House Rule: Task Resolution

Creating game materials? Monsters, spells, classes, adventures? This is the place!
Finieous
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 8:47 pm

Re: House Rule: Task Resolution

Post by Finieous »

Dimirag wrote:Using two dice you have better chance of higher results but are limited to the 1-20 scale and won't surpass the top 20 result. With a bonus you get higher lesser and higher values.
Yeah, but I'm never going to apply more than a +/-4 on a roll. Anything more doesn't need to be rolled. So only the most difficult task would be impossible for a 1st level character with a +3 ability modifier. [Edit: Bad math. The -4 task would be impossible for the PC with no ability modifier, but the +3 AB guy would have a 27.75% chance at it.] That seems fine as a starting point -- these are 1st level B/X "zeroes" we're talking about. ;)

Like I said, I really like the curve. I like the fact that the "gap" between proficient and non-proficient grows with level. For example, assuming no ability modifier, the non-proficient character has a 20% chance at an average task at 1st level, while the proficient character has a 36% chance. Fine. At 10th level, the non-proficient character has a 45% chance and the proficient character has a 69.75% chance. That's cool.

Maybe I'm just trying to warm myself up to it enough to overcome my aesthetic concerns. :mrgreen:
User avatar
Dimirag
Posts: 3613
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 1:24 pm
Location: Buenos Aires (C.A.B.A.), Argentina
Contact:

Re: House Rule: Task Resolution

Post by Dimirag »

I know the chances improves by level, I just prefer a combined increment instead of a 2 part benefit.

EDIT: My math did't consider the descending Target Number which allows for success against more difficult situations.

Why the removal of the Thieves? Do you feel they'll lose their niche if other characters can use thieving skills?
Sorry for any misspelling or writing error, I am not a native English speaker
Drawing portfolio: https://www.instagram.com/m.serena_dimirag/
Finieous
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 8:47 pm

Re: House Rule: Task Resolution

Post by Finieous »

Dimirag wrote:Why the removal of the Thieves? Do you feel they'll lose their niche if other characters can use thieving skills?
Thieves aren't removed, they're just treated as a background. I'm one of those who think the thief was a mistake in Supplement 1, and that the design is a poor fit for the D&D class-based system to boot.

Your question about niches really emphasizes this: In fact, in OD&D, at least the way it seems to have been played at the time, other characters can use thief skills. Probably the most common complaint about the thief is that its introduction, the way it was presented or interpreted by many players, suggested that now only thieves could hide, move silently, climb walls, or find traps. In other words, you took a class-based (as opposed to skill-based) game in which anyone could try anything and bolted on a class defined by skills, and it fouled up the works. And having done so, you were on a slippery slope to iterative attempts to more fully implement skills in the class-based game that continues to this day.

The proposed house rule goes back to the idea that anyone can try anything, and if you need a mechanic for it, there's one on page 153. The backgrounds (including the thief) overlay the niche definition and protection on top of this existing mechanic, instead of implementing niches with distinct mechanical subsystems (the way Supplement 1 did). The result: Anyone can do "thief stuff," but a PC with the thief background will always do it better -- and he'll do it "more better" as he levels up. And the proposed house rule is intended to allow all players to define any niche they want, not just the "thief" niche, in a simple way that fits snugly with the race-class-level design.
User avatar
Dimirag
Posts: 3613
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 1:24 pm
Location: Buenos Aires (C.A.B.A.), Argentina
Contact:

Re: House Rule: Task Resolution

Post by Dimirag »

The thief seems to be the one always causing troubles to any edition :lol:

I've been playing a thief for over 5 years and really like the class, my group has never had any troubles with the skills and often they try thieving skills.

I think the thief is a nice class addition and that the problem is either on the way the game is expressed or in the GM/player interpretation of the rule. Every class can fight, fighters do it better, but not every class can cast magic, thieves can do some things better and do some things no other class can.

