If DCs are just going to be Character Level + some modifiers. Then take character level out of both sides of the equation. It might make characters feel like their skills aren't really progressing but at least it's honest, instead of tricking them into thinking they are getting better at things, when they aren't.
The problem with that is then you remove progression from everything. The Pathfinder Playtest is built around this system. If you remove the per level to skills, you then need to apply that it to saves, since many combat uses for skills target saves. From there, you need to then remove it from abilities, AC, atrack bonus etc. It's the foundation on PF2's system.
The progression for skills is based on increasing available actions and minor boost. If you are doing the same task at early and high level, consider it not from the perspective of "the number is bigger" but "it is still a hard task", using the Hard DC for your level. Those who invested in the skill have the numerical bonus, and likely skill feats to give them further advantage. Those that did not invest and remain untrained have roughly the same chance of success they did the first time.
Whilst I can understand the potential frustration that the same task is harder because you got better, this is not new in Pathfinder. Diplomacy DCs in the original APs suffered greatly from this. Hazards had to scale beyond the CRB's capabilities in order to still be challenging to high level play. This time that is simply more transparent.
Essentially, you're picking between the lesser of two evils. You either have the level based system where yes, you get better, or you have a system without progression due to how central that mechanic is to the system.
I know it's heresy to mention, but the alternatives to this system mostly parallel 4e and 5e D&D. 4e used a system where you were proficient in X skill and that was about all. No points or progression beyond that. 5e's system has trained skills which add your Proficiency bonus to them, double for classes like Rogue and Bard that get Expertise but nothing for anything else. Pathfinder has attempted to take a middle road that still allows skill progression through specific training, without forcing players into limiting choices. If Perception for example, did not scale, your Perception DC, which counters things like Stealth, Deception, and others would be a necessary skill to take (bad example because most people get it free, but I couldn't think of another of the 18 skills off the top of my head).
Essentially, if you like anything else about how this system works, you kind of need to accept how skills and DCs work.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As Mr. Wyvernspur mentioned though, which had me look more into it,
As a game master, I don't want to take normal environmental challenges off the table and I certainly don't want to be concocting ludicrous situations.Nowhere in the book did I find a set DC table for anything beyond a few ordinary trivial tasks for Acrobatics, Athletics, Society, and Survival. The highest of which was DC 13.
I don't doubt your research. I was, however, responding to the argument presented by another that at high levels the DM should avoid normal environmental challenges in favor of increasingly more fantastic situations that justify a higher DC, and thus create a mathematical challenge. It was my opinion that argument wouldn't be a selling point of the game, to me.
Essentially, if you like anything else about how this system works, you kind of need to accept how skills and DCs work.
Indeed. That is the question I am ultimately trying to answer. Do I like the system enough to use it?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Essentially, if you like anything else about how this system works, you kind of need to accept how skills and DCs work.Indeed. That is the question I am ultimately trying to answer. Do I like the system enough to use it?
Whilst I am the Devil's Advocate, willing to defend design decisions, I must say I agree. I have not made a decision on whether I like the system or not.
I like D&D 5e, a lot. I see some parallels between PPT and 5e, which many people dislike strongly. We are however first: in but the first step of the Doomsday Dawn playtest, and whilst I am not certain, I would be more than willing to say in the first 5 days of release that most of the complaints on the forum do not come from a place of actually playing as they are from knee jerking "this is different". And second: in a playtest, not the final product. We have a full year before the game reaches its final state.
Thus my current decision of simply protecting design philosophy, even some of it I disagree with, until a later time as my table and I can run through all of Doomsday Dawn. Or rather, that I can run my table through it as the GM.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another consideration for those who dig the "high level people have learned a lot in their travels" explanation for why characters in 2E seem to know virtually everything...
The players are PLAYING through those levels. And the things that they encounter along the way become immediately accessed knowledge. Meaning, you've already fought a blue dragon back at level 7. You don't need to roll to know what its breath weapon does.
