Post/Author/DateTime	Post
EvilVegan 06-25-07, 03:39 PM	I'm tired of waiting. Everyone is talking about what Saga rules works for D&D and what doesn't or working on things separately, so lets do it. This thread is to find a way to convert the D&D skill system to the saga skill system. OK, there are a few skills that aren't present in SWSaga. Concentration, UMD, Spellcraft. And the knowledge skills are a lot different. Also I feel that the saga skill system is great for starwars style heroic characters, but doesn't fit some of the features of D&D, namely not every person of high level is going to be marginally skilled in every aspect of life. The best example of this not working is the "super sneaky rogue" vs the "completely clueless cleric" by Otto the Buggles in another thread. With the saga system a 20th level cleric with no perception training has a really good chance of seeing the rogue with stealth training and skill focus stealth (d20 + 10 + wis for cleric, d20 + 20 + dex for rogue). So, my house rule was to make the skills as follows: You add 1/2 your class level to class skills. Trained skills get +5 to the roll. You get no bonus to skills that aren't on your class list. We need to figure out what else to do in regards to the D&D skills, which to combine. For now I'd like to avoid the "Use Magic" (not use magic device) portion of the skill section, simply because there are no class conversions yet and its a little too debated whether everyone having magic access is a good thing. I don't want this thread getting too cluttered with off topic discussions. If you plan on playing with modified spell rules you can probably manage a use magic skill on your own.
Aubri 06-25-07, 04:32 PM	I don't think the rogue-vs.-cleric is much of a problem, myself. The Trained +5 represents a full 25% bonus relative to the cleric. It seems kind of silly that a rogue can sneak around with impunity against a similar-level NPC... and an NPC can do likewise to the PCs! Ultimately, this argument just comes down to "It's different from before, so I don't like it." The class level/non-class level thing seems silly to me, as well. The whole point of this system is to make the characters generally skilled and to reduce paperwork, and that violates both concepts. As for the magic skills: Knowledge (whatever) is handled exactly as in Saga, just replace the names. Possibly roll a couple of the less-used ones (Nobility? Architecture?) into more-used ones like Local and Dungeoneering. Concentration and Spellcraft seem like good candidates to roll together, or else leave Concentration alone and roll Spellcraft into K(A) and K(R) as Trained uses. The difference between "book larnin'" and examining active magical effects seems pretty minimal to me.
Joseph_Silver 06-25-07, 04:43 PM	I'd say we stick to the skill system used in Saga, renaming a few to keep with the flavor of D&D. 1. Use The Force = Spellcraft 2. Treat Injury = Heal We could also consolidate existing D&D skills: 1. Spellcraft = Use Magic Device and Spellcraft 2. Psicraft = Use Psionic Device and Psicraft 3. Endurance = Autohypnosis and Concentration
Dnarris 06-25-07, 04:59 PM	I'd love to see a working conversion to this just so I can get rid of skill points all together.
JoAT 06-25-07, 10:25 PM	My current list of Saga skills is: Acrobatics - Balance and Tumble Athletics - Climb, Jump, Sweim and: You may also use the Athletics skills to run races, cover long distances quickly, or run away from a monster. Athletics allows characters to push themselves faster than they can normally move. Depending on the result of your Athletics check, you gain a set bonus to your speed. Each round your do nothing other than chase/flee, you may attempt an Athletics check, and consult the following table. DC Result 15 Speed increases by 5 feet (+1 square) 20 Speed increases by 10 feet (+2 squares) 25 Speed increases by 15 feet (+3 squares) 30 Speed increases by 20 feet (+4 squares) Each consecutive round you chase/flee, you suffer a cumulative -2 penalty to your Athletics check. Terrain can affect movement by increasing the cost of each square by a certain value. Refer to the PHB for terrain details on character movement. Concentration - Concentration and Autohypnosis Deception - Bluff and Disguise Disable Device - Disable Device and Open Lock Endurance - New skill Gather Information Heal Initiative - New Skill Knowledge When you select Knowledge as a trained skill, you gain a number of Knowledge subskills equal to your Intelligence bonus as trained skills (ie, an Int 16 person could pick up Knowledge Arcana, Knowledge Religion and Knowledge local as trained skills for one selection). Perception - Spot and Listen Persuasion - Diplomacy and Indtimidation Ride Stealth - Hide and Move Silently Survival Use Magic (or maybe just magic) This skill would be normally unusable untrained (like Use the Force), but have some untrained uses, for those who took the special feat: Magic Sensitivity. These uses would include detect magic, allowing characters with Perception to find magical traps, as well as mechanical ones, and to activate magical devices, as per the Use Magic Device skill. The trained uses would deal with things such as identifying magical things (including other's spells, so Spellcraft gets rolled in in there), and using your own spells, and minor magical tricks, such as most cantrips. Lost skills: Forgery, Craft, Use Rope. Forgery becomes a feat, allowing you to use Deception to forge documents. Craft becomes 3 different feats, which allow the creation of Alchemical items, the use of Engineering and the creation of more basic, day-to day items. Use Rope... still working on that. Maybe roll it into Survival, and let people who say that they're Sailors use it untrained? Anyways, it's still getting worked on. For right now, I'm using the premise that skills act as they do under the Saga rules, though this may change with time.
