Secondary Skills & Adding Level to Checks

[Melkor]

Hi all,

I am trying to get a C&C game going again with my group, and was looking over all of the various options in the CKG.

In the past, I have always allowed players to add their character's levels to any check that basically didn't 'step on the toes' of another Class/Race ability that their character didn't possess. For example, if a Fighter tried to pick the pocket of a city guard (after making a good enough case for the attempt that I felt it was warranted). This was based on my assumption that according the way the Siege Engine is supposed to work, level is pretty much always added to checks.

I like adding in a Secondary Skill for characters as just a touch of something they might have done prior to their life as adventurers, so I was looking at the rules in the CKG thinking that there was something that bugged me a bit about them in the past, then I remembered what it was:

In the CKG (P.264), it mentions the following regarding Secondary Skills:
"A secondary skill provides a character basic knowledge in that area. To this end they gain a +1 on any attribute check associated with the skill. They do not add in their level bonus."

Now assuming that I would allow the character to add level to any check other than something that 'stepped on the toes' of another class/race ability - that means that as written, taking a Secondary Skill would actually be detrimental to a character. Say I had a character who wanted to have Blacksmithing as a Secondary Skill - According to the way we play, they would normally get to add their level into a check to say repair damaged plate armor. If they were fifth level, that would be a +5 bonus. But if they took the Secondary Skill, and used the rule as written, they would only get a +1 bonus to the check and not get to add in their level.

That seems a bit off to me.

On the other hand, utilizing Secondary Skills in the game and adding level to the check means that I pretty much have to say that if you try to make a check in a Secondary Skill that you do not possess, you don't get to add your level to the check of a whole new list of things you are not qualified to do (like another class or race ability you don't possess).

That also seems a bit off to me.

That said, how do you guys handle Secondary Skills in your game?

Thanks.

[Rigon]

I don't use secondary skills. I think that if I did, I would ignore the "no level added" and just give them a +1 bonus for things that would be related to the skill and let them add in level. That is the simplest way to do it.

R-

[Arduin]

I only allow adding levels for named class skills (as recommended in the PHB). So if they have any secondary skills they are +1.

[jdizzy001]

I don't really use secondary skills. If you want to change it up a bit, allow them to add 1/2 their level to a secondary skill. "Class" skills get the usual full level bonus, 1/2 their level as a bonus to secondary skills and no bonus to skills clearly outside the perview of the class.

Arduin, I have a question about the way you play. How would you handle, say, a fighter trying to intimidate an opponent? Not in the barbarian way (which results in a combat penalty) but in a social situation. Since intimidate is not a class skill, but clearly in line with something a fighter could do, would you let them add their level to such a check?

[Melkor]

Hi Arduin,

My read-through of the rules is that you almost always add level to checks. I only have the 4th printing PDF with me right now, but in just looking again:

P.8
"Every check has an associated attribute. Whenever one of these checks is made, a d20 is rolled by the player. Attribute and level modifiers are added to this roll, if applicable. If the result is equal to or greater than a number generated by the Castle Keeper, called the challenge class, then the attribute check is successful."

P.125
"In general, it is recommended that a Castle Keeper should disallow a character a chance of success in attempting a non-class ability. If a Castle Keeper, for whatever reason, does allow a character to attempt a non-class ability, then the SIEGE engine attribute mechanic changes in one significant way. The character does not add his level to the attribute check roll. Instead, the character rolls a d20 and adds the appropriate
attribute modifier only."

That may have been updated in later printings, but I read that to mean (and have always played C&C in a way) that you add your level to most everything except something covered by another character's class or race ability - Rather than you only add it to a class/race ability checks you possess. Can't find the suggestion you referenced, but not saying it isn't in the book or in later printings.

[Arduin]

Hi Arduin,

My read-through of the rules is that you almost always add level to checks. I only have the 4th printing PDF with me right now, but in just looking again:

Latest printing pg. 16: "Every check has an associated attribute. Whenever one of these checks is made a d20 is rolled by the player. Attribute and level modifiers, for class abilities only, are added to this roll, if applicable."