So really, the only things you need to roll Lore for... are the things you've never actually encountered on your path to higher levels. Yet you seem to know them all anyway.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The progression for skills is based on increasing available actions and minor boost. If you are doing the same task at early and high level, consider it not from the perspective of "the number is bigger" but "it is still a hard task", using the Hard DC for your level. Those who invested in the skill have the numerical bonus, and likely skill feats to give them further advantage. Those that did not invest and remain untrained have roughly the same chance of success they did the first time.
This is precisely the issue i have with it. I have played 4th and 5th edition and i agree this feels very similiar. Unfortunately, the skill system presented as is has the same problem. The skill checks badically dont mean anything. Everyone rolls on every check and either only one or two pass ir only one or two fail at the check regardless of class or character concept.
Most meaningful dcs increase in increments of 10 because we are rolling a d20. If Im rolling against a range of dcs if the skill spread between player A and player B is only +3, then most of the time both players will roll between X and X+10. Even when characters get two different categories they will rarely be off by more than one difficulty level.
Whats worse the character who is legendary at a skill can easily end up with a worse result then someone who is completely untrained in the skill.
Sure, its probably funny the 1st time but it will become increasingly frustrating over time.
"Ask bob the barbarian what the demon's weaknesses are, im just a stupid demon slayer who apparently doesn't know anything!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, I haven't found a progression tree for trained thru legendary in the manual yet.
Pages 8-9, I had to look them up just a bit ago too.
For something that's such a major part of the game it really should have a giant flashing banner or something saying "HERE IT IS". I know you can't do that in a physical book, that's not my problem. Stick some giant cardboard arrows that point to it in there, or make that part of the book into a pop-up book which displays the Proficiency bonuses surrounded by a choir of small angels that were trapped by planar binding and forced into servitude just to provide fanfare when someone looks up the bonuses for Proficiency.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another consideration for those who dig the "high level people have learned a lot in their travels" explanation for why characters in 2E seem to know virtually everything...
The players are PLAYING through those levels. And the things that they encounter along the way become immediately accessed knowledge. Meaning, you've already fought a blue dragon back at level 7. You don't need to roll to know what its breath weapon does.
So really, the only things you need to roll Lore for... are the things you've never actually encountered on your path to higher levels. Yet you seem to know them all anyway.
I think the explanation would be that while carousing and drinking in your downtime, you clearly meet all those unusual creatures as they too have to have a reason their skills treadmill up. There MUST be an interdimensional watering hole that every monster and adventurer go to for pathfinder training disguised as having fun on their offtime. So if you make your check, you must have had a few bears with that nameless tentacle horror last time you took a break between adventures. :P
I'm okay with the whole level adds to everything dynamic, assuming that:
A. Set DCs are set, which they are. The inclusion of a table with suggested DCs by level doesn't change that, though it apparently confuses a lot of people. They probably need to rework that, because it isn't 100% clear that they do not mean "every skill roll DC should be precisely leveled with the PCs."
B. The proficiency gating is functional, and doesn't lock out basic tasks that anyone could do untrained, just for balance purposes. Not sure if they've succeeded on this one. Kinda meh, really.
C. Skill feats let you do really cool things once you start getting high level proficiencies. They...kinda struck out on this part. A feat that requires Legendary Athletics and level 15 should do more than give you a swim speed equal to your move. Though that's still better than the Legendary Acrobatics feat which...allows you to squeeze through tight spaces at your full movement speed. A thing which has literally never come up in any game I've ever played, ever. Not to say the squeezing rules haven't come up, but I've never seen a situation where the ability to do it at full speed would have radically changed the situation.
D. There are enough Skill Feats to keep me from having to take unrelated or weak options just because there's nothing else left. Definitely not feeling that part yet. 10th level Rogue makes that list look tiny. Granted that part will be fixed when more splats start coming out I'm sure.
So overall I'm kind of ambivalent. Although I don't think they should drop the +level mechanic in core, they should probably include basic instructions on how to cut it out, because I feel like a lot of people want to. And the framework supporting the mechanic is going to have to be a whole lot better if they want people to be okay with it.
