Page 1 of 1
Secondary Skills? What is the point?
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:26 am
by tcabril
First of all - I was wondering if anyone is using the Seconday Skill Rules from either Yggsburgh or the PDF download. If so - what do you think?
Secondly - As I read these rules - I find myself saying "Why would I bother? I, honestly don't see a player actually doing this. What PC is going to stay at a low level in order to gain levels in secondary skills while the rest of the players advance in levels?
For example - lets take a bard. If that bard wanted to take the secondary skill Thespianism - it would cost him 5,000 XP in order to gain a +2 to rolls involving acting, disquise, impersonation, mimicry, orating, performing, reciting, and singing. So our bard at 1st level decieds to pursue this - by the time he aquires the 5,000 XP (he could have been 3rd level and on his way to 4th instead) the rest of the party is going to be 3rd level.
Without the secondary skill rules - and using the Siege Engine rules - anyone coud attempt to do any of those things under Thespianism and gain a +3 to thier die roll (i.e. 3rd level = +3 to checks) - if they were 3rd level (as mentioned above).
By utilizing the secondary skill rules (and continueing with our little bard) he would still only get a +3 (+1 for being 1st level and +2 for Thespianism).
So the bard has the same chance as the rest of the party and he is 2 levels lower than they are. I don't see the upside of this.
I could be getting this wrong - but I have shown these rules to my group and talked about them at the LGS and not one person can see any benefit from this.
Like I said - what are your thoughts?
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:58 am
by Vicar In A Tutu
I agree, the secondary skills are severly overpriced. Maybe it would be better simply letting a character gain a bonus number of secondary skills at 1st level equal to his or her Intelligence modifier (minimum 1).
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:47 pm
by rabindranath72
Well, there are some good reasons to use secondary skills as they stand:
1) they help roundout a character without requiring "shopping lists" of skills, counting of ranks etc. Furthermore, you can refine a character as you like, since they are not tied to level.
2) they are an effective way of adding skills from other classes without the need of multiclassing. For example, you can create a Fighter with Woodsman skills, which is not quite as proficient as a Ranger, yet has some of those skills.
3) they can be added "in play" without the need of completely remaking a character.
4) they help create effective NPCs without the need of giving them class levels. As an example, one of the most ludicrous NPCs writeup I have seen is in the Dragonlance sourcebook "Legends of the Twins". Therein, a simple (yet very expert) butler is created as a 12th level expert. So, our butler, to account for his "experience", also has tens of hit points, fights better than a fighter etc.; we are beyond the realm of fantasy, here. Instead, with the secondary skills, you can create an effective NPC with just 4 hit points. He will be master in what he does, but he will be likely (and correctly) killed with just one sword stroke.
Cheers,
Antonio
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:50 pm
by Moorcrys
I'm tempted to allow PCs to pick a secondary skill at first level based on their character history... that gives them just a touch of individuality.
Thereafter, they can purchase additional secondary skills or bumps for the secondary skill they picked. It seems like a big deal for a lower level character to drop experience into them, but much less so when the character gets higher in level. 3-5,000 experience is much less important to an 8th level character than it is for one who is 3rd level... especially as the different experience point progression for classes makes people level at different times.
_________________
----------------
Moorcrys
Re: Secondary Skills? What is the point?
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:51 pm
by rabindranath72
tcabril wrote:
Without the secondary skill rules - and using the Siege Engine rules - anyone coud attempt to do any of those things under Thespianism and gain a +3 to thier die roll (i.e. 3rd level = +3 to checks) - if they were 3rd level (as mentioned above).
No, you cannot add level. Level is added ONLY to skill checks for which your class qualifies. So, at most I would grant a bard to add his level should he try something relating performing. The other classes would just rely on the attribute bonues (and eventually primes).
Instead, with secondary skills, you could build a Fighter that, at some point in his life, he pursued the thespianism career (think of Cyrano de Bergerac).
Cheers,
Antonio
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:09 pm
by tcabril
My understanding of the Siege Engine rules is that if one attempts to do anything that is NOT the specific class ability of another class then you get to add your leve to the roll.