Aubri 06-25-07, 11:27 PM	Knowledge When you select Knowledge as a trained skill, you gain a number of Knowledge subskills equal to your Intelligence bonus as trained skills (ie, an Int 16 person could pick up Knowledge Arcana, Knowledge Religion and Knowledge local as trained skills for one selection). That seems like a little much. While that would certainly encourage people to take the less-used skills more, like Local, I'd still be more in favor of shrinking the list of skills -- Saga only has 7, for example! It does that by broadening the categories to things like "physical sciences". Here are my suggestions: Arcana (plus The Planes & Psionics) Science ("Architecture and engineering" plus Geography, astronomy, chemistry, art, etc. Stuff that you think of Da Vinci being good at.) Dungeoneering (including geological questions) History (plus Nobility and Royalty) Local Nature Religion I'd consider "Science" to be physical sciences while Nature covers life sciences. 2. Psicraft = Use Psionic Device and Psicraft I see no reason to differentiate these from Spellcraft and UMD, nor Knowledge (Psionics) from Knowledge (Arcana). They're simply different traditions -- we're not going around adding Knowledge (Hexes), after all...
Dnarris 06-25-07, 11:33 PM	I imagine I'd just lump forgery into deception. Put escape artist into acrobatics (Just because that's where it ended up in SW) and put use rope in survival.
JoAT 06-25-07, 11:36 PM	That seems like a little much. While that would certainly encourage people to take the less-used skills more, like Local, I'd still be more in favor of shrinking the list of skills -- Saga only has 7, for example! It does that by broadening the categories to things like "physical sciences". Here are my suggestions: Arcana (plus The Planes & Psionics) Architecture and engineering Dungeoneering History (plus Nobility and Royalty) Local Nature (plus Geography) Religion Could work too - I was mostly concerned that Knowledge skills are commonly less powerful and useful than many others, but at the same time, many people like to play highly intelligent characters, with access to many knowledge skills. If it could be squeezed down to 4 or 5, I'd be content to let it be. I'd also be okay with it if there were some Highly Educated Talent, which made all Knowledge skills trained for that character, requiring the Educated Talent. One could likely squeeze local into Dungeoneering, as dungeoneering is a non-existant IRL skill, which represents basic knowledge about being underground, underground monsters and various things that an adventurer should know.
JoAT 06-25-07, 11:42 PM	I imagine I'd just lump forgery into deception. Put escape artist into acrobatics (Just because that's where it ended up in SW) and put use rope in survival. My only problem with Forgery and Deception is that most Masters of Disguise I've seen on TV and in movies, and read about in books don't forge stuff on their own - they get it from a guy. If someone's good at conning and disguising (which are similar enough that I feel they go well together), they might be good at forgery... or not. I also like Escape Artist in Sleight of Hand because most who practice one do the other as well - they're the prime stage magician skills, and I haven't seen too much where a given person doesn't do both. Use rope and survival... Yeah, I'll do it like that. After all, Survival's also fishing, and sailors should be able to fish as well.
Aubri 06-26-07, 12:01 AM	I imagine I'd just lump forgery into deception. Put escape artist into acrobatics (Just because that's where it ended up in SW) and put use rope in survival. Actually... woudln't Use Rope be a function of Escape Artist itself? If you know the tricks for getting out, you're better at preventing that escape.