I'm leaning toward dropping the +1/level for untrained actions. But only for the skills like Lore that require specified subjects. That would still give small chance at knowledge(everything). Without having the high level barbarian giving guest lectures at the local medical school.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So far, this is the thing I like the least in P2 (but there's many things I like a lot). When it comes to skills, I think P2 relies too much on level and dice rolls as compared to build choices. 5 points has too little effect when compared to a 1-20 dice range and level range (and Item and Ability, but anyone can have that regardless of specialising). And for many skills, I find that the Skill feats don't do enough to make a difference.
I'm GMing Hell's Rebels, an urban AP where skills are important, especially knowledge and social skills. So my players have specialised their characters in different areas - and this has added to their personalities. The guy excelling in Sense Motive is a bit suspicious and the one with a high Knowledge: History is always going on about historic landmarks, and so on.
I can't see that happening in P2 anymore, where the difference between "untrained" and "expert" is that the expert has a +3 on a d20 roll, with 1-20 levels added. I don't care as much how this focus on level affects characters of different levels, but more how this will affect the party dynamics and character uniqueness (since they are usually at the same level.)
We make a lot of what is now called Recall Knowledge rolls in Hell's Rebels. In P2, anyone can Recall Knowledge for any Lore skill they might think about, untrained (p.151). Putting skill feats into Lore skills will give a poor return of investment, as it stands now.
Instead, I foresee that players in P2 will use their skill feats for "action" skills only, and as soon as there is a Lore-based skill check everyone in the party will roll, with about the same chance of success as if they would have had spent skill feats.
A few reasons
1) You learn as you adventure. Ergo, you grow in all areas regardless of what you choose to soecializes in.
2) This keeps the game relatively balanced *at level* so you don't need to have a DC 500 for one PC and a DC 25 for all the rest. It makes it so for a same-level group they can all have a reasonable chance to succeed or fail, instead of one auto success and the rest auto failures.
3) It helps show a difference between high level and low level characters.
4) Numbers aren't everything. While an untrained and a legendary are close in numbers, it's their *features* and proficiency-locked abilities that truly make up the difference. Even though an untrained level 20 is better numerically than a legendary level 10, the legendary character has options that the untrained does not.
Add one skill training per level instead of 1/2. Give rogues one and a half skill training per level.
make bonuses +0,+2,+4,+5,+6 from untrained to legendary.
That way every level you can learn a new skill or advance in existing.
Hmm thinking about it on side effect if they do (which they won't) remove level is you won't be able to do the really epic tasks Like 40 foot long jumps and dc 30 checks without reconfigureing all the skill dcs and then you have to make all the skill dcs a lot closer to each other so the difference between a dc 15 and a dc 16 will be worth a great deal more then previously. you might end up with something like a dc15 for 10 feet dc 16 for 15 foot etc.
Hmm thinking about it on side effect if they do (which they won't) remove level is you won't be able to do the really epic tasks Like 40 foot long jumps and dc 30 checks without reconfigureing all the skill dcs and then you have to make all the skill dcs a lot closer to each other so the difference between a dc 15 and a dc 16 will be worth a great deal more then previously. you might end up with something like a dc15 for 10 feet dc 16 for 15 foot etc.
Why not?
It could be tied to skill feats.
Feat; Legendary leaper, prerequirement, Legendary in athletic.
When you make long or high jump, double the distance your jump covers.
Hmm thinking about it on side effect if they do (which they won't) remove level is you won't be able to do the really epic tasks Like 40 foot long jumps and dc 30 checks without reconfigureing all the skill dcs and then you have to make all the skill dcs a lot closer to each other so the difference between a dc 15 and a dc 16 will be worth a great deal more then previously. you might end up with something like a dc15 for 10 feet dc 16 for 15 foot etc.Why not?
It could be tied to skill feats.
Feat; Legendary leaper, prerequirement, Legendary in athletic.
When you make long or high jump, double the distance your jump covers.
Uh hum: Alright I want to hop over the 10 foot gap ok dc 10 Oh I rolled an 11 and add +2! ok you jump 30 feet. oh I have trained prof, Oh 60 feet then.
Alternate scenario: I want to hope over the 10 foot gap ok I rolled a 5 and add +2 ok a 7 you failed. you can't make the 10 foot jump and fall into the pit.