If I would use your system I'll absolutely use thieves with proficiency and a class bonus in all thieving skills and give them some unique skill applications.
Sorry for any misspelling or writing error, I am not a native English speaker
Drawing portfolio: https://www.instagram.com/m.serena_dimirag/
User avatar
Longman
Posts: 3616
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 4:12 am
Contact:

Re: House Rule: Task Resolution

Post by Longman »

I like the option of a bonus as well. A mid to high level character with an expertise in riding shouldn't fail a roll to ride a horse to chase an enemy, unless the roll is absolutely terrible (like a 1). With two rolls, there's always the chance that both will be poor. With a bonus, that lower end of the dice is totally removed.

I suppose you could give the character the option of a bonus or an advantage (re-roll) before they rolled?

As for thieves - I get where the OP is coming from. It's been an issue with D and D since forever. All sorts of characters will want to sneak, hide and climb, etc. How to make sure that they can, but make sure the thief is better - especially when the thief's initial scores are quite low?

I've seen some DMs ask for a dexterity roll (roll under your dex) to sneak, but then made the poor thief use his percentile skills, which meant in fact the thief was worse than everyone else. I've also seen DMs who didn't allow any non thief to do things like hide, at all. Both bad options.

When I run BF games (which I only do on this site) I say that the thief's sneak, hide, hear, and so on are for supremely hard tasks - like sneaking down a corridor while there are guards 30 feet away, climbing a totally sheer surface with no rope, etc. Other characters cannot attempt these. But an ordinary climb, or sneaking through the dungeon, can be done by anyone.

If it's important, I use basic ability rolls (dex, normally) for the other characters when they attempt the easier stuff like this, and I don't even bother making the thief roll for them. If a thief can climb a sheer wall 80% of the time, they do not need to roll to climb a much easier surface.

I agree that a unified system is a good idea for all that, but, it'd be a new game.
User avatar
Dimirag
Posts: 3613
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 1:24 pm
Location: Buenos Aires (C.A.B.A.), Argentina
Contact:

Re: House Rule: Task Resolution

Post by Dimirag »

One thing that intrigues me is how do yo deal wit the overlapping that a background could cause over a class assumed knowledge.
Sorry for any misspelling or writing error, I am not a native English speaker
Drawing portfolio: https://www.instagram.com/m.serena_dimirag/
Finieous
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 8:47 pm

Re: House Rule: Task Resolution

Post by Finieous »

Longman wrote:I like the option of a bonus as well. A mid to high level character with an expertise in riding shouldn't fail a roll to ride a horse to chase an enemy, unless the roll is absolutely terrible (like a 1). With two rolls, there's always the chance that both will be poor. With a bonus, that lower end of the dice is totally removed.
I wouldn't roll the dice at all for routine tasks like that, regardless of what system or mechanic I'm using.
Finieous
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 8:47 pm

Re: House Rule: Task Resolution

Post by Finieous »

Dimirag wrote:One thing that intrigues me is how do yo deal wit the overlapping that a background could cause over a class assumed knowledge.
Not sure I follow. Do you mean, what do I do if two characters have the "thief" background? Or one is a thief and one is a scout, so their "niches" partly overlap? If so, other than having the players create their characters at the same time, I wouldn't do anything about it. That's not unique to this house rule: with classes and races, too, sometimes you have more than one in a party. If it doesn't bother the players, it doesn't bother me.
User avatar
Dimirag
Posts: 3613
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 1:24 pm
Location: Buenos Aires (C.A.B.A.), Argentina
Contact:

Re: House Rule: Task Resolution

Post by Dimirag »

I mean, what if two players opt to have characters that are ex priests, one of them chooses the fighter as the pc's class while the other chooses to play a cleric.

The fighter would have proficiency on military and priestly things
The cleric would have proficiency on clerical and priestly things

The cleric seems to have overlapping proficiencies making the chosen BG no so effective.
Sorry for any misspelling or writing error, I am not a native English speaker
Drawing portfolio: https://www.instagram.com/m.serena_dimirag/
Finieous
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 8:47 pm

Re: House Rule: Task Resolution

Post by Finieous »

Ah, I see. Thank you. Yeah, I'd be okay with most backgrounds the players come up with -- I just want to know what they want to be good at. But I wouldn't allow a background that just overlaps a class. In the unlikely event a player suggested something like that, I'd talk to them about it, drill down to what they were looking for, and refine the concept.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 45 guests