Aubri 06-26-07, 12:06 AM	Could work too - I was mostly concerned that Knowledge skills are commonly less powerful and useful than many others, but at the same time, many people like to play highly intelligent characters, with access to many knowledge skills. If it could be squeezed down to 4 or 5, I'd be content to let it be. I'd also be okay with it if there were some Highly Educated Talent, which made all Knowledge skills trained for that character, requiring the Educated Talent. One could likely squeeze local into Dungeoneering, as dungeoneering is a non-existant IRL skill, which represents basic knowledge about being underground, underground monsters and various things that an adventurer should know. I was thinking about that myself. It seems to really touch a number of different things -- mainly science (geology & geography) and nature (aberrations and such). In that case the list becomes Arcana (plus The Planes & Psionics) Science ("Architecture and engineering" plus Geography, caves, and... well, anything "sciencey") History (plus Nobility and Royalty) Local Nature (plus Aberrations) Religion 6 categories, and I don't see any serious overlaps.
JoAT 06-26-07, 12:14 AM	Actually... woudln't Use Rope be a function of Escape Artist itself? If you know the tricks for getting out, you're better at preventing that escape. Problem is it becomes one of those weird 3-way cases again. Someone who's nimble can escape things. Someone who knows a lot about rope can escape things. It doesn't follow that someone who can do a triple backflip will know how to tie a sheep-shank. I was thinking about that myself. It seems to really touch a number of different things -- mainly science (geology & geography) and nature (aberrations and such). In that case the list becomes Arcana (plus The Planes & Psionics) Science ("Architecture and engineering" plus Geography, caves, and... well, anything "sciencey") History (plus Nobility and Royalty) Local Nature (plus Aberrations) Religion 6 categories, and I don't see any serious overlaps. Good, simple, and works for me. I'll eliminate that Int-Knowledge thing I had going on for future considerations. I'll also put in a second tier Education talent, for those well educated.
Dnarris 06-26-07, 12:15 AM	Actually... woudln't Use Rope be a function of Escape Artist itself? If you know the tricks for getting out, you're better at preventing that escape. I think that is a little too specfic for the purpose of rope use. Since rope use checks are used for a lot of different purposes like when using grappling hooks, pitons, and the like. Also, it has a lot to do with rigging, possibly snares, and even knots. I imagine more of the general stuff would be more appropriate for survival.
Aubri 06-26-07, 12:19 AM	Yeah, you're right. Survival has that "boy scout" feel, tho Sleight of Hand could work too.
Anaxander 06-26-07, 10:27 AM	I also started on 'streamlining' the D&D skills. This is what I got so far: Acrobatics (Dex) = Balance, Tumble Adroitness (Dex) = Escape Artist, Sleight of Hand, Use Rope Athletics (Str) = Climb, Jump, Swim Awareness (Wis) = Listen, Sense Motive, Spot Concentration (Con) = IDEM Craft (Int) = Appraise, Craft Deception (Cha) = Bluff, Disguise, Forgery Disable Device (Int) = Disable Device, Open Lock Erudition (Int) = Decipher Script, all Knowledge skills (this skill represents encyclopaedic lore) Heal (Wis) = IDEM Initiative (Dex) = NEW Investigate (Int) = Gather Information, Search [active & elaborate counterpart of awareness] Perform (Cha) = IDEM Persuasion (Cha) = Diplomacy, Intimidate Ride (Dex) = IDEM Speak Language [Special] = IDEM Spellcraft (Int) = IDEM Stealth (Dex) = Hide, Move Silently Use Magic Device (Cha)= IDEM Wilderness Lore (Wis) = Handle Animal, Knowledge Nature, Survival
JoAT 06-26-07, 08:58 PM	Huh... I've gone over a few Saga skills again while making up some stuff for Rogues, and noticed something odd with Stealth. There's no cover/concealment requirement to sneak/hide, which strikes me as odd, given the abundence of use they make of both. I'm wondering if this could be an oversight, error, or an example of the designers knowing something that we don't know. It also makes me wonder if some skills should be replaced with versions that are more obviously direct combinations, and which interact with D&D rules better, like: You’re skilled at going unnoticed. Check: Your Stealth check is opposed by the Notice check of anyone who might detect you. While using Stealth, you can move up to half your normal speed at no penalty. At more than half and up to your full speed, you take a –5 penalty. It’s practically impossible (–20 penalty) to use Stealth while attacking, moving all out, or charging. • Size Modifiers: Apply the modifier from your size category to your Stealth checks to represent the relative ease of noticing smaller and larger targets (see Size, page 34). • Hiding: