Skills by dice...

[Jaeger]

Several weeks ago it was firmly established that the standard ROS skill system is perfectly fine and there was no need to convert it to a stat+skill die pool system. And I wholeheartedly agree.

So, I hereby present my conversion for which there is absolutely no need:

1.  All skill and stat rolls have (TN:5)universal and fixed.
   -all checks are measured by # of successes.

   -all rolls are contested like combat with the   winner claiming the spoils. Or the GM requires the player to have a certain number of successes to complete a task.

2.  During Charactor creation you get a starting number of dice in your skills as follows:
A-5
B-3
C-3
D-2
E-2
F-1
Yes, choosing F as your skill priority means you suck, and an A priority mens you Da' man.

3.  Skill packets stay the same except that you change all the skill modifiers that have + to - and vice versa. These modifiers now add to or take away dice from your beginning pool.

EX: Stealth -1 would now be Stealth +1d
   -whith an AG of 6 and a B skills priority you would now have a skill of 4d, with a total # of dice to roll of 10d (6d stat + 4d skill.)
   - Skills cannot fall below Zero due to skill packet mods. It will just read as 0d for purposes of rolling. (Yes, with an F skill priority you will suck at many things.)

And yes, at character creation you get to use your MA to raise these skills by the number of dice in your MA stat.

4.  Skill advancement works more or less exactly the same. You fill in your 3 check marks during play yada yada yada, and... you still roll MA but the TN is equal to 6 plus the number of dice in your skill pool.

EX: you have a stealth skill of 4d, you got your three marks, your MA is 5. So you roll 5 dice with a TN of 9 (5+4d=9).

5.  Table mods for per and sneak:
  They add or subtract dice instead of raising and lowering the target numbers. But they are modified slightly.

Per mods for camoflage:
no cover:    +3d
Day:         +1d
Dusk/Dawn:   -1d
Night:       -3d
Heavy cover: -2d
Light cover: -1d

Per mods for pickpocket:
Out in open:                +1d
Moderate crowd:             -1d
Hvy crowd/good distraction: -3d
Proximity to body:         +/-2d

Agility mods for sneak:
Quiet:      +1d
Mild noise: -2d
Loud noise: -4d
Not alert:  -1d
Alert:      +2d

I reccomend a new skill be added called: Spot/Search
so that per checks aren't made against obviously larger die pools. (some more new skills probably would be needed, but I can't be troubled to think them up right now.)

Yes you can lose you skill die pool and some of your stat dice due to some of the modifiers.

EX: Gareth the Loud created a very big distraction for his sneaky, backstabbing friend, Draeden the Outlander. Geralt, who's standing guard has a Per of 5 and a spot/search skill of 3, for a total of 8d.
Draeden has a Ag of 7 and a sneak skill of 5, for a total of 12d.
  Due to the big loud distraction of men running hither and thither wondering what is going on, Geralts pool is reduced to only 5d (9d - (-4) modifier for loud noise/distraction.)
  So Geralt rolls his 4d and Draeden rolls his 12d. Geralt rolls well and gets 4 sucesses out of 5d! Draeden rolls his 12d and, well, lets just say Geralt doesn't notice the fact that his Liege's field tent just acquired a new occupant.

This probably needs further tweaks, (I know there's something out there I forgot to change), but the basic system is there.
For clarifications/suggestions you may respond to this thread, or email me at: useless@homebrewrules.com

Now somebody please playtest this so that I can make the nessicary changes in time to use these rules in my new ROS campaign: The Riddle of the Lute.

[Lance D. Allen]

I don't think it'll work, Jim.

Don't ask me why I called you Jim. It's late, I'm drinking, and I swear it's from a book or something.

Either way, that's not important.

I don't think it'll work as you expect. You're basically giving people massive pools in various circumstances. Esp. if it's an unopposed action, where you'll have nothing to beat except perhaps an arbitrarily assigned threshold of successes.

I could be wrong, but I've a sneaking (priority B, plus average AG of 4, so 8 dice) suspicion that it won't work out nearly so elegantly as the existing system in actual play/playtest

[Mayhem1979]

The present system has always worked fine for me... I have my stats, which are my raw natural talent, and my skill scores, which represent how good I am at the actual skills, roll talent against skill and there you go.

[Jaeger]

Wolfen,

 I don't care if it doesn't work the same as the origional system, because I'm never gonna use it. I think the origional skils system is just fine and I have no plans of ever switching over. You fail to see the pointlessness of my conversion and how it fixes the current unbroken skill system until it is.

Mayhem1979,

Your astute perception of the obvious continues to astound me.

Peace out.