[Rigon]

Hi Arduin,

My read-through of the rules is that you almost always add level to checks. I only have the 4th printing PDF with me right now, but in just looking again:

Latest printing pg. 16: "Every check has an associated attribute. Whenever one of these checks is made a d20 is rolled by the player. Attribute and level modifiers, for class abilities only, are added to this roll, if applicable."

On page 163 of the 6th print, it says to add level to checks.

ATTRIBUTES & THE GAME

Throughout the game, the Castle Keeper and players must resolve whether or not specific actions succeed or fail. These actions might include tracking a band of goblins, detecting a trap, swimming a mighty river or resisting the effects of a giant snake’s poison.

To resolve these situations, the Castle Keeper informs the player to make a specific attribute check: strength, dexterity, constitution, charisma, wisdom or intelligence. The player rolls a d20 and adds the character’s level and the attribute modifier of the attribute designated by the Castle Keeper. If the total score equals or exceeds the Challange Class, that number representing the difficulty of conflict requiring the check (see below), the character succeeds. If it fails to equal or exceed it, the check fails.

This simple attribute check mechanic for resolving conflicts underlies the whole game and is called the SIEGE engine™. The name SIEGE engine™ reflects the attribute check because all conflicts in Castles & Crusades involve an attacker and a defender, just as if an army were laying siege to a castle’s walls. The SIEGE engine™ mirrors the game’s story-based theme of characters seeking to overcome the challenges before them.

That's how I've played it for the last 11 years.

R-

[Melkor]

Thank you, Anduin.

I recently purchased the physical 6th Printing, but have not had a chance to read it yet.

Side note - Does anyone know if the new CKG that is being worked on going to be in color like the latest printings the PHB and M&T?

[DMSamuel]

I saw that slight discrepancy and I made sure to put something in my houserules about it...

Here is what I say in the houserule doc that I give my players before character generation:

Task Resolution – Ability Checks (a.k.a. SIEGE Checks):
A Standard SIEGE check is d20+attribute modifier+level. The base target number for a SEIGE check using a prime attribute is 12. The base target number for a SEIGE check using a secondary attribute is 18.

When attempting a task that is directly related to another class’ ability – that is, an ability from a class that you are not – you do not add your level to the check.

If you are attempting a task that is a class skill for you, the base target number is 12 even if the attribute isn’t prime for you. Other checks with that non‐prime attribute are at the normal 18 base target number.

-----

There are a couple of nuances to the SIEGE mechanic – dealing with class abilities is perhaps the most important one. When a PC attempts a task which is the class ability of a different class, the Castle Keeper has a choice to make. They can either 1) disallow the attempt, or 2) allow the attempt, but the roll is a d20 with only the attribute modifier added. That is, the PC’s level is not added to the roll.

This is class niche protection codified into the rules, and I like it that way. It basically ensures that even if any PC can attempt any action (which is how I usually run my games, rather than disallowing actions, which I find distasteful), only the PC with that skill/task/activity as a class ability will improve in that skill/task/activity as they rise in level.

That means that at low levels some PCs will be about equally able to succeed at certain tasks, but as levels go up the PCs who have specific tasks as class abilities will improve in their ability to resolve that task successfully. Meanwhile those PCs without that task as a class ability will remain with the same chance for success that they started the game with at level 1. It is a subtle, but surprisingly effective way to demonstrate class niche improvement throughout a campaign.

[DMSamuel]

Side note - Does anyone know if the new CKG that is being worked on going to be in color like the latest printings the PHB and M&T?

Yes - and it looks great!

[Rigon]

Back in the day, there were many discussions on here about how the SIEGE Engine worked. From those discussions and my reading of the rules, I've always allowed characters to attempt any action. If it is a skill of another class, no level, but for everything else, add level.

R-

[Arduin]

On page 163 of the 6th print, it says to add level to checks.

Specific prohibition rule (stating ONLY class skills) overrides a general rule. Been like that in RPGs for 40+ years.

The page 163 wording has been turned in for errata to eliminate the conflict with the specific rule.