If others have spotted you, you can’t use Stealth to remain unseen. You can run around a corner so you are out of sight and then use Stealth to hide, but others then know which way you went. You can’t hide at all if you have absolutely no cover or concealment, since that means you’re standing out in plain sight. Of course, if someone isn’t looking directly at you (you’re sneaking up from behind, for example), then you have concealment relative to that person. Characters with the Hide in Plain Sight feat (see page 61) can make Stealth checks without the need for cover or concealment. • Creating a Diversion to Hide: A successful Bluff or Intimidate check can give you the momentary diversion needed to make a Stealth check while people are aware of you. When others turn their attention from you, you can make a Stealth check if you can reach cover or concealment of some kind. (As a general guideline, any cover has to be within 1 foot for every rank you have in Stealth.) This check, however, is at a –5 penalty because you have to move quickly. • Sniping: If you’re successfully hidden at least one Notice range increment away from a subject (usually 10 feet), then you can make a ranged attack and immediately hide again, but you suffer a –20 penalty to your Stealth check. • Tailing: You can use Stealth to tail someone at your normal speed. This assumes you have some cover or concealment (crowds of people, shadows, fog, etc.). If the subject is worried about being followed, he can make a Notice check (opposed by your Stealth check) every time he changes course (goes around a street corner, exits a building, and so on). If he is unsuspecting, he only gets a Notice check after each hour of being tailed. If the subject notices you, you can make a Bluff check, opposed by Sense Motive. If you succeed, you manage to pass off your presence as coincidence and can continue tailing. A failed Bluff check, or being noticed a second time, means the subject knows something is up. Action: Stealth is a move action. Note: The above is Open Gaming Content, and is from Mutants and Masterminds Second Edition
EvilVegan 06-28-07, 10:42 AM	I also started on 'streamlining' the D&D skills. This is what I got so far: Acrobatics (Dex) = Balance, Tumble Adroitness (Dex) = Escape Artist, Sleight of Hand, Use Rope Athletics (Str) = Climb, Jump, Swim Awareness (Wis) = Listen, Sense Motive, Spot Concentration (Con) = IDEM Craft (Int) = Appraise, Craft Deception (Cha) = Bluff, Disguise, Forgery Disable Device (Int) = Disable Device, Open Lock Erudition (Int) = Decipher Script, all Knowledge skills (this skill represents encyclopaedic lore) Heal (Wis) = IDEM Initiative (Dex) = NEW Investigate (Int) = Gather Information, Search [active & elaborate counterpart of awareness] Perform (Cha) = IDEM Persuasion (Cha) = Diplomacy, Intimidate Ride (Dex) = IDEM Speak Language [Special] = IDEM Spellcraft (Int) = IDEM Stealth (Dex) = Hide, Move Silently Use Magic Device (Cha)= IDEM Wilderness Lore (Wis) = Handle Animal, Knowledge Nature, Survival I like most of these, but what's IDEM? I also wouldn't remove/combine all knowledges. Here's mine: Acrobatics (Dex) - Balance, Tumble, Escape Artist Athletics (Str) - Climb, Jump, Swim Craft (Int) - Appraise is a use of craft pertaining to each of the separate craft skills. Appraise can be used untrained. Each of the following craft skills are taken separately. Mechanical Chemical (acids, bases, explosives) Weapons and Armor Pharmaceutical (poisons, anti-toxins, healing items) Deception (Cha) - Bluff, Disguise* Decipher (Int) - Decipher Script, Spellcraft Endurance (Con) - As Saga, includes Concentration. Initiative (Dex) - As Saga. Investigate (Int) - Gather Information, Search Knowledges (Int) - Taken Separately Arcana - Arcana + Planes Customs - Local + Nobility and Royalty History - History + Religion Structures - Architecture + Dungeoneering Warfare - Siegecraft + Tactics World - Geography + Nature Legerdemain (Dex) - Sleight of Hand, Disguise*, Forgery Mechanics (Dex) - Disable Device, Open Lock Persuasion (Cha) - Diplomacy, Intimidate Perception (Wis) - Listen, Sense Motive, Spot Ride (Dex) - Ride Stealth (Dex) - Hide, Move Silently Survival (Wis) - Handle Animal, Use Rope, Survival Treat Injury (Wis) - As Saga. Use Magic Device (Cha) - Use Magic Device I split disuise into 2 separate categories, one for physically duplicating something another for acting in character. One would be opposed by spot, the other by sense motive if it was ever an issue, so that physical disguises are observed by spot and affected by dex (how well you applied the disguise), and "acting in character" is opposed by sense motive and affected by Charisma. And something I'm considering: Magical Training - Arcane (Int), Divine (Cha), Nature (Wis). 3 separate skill sets. This would only be necessary if you were adopting the Saga Force (spellcasting) system.