So wait I can sometimes jump hundreds of feet and sometimes I can't make a 5 foot hop? man its all about that die roll then. literally for everyone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm thinking about it on side effect if they do (which they won't) remove level is you won't be able to do the really epic tasks Like 40 foot long jumps and dc 30 checks without reconfigureing all the skill dcs and then you have to make all the skill dcs a lot closer to each other so the difference between a dc 15 and a dc 16 will be worth a great deal more then previously. you might end up with something like a dc15 for 10 feet dc 16 for 15 foot etc.Why not?
It could be tied to skill feats.
Feat; Legendary leaper, prerequirement, Legendary in athletic.
When you make long or high jump, double the distance your jump covers.
Uh hum: Alright I want to hop over the 10 foot gap ok dc 10 Oh I rolled an 11 and add +2! ok you jump 30 feet. oh I have trained prof, Oh 60 feet then.
Alternate scenario: I want to hope over the 10 foot gap ok I rolled a 5 and add +2 ok a 7 you failed. you can't make the 10 foot jump and fall into the pit.
So wait I can sometimes jump hundreds of feet and sometimes I can't make a 5 foot hop? man its all about that die roll then. literally for everyone.
In another thread, I wrote how to avoid those things.
By adding mechanic to treat and roll on d20 as certain theshhold number.
I.E.
trained: all rolls for this skill under 5 are treated as 5
expert: all rolls for this skill under 8 are treated as 8
master: all rolls for this skill under 10 are treated as 10
legendary: all rolls for this skill under 12 are treated as 12
That way minimum competence in skill is increased but maximum is not skyrocketed.
Your still talking about making the difference of a single +1 be the difference of 10-20 feet. It means you still have the problem of the wizard rolling high and the figther rolling low (or treated at a minumum of 12) and the wizard jumping further then the fighter by 20+ feet.
Your still talking about making the difference of a single +1 be the difference of 10-20 feet. It means you still have the problem of the wizard rolling high and the figther rolling low (or treated at a minumum of 12) and the wizard jumping further then the fighter by 20+ feet.
Or make it that you can make a running long jump equal in feet to your str score.
halve that without running start.
If you need to jump longer, make athletics check.
will it be 1ft per pt over 10 or 1ft per 5 pts over 10 it is up to debate.
Well I'm using athletics because it easier to think about its examples but I think a similar circumstance would happen to every skill. It makes the die roll A lot more important. Plus I actually do want my 20th level character to be a lot better at skills then my 1st level character as well.
The other downside with your formula is now your taking away from the legendary fantasy that people have been wanting for non-magical characters. People have been saying for awhile they want a fighter who can jump 30 feet into the air and other crazy things like that by high levels.
|
I have an idea that makes use of Proficiency and the level of check needed (i.e.: Master Lock, Swim the Maelstrom (Legendary)).
It would work something like this using lockpicking as an example:
Untrained: Can attempt to pick ordinary locks. Nothing Higher can be attempted
Trained: Can attempt to pick Expert locks. Master locks could only be opened on a critical (either 10 above the DC or Natural 20). Legendary locks could only be opened on a Natural 20.
Expert: Can attempt to pick Master locks. Legendary locks could only be opened on a critical (either 10 above the DC or Natural 20).
Master: Can attempt to pick a Legendary lock.
Legendary: Can attempt to open Magical locks with no magical assistance.
Basically, it is this: you can attempt the skill level above you without any problems. Checks that are 2 above require crit rolls to succeed, 3 above require a natural 20. Untrained can only attempt to try things that are at a basic level, anything above is beyond their skill.
This would give a bit more meaning to the Skill Proficiencies and allow those that invest in a particular skill to shine without being outshone by their allies.
And just so that you can have a visual of what I perceive each level of lock as:
Untrained: Cheapo locks like you find on luggage.
Trained: normal padlocks and doors
Expert: what you might find on a high-end merchant's warehouse or goods chest.
Master: The Treasury, or something in Abadar's Temple.
Legendary: Some weird puzzle thing like the puzzle box from Hellraiser.