[mbeacom]

I've always made the call that you only add your level to attempts at non-class specific tasks if the task is justifiably within the skillset of the class. So, perhaps a rogue finds a trap and wants to camouflage it so that the next person is even less likely to see it. That seems properly roguish, so I'd add the level. A wizard or Fighter doing the same thing? Wouldn't add the level. Perhaps a wizard wants to manipulate some magical energy they find deposited in an ancient flask. I'd have them add their level but probably wouldn't let another class even try. Perhaps a Druid wants to attempt to bond two plants together in an effort to create a unique gift to impress a local NPC who is fond of strange plants. I'd let him add his level, but I would say no to a Fighter or Assassin. So if the task feels like it would be something a class WOULD get better at as they level in that class, I allow them to add it. This is not btb but feels right for me.

[Melkor]

Arduin, I have a question about the way you play. How would you handle, say, a fighter trying to intimidate an opponent? Not in the barbarian way (which results in a combat penalty) but in a social situation. Since intimidate is not a class skill, but clearly in line with something a fighter could do, would you let them add their level to such a check?

This also brings to mind how to handle things like Racial Traits - The Elf ability to Spot Hidden Doors via a Wisdom Check - Since they get a +2 for being an Elf, I would assume you wouldn't add your Level to the Check as if it were a Class Ability.

How do you handle this in your games Arduin?

[Arduin]

Arduin, I have a question about the way you play. How would you handle, say, a fighter trying to intimidate an opponent? Not in the barbarian way (which results in a combat penalty) but in a social situation. ?

CHA check. In reality a rogue is probably better at that than a fighter.

You COULD run a Super Hero type of C&C game where high level fighters are picking up huge boulders and throwing then UP a cliff (like the Gorn on that ST TOS episode) by adding levels to non-class ability checks but it changes the feel of the game.

[Arduin]

[
How do you handle this in your games Arduin?

It (the elf check for secret doors) is CLEARLY not a class ability. So the specific rule I cited covers it.
No one is a 5th level elf. They are an elf who is a 5th level Illusionist... In OD&D there were races as classes if you want to go that route.

[Rigon]

On page 163 of the 6th print, it says to add level to checks.

Specific prohibition rule (stating ONLY class skills) overrides a general rule. Been like that in RPGs for 40+ years.

The page 163 wording has been turned in for errata to eliminate the conflict with the specific rule.

So, by your definition, this example from page 164 is errata also, since pushing things over isn't a defined class ability of the fighter.

Let us turn again to the example of Bjorn. He is a 5th level fighter with strength as a prime attribute. His challenge base to topple the statue would be 12. Pushing over that statue is a simple to difficult task, so a challenge level of 4 is assigned to the action. Adding 12 and 4 results in a total challenge class of 16. Therefore, the player must roll a modified 16 or better to push the statue over and onto the kobold.

The player makes the attribute check by rolling a d20 and adding Bjorn’s level and strength attribute modifier. For this example, let’s assume Bjorn’s player rolls an 11. Bjorn’s level (5) and strength modifier (16 strength grants a +2) are added to the 11 for a total of 18. This beats the 16 challenge class, so the statue creaks and sways for a moment, then falls on the kobold war chief, squashing it.

R-

[jdizzy001]

Arduin, I have a question about the way you play. How would you handle, say, a fighter trying to intimidate an opponent? Not in the barbarian way (which results in a combat penalty) but in a social situation. ?

CHA check. In reality a rogue is probably better at that than a fighter.

You COULD run a Super Hero type of C&C game where high level fighters are picking up huge boulders and throwing then UP a cliff (like the Gorn on that ST TOS episode) by adding levels to non-class ability checks but it changes the feel of the game.

Yes, agreed, a CHA check, but would they get to add level?

[Arduin]

Arduin, I have a question about the way you play. How would you handle, say, a fighter trying to intimidate an opponent? Not in the barbarian way (which results in a combat penalty) but in a social situation. ?

CHA check. In reality a rogue is probably better at that than a fighter.

You COULD run a Super Hero type of C&C game where high level fighters are picking up huge boulders and throwing then UP a cliff (like the Gorn on that ST TOS episode) by adding levels to non-class ability checks but it changes the feel of the game.

Yes, agreed, a CHA check, but would they get to add level?

Nope. It isn't a listed Class skill. Did you read what I wrote about doing a Super Hero type of C&C game? That would be what to do (add level to every check ever made) if you wanted people leaping tall buildings, etc.