okaynowa 06-28-07, 03:49 PM	Craft (Int) - Appraise is a use of craft pertaining to each of the separate craft skills. Appraise can be used untrained. Each of the following craft skills are taken separately.Just an alternative idea here-- what if Craft were a trained use of other skills? Or rather, cheap items could be crafted untrained ("I whittle a branch into a pointed stick"), while complex items are a trained skill application ("I spend three days crafting a masterwork spear precisely weighted for my throwing arm"). Crafting magic items would be a use of Use Magic Device or Spellcraft. Crafting poisons and healing items would be a use of Treat Injury. Crafting armor and weapons would be a use of... huh. Got me there. My somewhat ill-formed logic for such a design would be that, in the generally non-industrial settings typical of D&D, a professional would be more likely to know personally how to make the things they need to do their job. A thief would make his own lockpicks, a wizard would bind his own spellbooks, and so forth. In a metagaming sense, it means a heroic character would no longer have to choose between being good at his job, and being good at making things related to his job. Okay, so maybe now a pirate PC would also be something of a master shipwright just by virtue of his Skill Focus: Sailing, and mounted paladins would be the world's finest saddle makers... but it's a peculiarity I'd be willing to live with.
EvilVegan 06-28-07, 04:30 PM	Just an alternative idea here-- what if Craft were a trained use of other skills? Or rather, cheap items could be crafted untrained ("I whittle a branch into a pointed stick"), while complex items are a trained skill application ("I spend three days crafting a masterwork spear precisely weighted for my throwing arm"). Crafting magic items would be a use of Use Magic Device or Spellcraft. Crafting poisons and healing items would be a use of Treat Injury. Crafting armor and weapons would be a use of... huh. Got me there. My somewhat ill-formed logic for such a design would be that, in the generally non-industrial settings typical of D&D, a professional would be more likely to know personally how to make the things they need to do their job. A thief would make his own lockpicks, a wizard would bind his own spellbooks, and so forth. In a metagaming sense, it means a heroic character would no longer have to choose between being good at his job, and being good at making things related to his job. Okay, so maybe now a pirate PC would also be something of a master shipwright just by virtue of his Skill Focus: Sailing, and mounted paladins would be the world's finest saddle makers... but it's a peculiarity I'd be willing to live with.Well, personally I think anyone should be able to craft something untrained, maybe with a penalty (-5 or -10). Complex items would just have DCs unattainable by untrained people. So you can whittle a club (DC 5) by taking 10 on a tree branch (IE as long as you aren't retarded you get a free club) and with enough time you might be able to make an axe (DC 15). But could only craft a masterwork item if they were high level and had a high intelligence, and even then they'd have to take a much longer time doing it. I don't like adding craft functionality to other skills, but I definitely see where you're coming from. I think that dark-age physicians probably just had training in both crafting and applying healing items.
okaynowa 06-29-07, 12:34 PM	Crafting simple or improvised items (a log raft, a decent club, a cloak when you've already got the fabric) could be untrained uses of a skill-- something you could do with one or no tools. Crafting complex items (a boat with a plank hull, a proper mace, a length of fabric out of fiber) would be a trained use of a skill-- something you need multiple tools and/or materials for. Crafting masterwork items would be a high DC check, and realistically possible only for people with Skill Focus and/or a lot of time on their hands. My motivation for turning crafting into a functional aspect of more "purposed" skills has a lot to do with how I approach adventures. The characters are out there to perform heroic deeds. Given the choice between making something and questing to get something, the quest is generally more fun-- so why bother with a single-use Crafting skill? By contrast, if the player knows that training in Sailing will allow his character to craft sailing-related things, maybe he'll step up and say, "I can get our party downriver to the fortress before the horde. Just help me fell a few of these trees..." Putting crafting into a more heroic context might inspire the player characters to try making things more often than if they have to get trained in Craft X, Craft Y, Craft Z. That's just my opinion-- though I will say that the Saga Edition skills system makes it easy for my idea to work.