[Lance D. Allen]

So you posted it for exactly what purpose?

Simply to make a pointless post, and waste your time, and anyone who decides to respond, assuming that this is a post with a point?

I see. Quite successful then, and I congratulate you.

[Brian Leybourne]

Come on guys, lets keep it nice.

Brian.

[arxhon]

Wolfen, Jaeger: No Group Hug for YOU!!!! :-P

Spamming is one thing (says arxhon the SpamLord of Portent), and angry replies are another (says arxhon the Master of Angry Drunken Email).

Jaeger's system is interesting, if, as he said, pointless to put into TRoS. On the other hand, I could see it having some use in a system of his own design, or being homebrewed into a game where the skill system doesn't work well, or the game has no skill system at all (can't think of any ATM).

Wolfen, normally you're a cool dude. I'm going to assume that you're still drinking or hung over or something. Chill. Let's not turn this place into RPG.net.

[Jaeger]

Evidently my attempt at subtle humor was a little too subtle for my own good.

[arxhon]

Yeah....

It can be tough sometimes.

I personally thought your opening comment "So, I hereby present my conversion for which there is absolutely no need:"was somewhat amusing, myself.

[Lance D. Allen]

Angry, no.

Annoyed, certainly. I responded thinking perhaps that it was a serious post, inviting serious comments. I was told, in return, that it was a pointless post, which irked me.

I was never drunk, nor hung-over. I had a small drink, and was being whimsical, as is my wont until something annoys me.

I am sure that it was not your intention, Jaeger, to annoy. But I dislike the feeling that someone is trying to make me look a fool by drawing me into a pointless discussion, and I tend to react in a less than afable manner when I feel this way.

[Brian Leybourne]

Seems like a good time to kill the thread then.

If anyone wants to discuss Jaeger's original idea then feel free, but lets not have a whole thread filled with "I'm sorry", "No, I'm sorrier" and so on.

So the thread is closed except to posts about the new skills idea ok?

Brian.

[Aaron]

As unnecessary as a change to the current skill system might seem there are a number of good reasons why a dice pool system, the same as weapon proficiencies, might be appropriate or considered.
*It could bring skills in line with proficiencies; after all fighting ability is just another skill.  This could lead to it being be possible to improve weapon skills through practice at lower levels, and not just with the use of spiritual attribute points.  Good for all those low combat proficiencies and defaults.  Similarly skills could be guaranteed to improve with SA point spending.
*It could lead to more consistency within the rules.  An across the board rule of everything, skills, stats and proficiencies high would be logical.
*In a similar fashion it would make skill and stat test similar with an increasing target number for added difficult.  The current skill system of taking off dice AND/OR changing the target number
*CP penalties for amour, encumbrance and fatigue could all be applied to a dice pool in a similar manner to combat pool.
*Likewise, pain and shock could also be applied the same way.  (I had a case where the characters fell some distance onto water taking falling damage and having to immediately make swimming rolls.
*Spiritual attributes would have a similar impact as they do on sorcery and combat pools.  Currently a character with an average stat of 4 and a spiritual attribute of 4 would double the number of dice they roll for a skill test when that SA is appropriate.
*Some balancing of the skill packets could be possible.  I know TROS isn’t a game of balancing one thing against another but the swordsman packet is pretty woeful when compared to the Woodsman/Ranger for example.
*Furthermore when considering the kits it could mean the two character who took the same priority in skill and the same packets could be different.

So there are a few reasons for considering a different skill system.  I came up with something while mucking around with Tros.  Some of it I liked, some I didn’t.  Tthe biggest problem seems to be how to handle a player rolling that many dice when it’s not an opposed test.  When considering some of the above points I thought it could be possible to give a character an experience point in an adventure when he used a skill/Weapon proficiency.  These could accumulate to some set ceiling after which he would have to use spiritual attribute points to further improve.  It allowed most skills to reach a level of around 4 before having to pay spiritual attribute points, with most skills being of average difficulty and having the same cost as proficiencies.  Harder skills a little higher, easy skills a little lower.

Aaron.

[Ashren Va'Hale]

\dag gone it, I leave the board for a while and jaeger is back up to his old shananigans... Never turn your back on that guy!

BTW I like how Gareth and Draeden were used in that example (thats how it would more than likely go down) and I actually think the conversion, although pointless, does much to demonstrate just how bored you must be.

I will keep up the current system but perhaps mess with this idea.

[Mayhem1979]

Mayhem1979,

Your astute perception of the obvious continues to astound me.

Peace out.

I try

Of course, if I'd remembered who that tag belonged to before I'd replied I would have tried to make the response even dumber.... ah well.  :D