[Rigon]

Arduin, I have a question about the way you play. How would you handle, say, a fighter trying to intimidate an opponent? Not in the barbarian way (which results in a combat penalty) but in a social situation. ?

CHA check. In reality a rogue is probably better at that than a fighter.

You COULD run a Super Hero type of C&C game where high level fighters are picking up huge boulders and throwing then UP a cliff (like the Gorn on that ST TOS episode) by adding levels to non-class ability checks but it changes the feel of the game.

Yes, agreed, a CHA check, but would they get to add level?

Nope. It isn't a listed Class skill. Did you read what I wrote about doing a Super Hero type of C&C game? That would be what to do (add level to every check ever made) if you wanted people leaping tall buildings, etc.

So, you're saying that a fighter can only add his level when he is making saving throws because he does not have any class abilities that are Attribute based.

R-

[Arduin]

[
So, you're saying that a fighter can only add his level when he is making saving throws because he does not have any class abilities that are Attribute based.

R-

Read the actual words that I wrote. THAT is what I'm saying. THEN, read the specific rule written about it that I quoted. It's TOO simple to go on and on about. What exactly didn't you understand in the rule from pg. 16?

[Treebore]

Hi Arduin,

My read-through of the rules is that you almost always add level to checks. I only have the 4th printing PDF with me right now, but in just looking again:

Latest printing pg. 16: "Every check has an associated attribute. Whenever one of these checks is made a d20 is rolled by the player. Attribute and level modifiers, for class abilities only, are added to this roll, if applicable."

Considering this is the ONLY place this is said, and it is countered in several other locations throughout the book, I consider this sentence to be the one that is wrong, and is in need of being errata'd.

[Treebore]

On page 163 of the 6th print, it says to add level to checks.

Specific prohibition rule (stating ONLY class skills) overrides a general rule. Been like that in RPGs for 40+ years.

The page 163 wording has been turned in for errata to eliminate the conflict with the specific rule.

They have also been saying when one sentence counters what is said in several other locations, ignore the one, not the many, for over 40 years now.

[Rigon]

Hi Arduin,

My read-through of the rules is that you almost always add level to checks. I only have the 4th printing PDF with me right now, but in just looking again:

Latest printing pg. 16: "Every check has an associated attribute. Whenever one of these checks is made a d20 is rolled by the player. Attribute and level modifiers, for class abilities only, are added to this roll, if applicable."

Considering this is the ONLY place this is said, and it is countered in several other locations throughout the book, I consider this sentence to be the one that is wrong, and is in need of being errata'd.

This right here.

R-

[Rigon]

[
So, you're saying that a fighter can only add his level when he is making saving throws because he does not have any class abilities that are Attribute based.

R-

Read the actual words that I wrote. THAT is what I'm saying. THEN, read the specific rule written about it that I quoted. It's TOO simple to go on and on about. What exactly didn't you understand in the rule from pg. 16?

I read the actual words you wrote. I just wanted to be clear that for every other example in the book, specifically the parts that talk about the SIEGE Engine, that contradict that one sentence, you think is errata and should be changed.

R-

[Melkor]

So last night, I found the following quote which seemed to describe not adding level to the check...Which, in my mind, actually fixes a lot of perceived issues I have had with little things in the system.

P. 229: "One should note that, all things being equal, a 1st-level character, when performing an action with a primary attribute, has a 45% chance of successfully doing so. This is without adding the level bonus, which is almost always the case. A 1st-level character, when performing an action with a secondary attribute, has a 15% chance for success."

Then there is this:

P.228 "When an action is taken for which the Castle Keeper deems a significant chance of failure exists, an attribute check is made. The player rolls a d20 and adds his character’s level (at the Castle Keeper’s discretion) to the roll, as well as any attribute bonus."

Then there are these which mention that level is added to checks:

P.230 "Remember, the level is added to the attribute check (the vast majority of the time— exceptions are detailed later in this chapter)."

P.234:
"The character’s level is almost always added to an attribute check."

"So, in general, characters add their levels to attribute checks, except when they are trying to perform a class-specific action which they have not used in play, or when they are trying to perform another class’ designated class-specific action, like tracking or picking pockets."