EvilVegan 06-29-07, 01:03 PM	True, but not every aspect of the hero need be heroic. Item crafting is a big part of some character concepts, though usually in the area of magic items. Either way, I've played several alchemists and mundane craftsmen that made their own equipment.
okaynowa 06-29-07, 01:56 PM	Either way, I've played several alchemists and mundane craftsmen that made their own equipment. See, to me that makes a strong case for ruling that crafting an alembec is part of the Alchemy skill, or that crafting a plow is part of the (Village Farmer) skill. It comes with the job. Speaking of job, were these characters PCs or NPCs? Was making their own equipment a central, dramatic event, or just a montage sequence? Is blacksmithing something the player character does as a central calling, or is it what they do in between real adventurers? Not every aspect of a hero needs to be heroic, but every game mechanic in a heroic adventure game should have elegance and purpose. If crafting things "on screen" is going to be a big or recurring part of an adventure or campaign, then it probably does warrant a skill of its own. But if crafting is a downtime activity or merely a step in something grander, it can be safely relegated to a supporting role in a broader skill. What skill does a Jedi use to construct a lightsaber? Enjoying this, by the way-- ideas put forth might affect the artificer in my campaign. :)
EvilVegan 06-29-07, 04:07 PM	Jedi construct light sabers in a manner similar to what you're suggesting. They make a Use The Force Check after a certain point and expend a set amount of money. My characters were PCs, only 1 was an artificer/item-crafter specialized character. I had a paladin that grew up in a poor area and had to craft her own armor, and later on in her career didn't feel right wearing armor crafted by someone else. I had an chemist rogue that used a lot of alchemy items (before the prestige classes came out that made this work even better). Throwing tanglefoot bags every round can get expensive, and if you have an item crafter in the party using their downtime to make the party items, you may as well use your time restocking. I seldom have a character without craft. Also I've ran campaigns where the craft skills allowed you to craft magical items and had both a samurai player and a wu jen who spent a lot of time crafting their own specific weapons. The samurai had an adamantine katana, a deep ice katana (ice harvested from the center of a glacier that doesn't melt even in a fire), and his ancestral katanas. The wu jen had scarves that she crafted and laced with various materials that she wielded as whips or donned as armor (similar to bracers of AC). Craft was a very interesting and useful skill for them in this campaign. Side-note: Farmers rarely crafted their own ploughs, that was done by a blacksmith. :P
Dreamstryder 08-03-07, 04:34 AM	I put both Innuendo + Decipher Script in "Encryption" (Int), and perhaps Forgery should be a Craft, being trained-only & using Int like other Crafts, not Cha & untrained like Deception.
okaynowa 08-06-07, 09:29 AM	I did some brainstorming on the use of skills this weekend-- hopefully EvilVegan won't mind if I post them here. These are just musings, and potentially unworkable, but perhaps worth mulling over. Idea #1: Combat as a skill In a now-locked thread, someone pointed out that the end result of untrained/trained/focused skill modifiers is identical to the 1/2, 3/4, full BAB progressions. So that got me to thinking, what if the separate BAB system were collapsed into the skill system? Instead of taking Weapon Proficiency (Martial) as a feat, you take it as a trained skill. To reach a fighter's level of proficiency, you focus. An untrained combatant can only make the basic attack rolls, while a trained combatant can perform advanced maneuvers. For example, simple BAB-redistributing feats like Power Attack and Combat Expertise could be trained uses of a combat skill. The potential advantage of turning BAB into a skill is that it would finally unite "combat" and "everything else" into one coherent system. Also, at higher levels combat would work with pretty much the same numbers it does now. However, there are many questions that would have to be answered, including: How would the game deal with a 1st level fighter who, trained and focused in a combat skill, has an attack bonus of at least +10? Such a number radically changes the expectations of success in low-level encounters, and monsters would have to be adjusted accordingly. The combat skills would have to have associated ability scores. But which gets which? Dex for ranged weapons is fairly intuitive, and Str for melee weapons, but what about finesse weapons? Exotic weapons? I think it could be done: the maneuvers in ToB already demonstrate a little skill/combat integration, and even at low levels there would be plenty of ways to spend down that +10 bonus. But there's any number of arguments against it, including simple dislike of the resulting paradigm shift. Idea #2: Leet magic skills SWSE has the advantage of only dealing with one "magic system;" D&D defaults to two (arcane, divine) with the promise of many more (psionics, warlock invocations, bardic music, incarnum, and so on). But really, the critical difference between magic systems in D&D is what ability score drives it. So, make one magic skill for each mental ability: Spellcraft (Int): This skill is for wizards, psions, and other "classic" pure spellcasters. Pray (Wis): This skill is for clerics, druids, paladins, and other casters whose spells come from a "higher power." Manifest (Cha): This skill is for "natural born" spellcasters, including sorcerors, warlocks, and wilders. Each skill has untrained and trained uses, but a character cannot make a Spellcraft/Pray/Manifest check without an appropriate access feat. Spellcasting classes get that feat with their starting package, while everybody else (the would-be gishes) has to ante up. I could see certain low-level spells turn into basic skill checks. Detect magic could be an untrained use of Spellcraft ("Hey, this glowing sword is enchanted!"), Use Magic Device would be a trained use ("...and I think I can convince this glowing sword to dance..."). Detect alignment could be an untrained use of Pray ("Ommmm... that castle is eeeevil..."), while a minor form of augury might be a trained use ("... but the Silver Flame says to go in anyway..."). Manifest? Honestly, the Cha-based skill could use a better name, and I'm not sure what checks it should allow, but that can come later. But the design goal of these skills is that even a dabbler (someone with access to the skills but no real spells) can pick up the slack when it comes to the adventuring basics of 1) finding the bad guys, and 2) bringing home the treasure. Just some thoughts...