For example: Swiming is not inherent to any class therefore when making a check the PC would roll a D20+Ability modifier+level.
If a Wizard tried to Track (a ranger ability) he woul donly get to roll D20 and add his ability modifier.
Since none of the Secondary Skill Thespian abilities are specifically a class ability of any particular class - anyone should be able to do them and get the full befifit of adding thier level.
This was one of the things that attracted me to C&C in the first place - no more adding ranks just to have a skill incase you need it. Class level equates to life experience (as well as combat prowess) and therefore things become easier with time (i.e. you get to add your level to your check).
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:17 pm
by rabindranath72
tcabril wrote:
My understanding of the Siege Engine rules is that if one attempts to do anything that is NOT the specific class ability of another class then you get to add your leve to the roll.
For example: Swiming is not inherent to any class therefore when making a check the PC would roll a D20+Ability modifier+level.
If a Wizard tried to Track (a ranger ability) he woul donly get to roll D20 and add his ability modifier.
Since none of the Secondary Skill Thespian abilities are specifically a class ability of any particular class - anyone should be able to do them and get the full befifit of adding thier level.
This was one of the things that attracted me to C&C in the first place - no more adding ranks just to have a skill incase you need it. Class level equates to life experience (as well as combat prowess) and therefore things become easier with time (i.e. you get to add your level to your check).
Well, here is where common sense enters into the stage. If you do not allow the use of secondary skills, you must ask yourself what a character of that profession would be likely to know. One could certainly allow a Fighter to sing a song, but giving him the full benefit of class level for performing in a Professional manner, perhaps is bit too much, unless his background warrants such a boon (e.g. Cyrano de Bergerac). On the other hand, a bard is professionally adept at performing, so he would "naturally" add his class level.
Regarding swimming, you should take into account the background of the character. A Barbarian born and raised in the desert steppes, who has been lucky if he has seen a full bathtub in all his life, is quite unlikely to know how to swim!
The guidelines for using the SIEGE engine are just that: guidelines. You have a set of rules for handling actions, but when and how to allow those actions, is not written in the rules (nor should).
In any case, if you feel that everyone should be able to attempt anything without conditions, you are free to do it. But I would soon expect the players attempting all manners of actions which do not fit their character archetypes.
Cheers,
Antonio
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:25 pm
by tcabril
Hey Antonio!
I 100% agree that there should be some common sense - all I was getting at was - is it reasonable to expect PC's to sacrifice levels to gain abilities that they could otherwise have.
Back in the old days (before the dark time - before 3.X) as a DM I used a simple mechanic to handle those situations where a PC would try something that he either did not have a proficiency for or class ability.
I just used the appropriate attribute and then added 5 for every level of the character and used it as a percentage chance to succeed.
For example - I alwasy thought it was stupd that only thieves could climb (I am not a thief but I can climb stuff - indoor rock climbing ect.) So if there was a Mage in the party who needed to climb a wall, tree or something then I would ask him to roll his Dex + 5pts per level as a percentage to see if he could do it. So if our Mage had 4 levels and a 14 Dex he would have a 34% to climb.
I know its very rudimentary but it was the best we had and it worked for years.
I think the Siege engine works much better - and to repeat - use of commons sense needs to factor in.
Funny thing is all this discussion makes me want to utilize Seconday Skills even less than before.
Funny.
Todd
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:33 pm
by rabindranath72
Another point: if you use secondary skills, they are treated much as class abilities.
Quoting from the secondary skills rules:
Quote:
It is important to note that, when applying this system, the Castle Keeper must be aware that those attempting to perform actions that are covered by a secondary ability or class ability which they do not possess can not perform them as well as other characters or non-player characters. This allows the secondary abilities to have some meaning in the game.
Also keep in mind that having a skill level is equivalent of two class levels. So, they are not as costly as they seem.
Well, I hope you give them a try before discarding them. In any case, they are just optional, and can be added or removed without impacting the campaign.
Cheers,
Antonio
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:34 pm
by JonusBlackthorn
Checking the PDF under secondary skills
Quote:
It is important to note that, when apply this system, the Castle Keeper must be aware that those attempting to perform actions that are covered by secondary ability and class ability which they do not possess can not perform them as well as other characters or non-player characters.
