tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1790030420507335953.post1579065965617490236..comments2024-03-23T08:21:07.075-07:00Comments on Points of Light: A Closer LookDavid Guyllhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16299128722345607123noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1790030420507335953.post-11857787915573793632011-10-16T10:26:40.365-07:002011-10-16T10:26:40.365-07:00I used to find it odd that if you went strictly by...I used to find it odd that if you went strictly by the rules-as-written, that wizards trained in Religion would be more likely to know stuff about a god than a cleric who worships him/her (though I have met a surprising number of religious folk who do not know many things, or seem to cherry-pick various biblical texts).<br /><br />I get what you are saying; with the rank system the cleric would not have to roll as much as someone else when it comes to Religion, making it more consistent that they know stuff about their god, holidays, and ceremonies than a wizard.<br /><br />However I think it can be easily "fixed" by taking factors of the character into account when it comes to setting a DC. There are numerous examples in published adventures where characters of a certain race, with a certain power source, and even with certain feats (Dragonmarks or a spellscar) gain a bonus to some skill checks.<br /><br />I do not see why a cleric who worships Pelor has to stick to the same DC to know about a holy day as a wizard, or even that said cleric has to even roll. When planning adventures, I tend to also dole out situational bonuses for characters trained in skills or that have certain themes. I also have scaling results for skill checks, so it is not always a binary win-lose situation.David Guyllhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16299128722345607123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1790030420507335953.post-83187274578686640542011-10-16T07:44:12.279-07:002011-10-16T07:44:12.279-07:00Well, I guess that depends on if you believe that ...Well, I guess that depends on if you believe that classes or races should be inherently better at a given skill or not. In your case (Maxwell) it seems that you are happy with high wisdom being as important as training in perception.<br /><br />Are you equally happy that any wizard can easily know more about religion than a cleric? That clerics are particularly good at dungeoneering? <br /><br />It is my guess that this proposed system was triggered by a desire to see a greater distinction between the classes and races. To give a stronger sense of place or specialization to the individual classes. To ensure that different classes shine on different occasions - clearly and without peer.<br /><br />However, if that isn't the type of system you are interested in then clearly this isn't an improvement or beneficial.Geraldnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1790030420507335953.post-92132887713677005892011-10-16T06:39:45.846-07:002011-10-16T06:39:45.846-07:00I feel, based on your re-explanation, that a syste...I feel, based on your re-explanation, that a system like this would be significantly the same with the exception that now I have to re-teach the game to my group.<br /><br />Clerics are good a perceiving things. Maybe they hear the whispers of their gods. Just because some Rogue feels slighted isn't a good reason to replace the system with the same thing.<br /><br />The only benefit I could see to this system has a negative as well; setting up a module this way could make for quick reference as to see if a class in the party would be able to notice something right away or complete a task without rolling. In the game I run for Coliseum of Comics, this is what we use passive history, passive athletics, passive streetwise, and passive (insert skill here) for. A minor expansion of the passive perception rule is much better than this overhaul of the skill system.Maxwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13753905259909509809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1790030420507335953.post-4329248564605019532011-10-16T05:06:54.889-07:002011-10-16T05:06:54.889-07:00Thanks for putting for the effort to look for an i...Thanks for putting for the effort to look for an improvement to the system. My apologies for not getting back here earlier - computer problems FTW.<br /><br />I think the main difference with what Monte was suggesting and the current system is that specific classes, or races, would have set ranks before spending any points. His reference to the elf is how I got this impression. <br /><br />So, a Rogue might each have a perception rank of 3 while a Cleric may only have a rank of 2. The benefit gained here (and the difference between the current system and this ranking system as I understand it) is that in the current system the difference between the cleric and the rogue could reasonably be 1 point (based on wisdom scores) despite it being a trained skill for rogues and untrained for clerics. Which will commonly be negligible for checks. However, with a rank system the bonuses only apply if a roll is called for which would make it far more common for the rogue to perceive something than the cleric even if the different in skill points is only 1.<br /><br />Another blog looked at it from the perspective of a rank equaling 20 points, so a 5 point rank system would give the equivalent range of 100 points (e.g. if we use the ranks from Mike Mearls column the week before, Novice, Journeyman, Expert, Master and Grandmaster they would grant the equivalent rank of 0, 20, 40, 60 and 80 plus the skill points assigned). So, while it wouldn't be impossible for a novice to attempt a Journeyman check it would certainly be very difficult, but it would be virtually impossible to attempt an Expert check.<br /><br />What are your thoughts on the system as explained this way? Is it significantly different? Is it better, worse or does it make no real difference?Geraldnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1790030420507335953.post-52118010803925677842011-10-06T07:53:29.305-07:002011-10-06T07:53:29.305-07:00The penalty is -1, but you are right. I think I wa...The penalty is -1, but you are right. I think I was thinking of the Aid Another rule from 3rd Edition and just never picked up on the error before. Oh well, just one less thing I have to concern myself with. :-)David Guyllhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16299128722345607123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1790030420507335953.post-17987004723381065512011-10-06T03:32:29.557-07:002011-10-06T03:32:29.557-07:00I thought that aid another had already been change...I thought that aid another had already been changed to include a negative. DC 10+half level of the person you are aiding, -2 penalty if you fail.Maxwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13753905259909509809noreply@blogger.com