. I think that’s the first place to start balancing the Skills system. Approach them as Powers instead of overly specific Talents. The Combat Levels certainly do. They’re open ended and versatile. Players are free to describe them as they wish and then pay an amount appropriate to the effectiveness of those levels. Instead of a list of specific Skills, allow players to develop their own ‘Skills’ which act as modifiers in the situations that they apply. Instead of having to buy a series of 3 point base Skills, simply use the Characteristic roll as a default, and buy Skill Levels for things that a character is more competent at. Some examples could easily include Social Skills Physical Skills Mental Skills Academics Biological Covert Domestics etc. Doing things this way would make it easier to incorporate Skills into Powers when designing items or such, as well as allow players to assign Advantages and Limitations to them. This would also have the side effect of allowing player the same freedom that the Powers system offers, in that they would be free to define their skills as they wish.

Re: Skills System - Out of Synch? According to the rules presented on p.42 5ER, if a task is routine, there doesn’t need to be a roll, which means there shouldn’t be a +3 to +5 modifier. While this means that characters with a 2- roll will still be able to perform ‘routine’ tasks regardless of their feeble skill, it also means that when an average character with a 10- or 11- does need to make a roll, success is much less likely. According to p.42 5ER, the time to perform a skill is based on the task and circumstances. Effectively, the duration and difficulty of a standard skill attempt are ‘average’, but they need to be made when the outcome is crucial such as only having one chance to attempt the task. However if we take the above example, a character with access to standard equipment and an acceptable amount of time, but put them in the position that they only get one attempt to make their navigation roll, they will miss their destination 37% of the time. Oddly, private pilots only get one chance to set their course before they take off, yet almost never miss their destinations in the real world. Finally, compare the ability to reliably fly a plane to just being able to fly. Transport Familiarity – Pilot to know how to operate the plane. PS: Pilot for unusual applications should they arise. Combat Piloting to fly under hazardous conditions should the need arise. Navigation to get to your destination. A Familiarity with Systems Operations for the plane, There’s at least 12 points if not more – assuming the character doesn’t want to crash 37% of the time he ends up in a fateful situation. For that same amount, a character could buy minimum flight with NCBT Megascale, and fly as fast as the plane without ever having to make a roll. Add some limitations like 'Real Item' and 'OIF-Bulky:Plane' to the Flight and you're down to a fraction of the cost. If you want almost the exact same effect, add 'Independent' to the plane and 'Requires Skill Roll-Piloting', and you still end up paying an even smaller amount despite the need for one Skill. What the current Skills System ends up with is a situation where Skills are overly specific but mostly irrelevant yet still eat up a lot of points for very little effect, which does not at all match the versatility of the rest of the Hero System’s design logic or points balance and that’s my point.

This has been a nagging point that has been bothering me for years, so I thought I'd see what you all have to say to the subject. It takes 3 points to buy a Skill that affords effectively 50% chance of success for an average character. It costs 5, 7, 9 or even 11 points to raise it to a reliable level. Compare being able to regularly navigate to quadrupling a character’s Strength or the ability to fly, and the cost seems a bit high. However, even a flat character needs at least 10 Skills, while better-developed characters need up to 20 or more. It’s almost as if characters are penalized for bothering to buy those extra skills to make them interesting. Am I the only one that thinks the costs for skills are not in scale with the rest of the Hero System?