It doesn't neccessarily say whether you add level or not but the example given in the PDF does NOT have the character with the skill adding level so why would a character without it add their level. I believe the assumption is that if you use the secondary skills then class level is only added to class abilities.
Keith
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:36 pm
by JonusBlackthorn
look like we both had the same idea rabin
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:36 pm
by rabindranath72
JonusBlackthorn wrote:
Checking the PDF under secondary skills
It doesn't neccessarily say whether you add level or not but the example given in the PDF does NOT have the character with the skill adding level so why would a character without it add their level. I believe the assumption is that if you use the secondary skills then class level is only added to class abilities.
Keith
It is explicitly said on pag.5 of the pdf:
Quote:
It is very important to note that the roll IS NOT adjusted by the characters class level.
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:37 pm
by JonusBlackthorn
Thanks rabin. I've really only scanned the document. I will probably not use them anyway, but if one does use them it only makes sense to use class level with class abilities.
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:39 pm
by rabindranath72
JonusBlackthorn wrote:
look like we both had the same idea rabin
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 2:06 pm
by BeZurKur
I don't have the rules for the secondary skills, but if I understand this right, I might have to tell the player with the the 1st level woodsman figher (I'm sure they exist) that he can't identify the plant growing behind his cabin until he picks up the skill. Hmmm... but he can later learn the skill by paying XP for it: nope, certainly not interested in those optional rules. If I wanted a structure in the rules to define a character, I can play many other good games that already do that for me. It sounds to me that would be trading one of C&C's strengths for a weakness, IMHO.
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 3:33 pm
by johns
Taking the original example of the bard, though, consider that by the time the 3rd level characters in the party have reached 4th level, the bard will probably reach 3rd level - the doubling of required XP at each level allows characters who fall behind to catch up quickly.
Thus,
1st level bard (thespian +2): 0 XP
3rd level fighter: 5,000 XP
--
3rd level bard: 3,500 XP
4th level fighter: 8,501 XP
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 5:38 pm
by moriarty777
I definately believe that they have merrit but not necessarily all of them.
As for cost, I am in favor of the high cost because some of those skills are really a sort of expertise.
Some of the knowledge ones are my favorites personally speaking and I think that these are also ideal for specialist NPCs... Consider an Engineer who specializes in building and setting up Siege Equipment... no class in the PHB is able to do that. Period. Special training and considerable time is required. The same can be said of other special areas of training. If a character wishes to the spend the time to learn the discipline which, almost amounts to a class of its own, then the high XP cost is well worth it.
Otherwise, they'll need to hire someone to do it. In comes the 'expert'.
Just my two coppers.
Moriarty the Red.
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"
Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:02 pm
by Moorcrys
We had this discussion some months ago.
Secondary skill abilities are not class abilities. You don't throw out the common sense'ness' of C&C just because you add in secondary skills. For instance, just because a secondary skill includes swimming doesn't mean that no one can swim who doesn't possess that particular skill. It means that in a highly dangerous situation, the one who possesses the skill can perform 'heroic' acts or very difficult acts if they succeed at their skillcheck.
So if the party needs to swim across a river, the CK would probably determine that a great number of the characters simply knew how to swim. To dive into a raging river to rescue a drowning comrade may require a bit more skill, and the one who possessed the secondary skill that included swimming would have bonuses to accomplish that feat.
_________________
----------------
Moorcrys
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:48 pm
by Emryys
Moorcrys wrote:
Secondary skill abilities are not class abilities. You don't throw out the common sense'ness' of C&C just because you add in secondary skills. For instance, just because a secondary skill includes swimming doesn't mean that no one can swim who doesn't possess that particular skill. It means that in a highly dangerous situation, the one who possesses the skill can perform 'heroic' acts or very difficult acts if they succeed at their skillcheck.
