Skills and the Seigev engine

[Captain_K]

How do you folks handle non-class based skills that PCs want to know like, juggling, turnip farming, sewing, etc. Things that can't be "faked" you either have life experience and years of training or you just kind of muddle through?

We have been using the 2nd Ed DnD listing as a starting point/framework and each PC gets 3d2+ highest bonus in skill points to "buy" their first level non-class skills BUT they must all make sense in their back story, they should be half for flavor not just for abilities to help in combat or gaming terms. They are also useful in flavoring a base class.. like the archer with bowyer and fletcher skills because his people had to make their own weapons... etc.

How do you handle these things?

[Treebore]

I've been thinking of revising them, but this is how I've had it in my house rules for a few years now...

SKILLS and LANGUAGES:

If you want anything beyond what your chosen class give you do a back ground write up explaining how you were raised and trained. As long as you can make it a sensible and realistic back ground I don't care if you have 20 skills or languages. Consider 20 the limit, though.

When I decide a skill/language related roll is needed I will do it as if you have the relevant attribute as Prime, even if it is not, just like I treat Class Skills.

I will not accept skills that are too broadly defined, though. For example, Gymnastics is too broad. You must specify tumbling, balance beam, jumping, the horse, the rings, etc...

As for what a class automatically knows, lets use Wizard as an example. I will be willing to assume they "know" everything about spells, spell casting, spell creation, and creating scrolls, potions, and items. I will not assume they know about magical creatures, the planes of existence, etc...

Similar assumptions will be made for the other spell casting classes. You want them to know about monsters, the planes, etc... then do a back ground write up.

Now a fighter example. I will assume they know how best to fight as an individual and maintain their weapons and armor and how to ride their horse and give basic care to their horse and riding gear. If you want them to know how to make armor, weapons, leather goods, medically treat themselves or others, to be perceptive, etc... you must write up a background history.

For clarity, also list your skills you think your write up gives you. So after you finish your write up then list skills like this:

Weapon crafting
fishing
mountain climbing
skinning animals
etc...

EVERYONE HAS THE FOLLOWING, meaning they can add their level to the following checks:

COMMON ABILITIES
Common ability checks automatically improve as characters advance in level,
Common abilities include:
Strength: Feats of strength, jump, swim
Intelligence: Appraise, estimate, recall information
Wisdom: sense motive, direction sense
Dexterity: Balance, climb (simple things, like trees)
Constitution: Stamina, fortitude
Charisma: Bluff, haggle, intimidate, persuasion

*This is not "all inclusive", and I reserve the right as CK to make situational exceptions.

SPOT/Search/Perception/Notice Checks:

Only Barbarian, Rangers, Thieves and Assassins can add their level to a Spot check, everyone else can treat it as 12 or 18, but do not add level.

[Arduin]

How do you folks handle non-class based skills that PCs want to know like, juggling, turnip farming, sewing, etc. Things that can't be "faked" you either have life experience and years of training or you just kind of muddle through?

Background of the PC is used + common sense. Something like sewing finely is not going to be something the average adventurer is going to know. Punching some holes lacing together a leather pouch? Probably not a problem. It will be rough and ugly though. Turnip farming? Does the PC background show farming?

[Tadhg]

Are you kidding me, comrade??

Not just skill, but brute strength and a few shots of vodka were required to drive the ole Moskvitch '62 with the Seigev engine. Shifting was high near impossible if one's lover were sitting on one's lap while driving. And clutching . . yes - you had to stomp the pedal to disengage.

But the beauty of this vehicle was the strong but steady purring of the Seigev engine.

Twas the finest engineering from our Soviet brethen. I miss my old Sonja!

[Rigon]

For skills that are not defined as a class skill for any particular class, I go with the good old eyeball test. If it makes reasonable sense for a character to know how to do something, then I let them. If it is something that is standard for the setting (ex. fire building), I just assume that people from that "technological" area would know how to start fires with flint and steel. No check required. I mean, do you have to have special training to do something that everyone knows how to do in today's world? Why would it be that way for a game.

R-

[Treebore]

For skills that are not defined as a class skill for any particular class, I go with the good old eyeball test. If it makes reasonable sense for a character to know how to do something, then I let them. If it is something that is standard for the setting (ex. fire building), I just assume that people from that "technological" area would know how to start fires with flint and steel. No check required. I mean, do you have to have special training to do something that everyone knows how to do in today's world? Why would it be that way for a game.