To be honest, if you don't add character level to anything other than your class abilities, it seems to make more sense in integrating with things like Secondary Skills as written in the CKG, and things like Race abilities which not only seem to add level, but also bonuses like a +2 for Enhanced Senses for an Elf (which seems a bit much to me).

[serleran]

In general, for my game, I look at the task. If its something "anyone" could try, then anyone can -- and I base success on attribute score. That is, if you want to lift a three hundred pound tree stump, you're going to need a certain amount of raw Strength. If I determine a roll is required, level is not normally added, but this would be extremely rare.

Abilities that are possessed by another class can be attempted by one who does not have them, and again, level is not added.

Level is always added to class abilities and saves.

[jdizzy001]

I think reading Bjorn's example of toppling the column on page 164 in the phb was helpful. It states very clearly that bjorn the fighter added his level to push over a column.

[Captain_K]

So much fun and for free too!

I like using secondary skills as part of a back story.. not per the latest, or any CKG, but per 2nd Ed DnD. It provides a listing of codified "skills" that any PC can have or say they learned earlier in life or as part of their class. Each PC gets a small varied number of these (3d2 or so) to help flesh out the PC, the class, and their backstory. I require a short paragraph to a page or two of backstory from each PC stating their life, country of birth, native language, how they got into their class and how their skill set works within....

So a typical Fighter, we won't call him Bjorn, let's call him Xióng, who has great strength and vitality and a very quick mind because he was a blacksmith's son and apprentice before his whole village, father included, was wiped out by a Demon (STR, CON & INT are his primes). Now he's a travelling Fighter out to rid the world of Demons. He has the following "secondary skills" along with that long list of fighter abilities to which we ALL agree he would get to add his level when rolling against (a specialized weapon, fighting low HD creatures, and taking extra attacks after 10th lvl): blacksmith (basic village smith STR), coke production from coal (WIS), cooking (INT), running (CON), Demonology (INT), reading Chinese (basic level INT).

As to rolls:
1) saves get to add level and are usually countered by opponents level/HD
2) any issue that pops up with Xióng's war hammer (not dropping it, using it in an odd way) or fighting creatures with said hammer would add level. Issues like can he impose himself in a doorway against 6 small demons intent on pushing past him - seems like the kind of check he could add his level to...
3) any of the skills noted above are not class abilities and would not add level but could be prime or not (affectively a +6) but are normally not against a level driven difficulty so a 12 to 18 roll is the goal.
4) Ex. Finding the signs after a slaughtered village that leaves written characters in blood on the walls would be a INT roll to understand the characters and that they were written by clawed hands and the killings have all the classic signs of Xiao (a one-footed mountain-dwelling fiend. It has one foot, a big head and a small body and attacks people at night). All of the later he would gain from a second successful INT roll. Neither of these rolls add level, but neither has anything subtracted from it other than a low to moderate challenge.

I think the key to helping make sense is what's the goal, always making every roll or keeping it a challenge? Things you add your level to NORMALLY get tougher to do as you gain level so that the rolls do not get out of hand. So moving silently for a high level thief should get easier and as the PC gains levels they can do so in more difficult surroundings.. or tracking for the ranger should be easy until its a single orc across rock three days ago... others without tracking would have no chance since its not a class ability of theirs...

To me class abilities are like "magic" to those who do not do them....

[Captain_K]

To finish that bit above, key to me that skills help with is the basic learning. In the example above the Chinese fighter comes to Europe on an extended "demon chase"... he finds he needs to learn the language.. years of work, but picks up a new language... even beyond the PH language limits... and learns he needs to learn to ride a horse.. in the beginning he just "held on" with basic SEIGE checks but over the years he picks up a new skill at "riding land based horses" and starts getting better at it, not KNIGHT good, but passable riding skills. This to me is the key, NO skill in reading Chinese and no SEIGE check matters, you don't have the basics, no skill in Chinese Demonology and you don't know squat,, same for making coke from coal.. this is why SEIGE for all sorts of things, but skills and class abilities and race etc for "basic level of ability" all the way up to amazing silent movement for a high level thief...

The old Prime vs not is +6, to me having an ability is at least that much better than those without and the same would go for a noted "skill" vs those not.

Swimming skill means you know what you're doing in the water, not having it is a SEIGE check to float and keep your head above water.