Mar 15, 2023
New mechanic for your urban games
seen from France
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Australia
seen from Germany
seen from Germany
seen from Türkiye
seen from Canada
seen from Czechia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Germany
seen from India
seen from United Kingdom
New mechanic for your urban games
Intelligence is the amount of clay you have
Wisdom is what you do with the clay
Undoubtedly the greatest sin of D&D is its treatment of skills. It’s actually pretty funny just how poorly they’re handled, to the point at which it’s genuinely sad that for so many people it’s the only RPG they’ll ever play, because there are much, much better ones out there. (Also, assume when I say D&D that I am referring to the fifth edition of that game.)
Ok, but why? What’s wrong with D&D’s skills? For a start, they’re almost meaningless. They’re presented as closer to specific appliccations of an ability score than they are as their own indepentent abilities. Ultimately, this comes down to the way proficiency works, as a one size fits all single modifier. You use your ability score and your proficiency bonus, the latter of which means very little at the levels at which 90% of play takes place. For example, the character I play in one of my games has been educated extensively in the internal workings of the multiverse, and has proficiency in Arcana and Religion to reflect this. Except... their intelligence isn’t particularl high. It’s respectable, sitting at 14, the second highest in the party, but when one of the other players, who hasn’t had the canonic education that mine has, has only one point of modifier to those skills lower than mine because their intelligence is 18... it doesn’t really make any sense, does it? How did they come by that esotric knowledge, introspection into the nature of reality and their own being? Yeah, no. I’m not buying that.
3.5, which I played for many years before 5e, got around this issue by allowing curated skill progression. Each level up, you assigned skill points, which you were given a number of according to your class and intelligence (I also seem to remember that humans got a few more per level). (Intelligence, by the way, has dropped from being an absolutely crucial ability score to (ironically) the no brainer dump stat for most characters, which while not inherently a bad thing doesn’t do great things for balancing wizards and artificers.) There were certain skills that it was harder to level up, as you had to invest two points to increase that skill’s modifier by one, which was dictated by your class. This led to enormous modifiers only a few levels in, but the game got around this by just inflating DCs as players progressed in level (which was incidentally an incredibly good tool for DMs to indicate that the player’s shouldn’t be attempting a certain challege too early on - they simply could not reach the DCs required at the level they were at. This also appied for AC, by the way). The end result of this was that in the late levels, the actual roll barely mattered, but at those levels, where characters are expected to be consistently good at things, that made sense!
Recently, I’ve started prepping for a game of Werewolf: The Apocalypse, a game that I absolutely adore, but haven’t really been able to play for a while because I haven’t been able to find a group until now. Anyway, while going through the rulebook, I was amazed at how much better skills are dealt with than in D&D (I’m not claiming that Werewolf is perfect, but Gaia is it a breath of fresh air after playing nothing but D&D for so long). For one thing, the rulebook is much more concerned with the concept of failing forward than that of D&D, and provides the Storyteller with help on how to do this effectively, but this isn’t as relevant. They can’t be compared as directly as with 3.5, because the die rolling system in World Of Darkness games is completely different, but the nice thing about them is that they aren’t tied to any one ability score (they’re not called that, but the equivalent of them). In D&D, if I, a lawyer, make a bulletproof case to a jury as to why my client is innocent, including indisputable evidence and flawless logic, I am asked to make a Persuasion check. In D&D, Persuasion is a Charisma based skill. This very plainly doesn’t make sense in context, my Intelligence should be the driving ability here, but it’s not. In Werewolf, however, the Storyteller (me in this case) asks the player to roll Intelligence + Expression, combining the Persuasion equivalent with the character’s mental acuity. Much better.
My final gripe with the skill system is just how of them there are. Look at this. Compare these, representing the numbers of skills in each of these game lines.
Call of Cthulhu: 59
Werewolf: The Apocalypse: 30x9 (As there are 9 different Traits (Ability Scores) with which to combine Abilities (Skills))
3.5: 36
D&D 5e: 18
By the way, in 3.5 the number is actually a lot higher than that because you can add other skills like Engineering, Law, and Economics based on what your character knows about or knows how to make. D&D falls massively short by comparison, with a lot of things left out entirely. I understand the motivation behind combining things like Run, Jump, and Swim into Atheltics, and Listen and Spot into Perception, but there are entire, and pretty useful, skills like Appraise and Craft which are completely done away with.
Ultimately, this doesn’t really matter, but it is the driving factor in why I am becoming less and less interested in D&D on the whole. I do completely understand why people like it, it’s simple and it has a larger fanbase than most other games, making it perfect to start out with in the hobby, but I just can’t help but feel that it could be doing something so much better. I’ll get back to planning Werewolf stuff now. Play whatever you want to play.
Intimidation shouldn’t be under Charisma is 5e, fight me.
Building Character - That One Low Ability Score ...
Let’s start by establishing the setting around this topic of discussion.
I dislike the phrase ‘Mary Sue’ when used as a critique of fictional characters.