EvilVegan 08-06-07, 11:38 AM	I did some brainstorming on the use of skills this weekend-- hopefully EvilVegan won't mind if I post them here. These are just musings, and potentially unworkable, but perhaps worth mulling over.I don't mind at all, but you may want to post some of this up in the UA variant section as well. Its good stuff. Idea #1: Combat as a skill In a now-locked thread, someone pointed out that the end result of untrained/trained/focused skill modifiers is identical to the 1/2, 3/4, full BAB progressions. So that got me to thinking, what if the separate BAB system were collapsed into the skill system? Instead of taking Weapon Proficiency (Martial) as a feat, you take it as a trained skill. To reach a fighter's level of proficiency, you focus. An untrained combatant can only make the basic attack rolls, while a trained combatant can perform advanced maneuvers. For example, simple BAB-redistributing feats like Power Attack and Combat Expertise could be trained uses of a combat skill. The potential advantage of turning BAB into a skill is that it would finally unite "combat" and "everything else" into one coherent system. Also, at higher levels combat would work with pretty much the same numbers it does now. However, there are many questions that would have to be answered, including: How would the game deal with a 1st level fighter who, trained and focused in a combat skill, has an attack bonus of at least +10? Such a number radically changes the expectations of success in low-level encounters, and monsters would have to be adjusted accordingly. The combat skills would have to have associated ability scores. But which gets which? Dex for ranged weapons is fairly intuitive, and Str for melee weapons, but what about finesse weapons? Exotic weapons? I think it could be done: the maneuvers in ToB already demonstrate a little skill/combat integration, and even at low levels there would be plenty of ways to spend down that +10 bonus. But there's any number of arguments against it, including simple dislike of the resulting paradigm shift.The other way to go is to make skills progress like BAB. Classes have "good, average, and poor skills". In other words you choose your skills exactly like you do in Saga, but instead of a flat +5, you get average progression. And focus bumps that up to good. This makes for a very gradual skill increase (10th level character gets +10, +7, or +5; 20th level character has +20, +15, or +10). Either way you take it is more consistent, but neither way has an easy way to adjust for the systemic changes it would cause. But BAB should technically just be another skill, as should magic... Idea #2: Leet magic skills SWSE has the advantage of only dealing with one "magic system;" D&D defaults to two (arcane, divine) with the promise of many more (psionics, warlock invocations, bardic music, incarnum, and so on). But really, the critical difference between magic systems in D&D is what ability score drives it. So, make one magic skill for each mental ability: Spellcraft (Int): This skill is for wizards, psions, and other "classic" pure spellcasters. Pray (Wis): This skill is for clerics, druids, paladins, and other casters whose spells come from a "higher power." Manifest (Cha): This skill is for "natural born" spellcasters, including sorcerors, warlocks, and wilders. Each skill has untrained and trained uses, but a character cannot make a Spellcraft/Pray/Manifest check without an appropriate access feat. Spellcasting classes get that feat with their starting package, while everybody else (the would-be gishes) has to ante up. I could see certain low-level spells turn into basic skill checks. Detect magic could be an untrained use of Spellcraft ("Hey, this glowing sword is enchanted!"), Use Magic Device would be a trained use ("...and I think I can convince this glowing sword to dance..."). Detect alignment could be an untrained use of Pray ("Ommmm... that castle is eeeevil..."), while a minor form of augury might be a trained use ("... but the Silver Flame says to go in anyway..."). Manifest? Honestly, the Cha-based skill could use a better name, and I'm not sure what checks it should allow, but that can come later. But the design goal of these skills is that even a dabbler (someone with access to the skills but no real spells) can pick up the slack when it comes to the adventuring basics of 1) finding the bad guys, and 2) bringing home the treasure. Just some thoughts...Magic is tricky. Nobody is really putting up suggestions in the Saga: magic thread. I'm personally going to do a whole rework with magic functioning more like a mixture of per day abilities and tome of battle-esque maneuvers, with a reserve system built in (if you haven't used your teleport for the day, you can ready dimension door as a maneuver, but if you have, you can't), but this isn't going to be purely Saga, so my rules changes won't really apply to a Saga rework.