R-

Make your INT check to use your TV remote to program it.

[Daniel]

Make your INT check to use your TV remote to program it.

Rolled a 1 again....


On topic; I have always tried to allow skill checks that made sense and not get too caught up in creating large lists to work from. What I find is that the larger the list the harder it is for me to manage as both player and/or GM. I also find it is easy to break down a skill too far. I accept a little "lack of realism" for the sake of the game. Using fishing as an example, I don't bother with Fly fishing, stream fishing, ocean shore fishing shore net casting, etc. It is ok for me to just say your character knows how to fish.

[Captain_K]

Clearly "spelling" and "typing" are not on my list of personal skills, that or I rolled a "1".


Thanks for all the input. Looks like I' not alone. I find the list kept simple is best too. But I like to know when folks are skilled horse trainers/riders (without being a knight) versus simply "able to ride" or in the odd background a turnip farmer able to eek out a living in poor soil under drought conditions... heck they can even cook the things to taste good.. that's a real skill or set of skills every PCs needs ;} Sorry Arduin, it was just a skill set not everyone has that popped in my head.. clearly a story/background with little gaming benefit, but background all the same.

[serleran]

Three ways:

1) each player selects two attributes. They can pick one talent for each using the absolute value of the attribute modifier.

2) "skills" are assumed based on race, class, age, background, etc.

3) use "everyman" rules, which is not based on the SIEGE Engine, but a d12.

[Rigon]

For skills that are not defined as a class skill for any particular class, I go with the good old eyeball test. If it makes reasonable sense for a character to know how to do something, then I let them. If it is something that is standard for the setting (ex. fire building), I just assume that people from that "technological" area would know how to start fires with flint and steel. No check required. I mean, do you have to have special training to do something that everyone knows how to do in today's world? Why would it be that way for a game.

R-

Make your INT check to use your TV remote to program it.

No need, it's an auto-programmed one that came with the tv.

R-

[Arduin]

But I like to know when folks are skilled horse trainers/riders (without being a knight) versus simply "able to ride"

Easy. Does the PC's background lists YEARS of experience breaking horses as a job (that's what it takes).

[Snoring Rock]

Are you kidding me, comrade??

Not just skill, but brute strength and a few shots of vodka were required to drive the ole Moskvitch '62 with the Seigev engine. Shifting was high near impossible if one's lover were sitting on one's lap while driving. And clutching . . yes - you had to stomp the pedal to disengage.

But the beauty of this vehicle was the strong but steady purring of the Seigev engine.

Twas the finest engineering from our Soviet brethen. I miss my old Sonja!

Wow.

Looks like the 62-78 Latta. Oh yeah, they all looked alike. The joke in Canada was "Latta Junk". You could get them in three communist rich colors, black, white and.... maybe just two colors.

[Buttmonkey]

How do you folks handle non-class based skills that PCs want to know like, juggling, turnip farming, sewing, etc. Things that can't be "faked" you either have life experience and years of training or you just kind of muddle through?

We have been using the 2nd Ed DnD listing as a starting point/framework and each PC gets 3d2+ highest bonus in skill points to "buy" their first level non-class skills BUT they must all make sense in their back story, they should be half for flavor not just for abilities to help in combat or gaming terms. They are also useful in flavoring a base class.. like the archer with bowyer and fletcher skills because his people had to make their own weapons... etc.

How do you handle these things?

I go the opposite direction and avoid dealing with skills like juggling, turnip farming, and sewing. I would assume a bard or rogue could juggle. I would assume any adventurer can sew well enough to maintain their cloaks, etc. in rough repair. I also assume PCs can do basic life stuff like ride a horse, fish, swim, cook simple camp meals, and start a fire. Developing a skill system to quantify that would be anathema to the rules lite approach I take. If a PC needs a specialized skill like smithing or bow-making, they can hire a professional. I've never had a player push for that type of pre-adventuring background abilities before. If a player insists that her PC must have some specialized skills that don't involve adventuring, I would have the player roll for a PC background using the funnel charts from DCC RPG. Congratulations, your PC used to be an accountant and has a quill and some ink as souvenirs.