For those of you who are unaware, ‘Mary Sue’ is a punchy, dismissive insult handed to writers who create characters without an obvious flaw by critics. It is a sentiment that has deeper bias within western literature and fiction. An audience often will turn against these examples of ‘perfection’ if there is not some horrific secret that serves to justify it. This is best explored in Ursula Le Guin’s ‘The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas’, although other contemporary examples in culture include WWE wrestler Roman Reigns, DC Comics’ Superman, and the Paladin class in D&D.
Personally, I swerve to avoid this cliche through personal preferences but I am not afront to it by nature. I do, however, deeply dislike the back-handed superiority that arises from those who hold onto it like a trap for writers to fall into and often as a tool to justify their cruelty.
With my players at my games, I do use random ability score generation for D&D and Pathfinder. This means that players bring a broad spectrum of statistics to the table to avoid saturation of play styles. For every character with above-average scores in everything there is one or two who are genuinely talented in one field of expertise, and yet clueless in another. A fighter whose back just cannot carry the weight it once could, but his aim with a bow is near impeccable. A lowly thief who knows every alley, street, corner, and rooftop from the eastern suburbs to the western docks but has his words jam up in his mouth when he needs them most. It often has every player treating their characters with a parental adoration despite all their differences ...
... and that is just what they are; differences.
Not crippling detriments, but things to hold onto, things to remind you of who you are and why you fight. They are not weaknesses, but a piece of you - a piece to shape as you see fit and turn into a weapon of irresistible force. You take the flaws that the world gave and you turn them around and back onto it.
You are a hero - a word undefinable through colour, creed, or capability, only through heart.
How to play with a ‘dump stat’? (Players and Game Masters)
One of the players in my current Pathfinder RP is a Dwarf Ranger, one I have mentioned before in a previous post. He is a dependable sort, has his own prejudices and habits, but is one hell of a fine shot with his new heavy crossbow. There is only one issue - his strength score is 3. Three.
A few things should be made of note to contextualise the significance of this fact;
- The standard average for an ability score is 10 or 11
- 3 also happens to be the same strength score of an everyday house cat or owl
- He cannot physically carry any weight beyond that of his crossbow and simple clothing
When he first rolled those four ones (4d6 and drop the low, yada-yada ...) I sharply inhaled through my teeth and tilted my heard with a timid “well.” But Joe? Joe was grimacing in fascination - it was all he could have wanted.
How did we work around this? We didn’t. The tools were already there.
Usually, an over-encumbered character cannot move if over a certain weight capacity, as calculated by their strength. Unless you are a Dwarf. Dwarves ain’t too fast, but good luck slowing one down - even a frail one. We also had a crisis in imagery, as I continually mistook Joe’s Ranger for a stereotypical Dwarf - one you’d see in the Core Rulebook or fan art with broad, well-haired forearms and a wide, barrel chest. In reality, this Dwarf has lithe, small, and not all too durable at all. This means that he will always want to stay at the rear of combat and use his better talent for marksmanship in place of close-quarters.
What I was vigourously encouraged to see was how the party accustomed to this like a family. The Cavalier and the Barbarian opted to help carry his miscellaneous gear on their shoulders in stead, the party always left someone within reaching distance of him in case enemy ranks closed ground into melee, and the party began to strategise their engagements with a constant awareness of how the Dwarf would want to best make his shots, clear of obstacles.
The party were not only aware of their Ranger’s limitations, but changed their entire approach in battle to best utilise what he was undeniably the best at. They even chose to take on more responsibilities and penalties so he was not impeded by something he would not be able to cope with if left alone.
This low strength score also inspired him to choose his Ranger's animal companion to be a strong shire horse named ‘Brak’ (Dwarven for ‘Fool’). Brak is a tough, reliable brute of a horse. Incredibly friendly, loyal to a fault, but thick as a brick shit-house. The Ranger treats his companion with care and consideration, taking time to explain instructions, and never demanding more than could be reasonably asked for, much the same treatment that his party offered himself when he was first rescued in the mountains. The cycle of compassion continued despite everyone being a misfit and outcast.
Don’t be afraid to ask for help with your struggles - in life and game - because, more often than you think, you are worth it.
Enjoy the game, you beautiful people.
Pixie x
21/10/2017
Pathfinder 1d100 Ability-Score/Starting Sets
Pathfinder 1d100 Ability-Score/Starting Sets
What’s the best way to generate ability scores for a new set of PCs? Well, there are a lot of options out there, including my own personal house-rules, here ... but here’s another!
-- Different Point-Buys, adding extra Feats, Traits and Drawbacks --
With your GM’s permission, roll d100 twice on the chart below and write down both possible stat-sets. After carefully considering your character, pick your favorite of the two stat-lines and assign the six scores to your abilities as you see fit. You may choose to discard both rolls and try your luck a third time, but you must take the third and final roll.
My dump stats are strength, agility and constitution.
ABILITY SCORE MODIFIERS
20 - +4
19 - +3
18 - +3
17 - +3
16 - +2
15 - +2
14 - +2
13 - +1
12 - +1
11 - +1
10 -
9 -
8 -
7 - -1
6 - -1
5 - -1
4 - -2
3 - -2
Roll 3d6, reroll ones for character creation.