okaynowa 08-06-07, 01:07 PM	The other way to go is to make skills progress like BAB. Classes have "good, average, and poor skills". ... Either way you take it is more consistent, but neither way has an easy way to adjust for the systemic changes it would cause. But BAB should technically just be another skill, as should magic...It just seems that at some point (possibly from the beginning), D&D broke character-actions into three categories: combat, magic, and everything else. Over time, "everything else" has come to be represented by the skill system. If a skill system were to arise that were truly robust yet flexible enough to handle "everything else," why should combat and magic remain separate? SWSE's system nails two out of three-- it's not hard to envision a system that picks up the hat trick. Between the division of trained and untrained uses, and talents and feats to modify options, we're not even talking about a loss of detail for combat and magic-- just a reduction in the systems needed to adjudicate them.Magic is tricky. Nobody is really putting up suggestions in the Saga: magic thread.Possibly for the same reason a person who wants tea-for-two does not go elephant hunting. :) It's a big task. (Tusk?) I'm personally going to do a whole rework with magic functioning more like a mixture of per day abilities and tome of battle-esque maneuvers, with a reserve system built in (if you haven't used your teleport for the day, you can ready dimension door as a maneuver, but if you have, you can't), but this isn't going to be purely Saga, so my rules changes won't really apply to a Saga rework.I had some ideas, not about a magic system, but about the resources available to potential systems. I'll talk about that in the magic thread.
Ranger REG 08-07-07, 03:58 AM	I'd say we stick to the skill system used in Saga, renaming a few to keep with the flavor of D&D. 1. Use The Force = Spellcraft 2. Treat Injury = Heal We could also consolidate existing D&D skills: 1. Spellcraft = Use Magic Device and Spellcraft 2. Psicraft = Use Psionic Device and Psicraft 3. Endurance = Autohypnosis and Concentration Shouldn't we split Spellcraft in two: one for Arcane and the other for Divine?
Silverblade The Enchanter 08-13-07, 01:15 PM	K, my take :) D&D isn't Star Wars, knowledge is MUCH less widely available. "In days of olde", it was hard to learn things, though a person would need to learn allied skills to do things (blacksmith would often need to know how to smelt iron, and bronze), the ability to learn things from books was almost non-existant for most folk, so only training by a master, or trial and error was available. -Thus, crafting, proffesion and Knowledge skills should NOT be lumped together. Basically, if it's Int based, don't group it up (though Disable Device and Open Lock should be, they're much the same) Crafting-Metalwork; Crafting-Stonework; Crafting-Woodwork; Crafting Jewellry; Crafting Alchemy Seem to make sense for D&D as seperate areas. "Heal" skill is absolutely *NOT* the same as making poisons. A healer knows what poisons do, but it takes an alchemist to make them (or a Survival skill to gather animal toxins in the field). Likewise, Forgery should not be part of "decpetion", or any other skill, as it's an art in itself! FOrgery also combines making "fake art items", remember ;) -Same with Decipher Script, not many folk would be able to read (literacy woudl NOT be common in most D&D worlds!) and thus cryptogrpahy would be an art (as it is in real life). Knowledge SKills, should remain as they are, , though IMHO, Knowledge (specific monster type,: undead, abberation etc) should exist, as using say "Knowledge-Dungeoneering = knowledge of abberations" doens't really make sense. You may knwo what type of beasts typically inhabit caves/dungeons, but most of them are not abberations. Knowledge: Nature, is not the same as Survival, and should be kept seperate. Survival and Handle Animal make sense to group together. (maybe rename it WILDCRAFT?) Hm? :)