Exactly
The equivalent in 3.5 would be "untrained checks allowed"
Swimming -yes
Decipher -No
Although swimming I would do an ability check Vs. Str or Con
_________________
Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:22 pm
by weasel fierce
I'd be tempted to just let each player pick one or two "background" skills that they are good at. When doing stuff involving these, that warrants a dice roll (important distinction), they get a +2 or whatever.
So you might be good at building boats and herding cows, or whatever
Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:21 pm
by Rigon
Grey Elf has a background skill system that is fairly simple. here is the link:
http://www.grey-elf.com/candc/backgrounds.pdf
I don't personally use it, but it is better, in my opinion, than the one in CZY.
R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind
Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:50 pm
by Ghul
There is ample room for both. If you want your character to have a background -- say he is a fighter, but is a skilled woodcutter, having done so since he was but a lad. He may be quite skilled in identifying trees, knowing which ones burn best, which ones are resionous, etc. But he's not going to be able to do the other things that someone with the Woodsman Ability has, such as hunting, fishing, boating, climbing, tracking, and more. With all these skills, you are getting quite a good deal, as your fighter can now effectively perform as a ranger does in many capacities.
Secondary Skill bundles allow your character to customize a bit beyond the boundaries of the class system, thus bridging the gap between a class based system (Castles & Crusades) and a skill based system (Lejendary Adventures). IMO, of course.
--Ghul
Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:33 am
by Rigon
After reading this thread this afternoon, I was looking through the RC and was checking out the optional skills section. If I were going to incorporate a skills system into my game, I'd base it off of that system and try to keep it very simple.
R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind
Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:36 am
by moriarty777
I have to agree with Ghul...
These aren't made as a replacement and these shouldn't be seen as a wrench thrown into the SIEGE Machinery. Don't get me wrong... I don't like all the ones presented and my ultimate implementation of them will mean that some will get axed. It did lead me to the idea of expertises within the game to complement the very solid game design that C&C rests on.
I gave the example of a siege weapon engineer... Another could be a baker. Sure... everyone can bake (albeit some better... some worse) and then you have your French Pastry Chef. A clear difference in ability and training (something that warrents a large XP cost). However I see how this might be more beneficial with NPCs.
As for the background secondary skills inspired from OD&D and AD&D... they fit too and really help fleshout a characters background... these are great too and can present a perfect backdrop that the characters can fall back on in terms of special skills. This was what the adventurer was probably doing or learning before starting his career as an adventurer. There is nothing preventing the said adventurer from picking something else down the line. This is a system that may allow a CK to help implement that.
However, as I mentioned, I feel it needs some work before I decide to implement it. The other secondary skill options mentioned are also under consideration for me.
Moriarty the REd
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"
Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com
Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 2:12 am
by BeZurKur
I understand the desire to personalize the character, but in the pursuit to make that personalization reflect on the character sheet, one can risk the ease of a class based system. I know the arguement that it allows for fine tuining and vision, but then why stop there? Ditch the classes and go skill based. This is not a dig on either kind of system or an attack on anyone. I'm just saying to find the right tool for your game.
Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 2:51 am
by moriarty777
BeZurKur wrote:
I understand the desire to personalize the character, but in the pursuit to make that personalization reflect on the character sheet, one can risk the ease of a class based system. I know the arguement that it allows for fine tuining and vision, but then why stop there? Ditch the classes and go skill based. This is not a dig on either kind of system or an attack on anyone. I'm just saying to find the right tool for your game.
There is merrit to what you say... I suppose the point I was trying to make was the notion of professions... In a class based system... no CK in their right mind is going to make a Baker Class... an Alchemist Class... A Farmer Class... a Beggar Class... etc.
A Commoner... will be a Commoner... with D6 hitpoints and some will be famers and whatever...
I saw some of what was presented as an interesting design element which could also benefit player characters.
Is it needed? NO. C&C is meant to be liberating and it is far more simpler to say that Joe Blow the Commoner happens to be a whatever... raised in the tradition of his family of whatevers...
Same goes with PCs... they have developed backgrounds as far as the CK or player wishes to take them... Those who do end up creating a much more solid character for the enjoyment of all.
None of the skill options are necessary. But... they are what they are... options. Some people like them like some people invariably find a way to complicate their lives.
Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"
Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com