Extinction Event Alpha test

[damned]

Outsider looking in... If you have a specific (trained) skill at something it can compensate for a lack of native (attribute) skill.
You could use whichever was most suitable - if you had specific skill at throwing you could likely throw just as well as or better than someone who has a naturally good dexterity.
Likewise a good dexterity could translate to you being quite handy at throwing too.
If you had both training and natural ability you might apply the bonuses from one to the other...?

[cmdisc]

Nah, you're not thick. I'm just wordy. Ask d1wright, he knows. He’s been gaming on and off with me for 25 years (the poor sap). heh Let me put things a different way.

EE is unique from other RPGs I’m familiar with (admittedly few) in that it doesn’t have Skills and Attributes interrelating at all. Where D&D says your attempt to Jump is [Jump Skill + Strength modifier + d20], EE says that your attempt to Jump is your Jump Skill only (expressed by xd10) and it doesn’t matter how Strong or Coordinated you are. In D&D, even if I didn’t have any skill in Jump, I could still attempt it by applying only my Strength modifier to the roll. But in EE, a 0 skill means 0 attempts. I don’t get a roll.

This is fine when we’re talking about skills that require training, such as Biology, First-aid, Carpentry, or Explosives. If I have 0 in Carpentry, then I don’t know anything about it. But there are some “innate” actions like jumping, lying, and sneaking up on someone that I think any Average Joe could attempt even if they don’t have skill in it. It doesn’t make sense to me to say that a Strength 4, Coordination 4, Jumping 0 character can’t leap across a small stream or over a low wall. But that is exactly what the rule as written states.

As for Attribute checks such as grappling, lifting, memorizing, and throwing, these are actions that can be improved with training. But the rule as written doesn’t allow for this. So the pro baseball player with Coordination 3 can only throw as well as Gage and the Pro Light-weight Wrestler with Strength 3 is evenly matched with Gage.

This is what I mean by a Grey area. Your Technical Trade Skills and Trained Skills are fine. But Skills I would refer to as Innate Skills (common things anyone can try to do) need clarification.

So what do you do? Possible options:

#1 Emphatically state that characters MUST put at least 1 point (3 average) into these kinds of skills, just like characters MUST put at least 1 point (2 average) into every Attribute. These skills will have to be highlighted and extra points should be given out at character creation.

#2 Say that a 0 in a skill means you can still attempt it, but with a single die at a penalty on the TN. Maybe Innate skills suffer a +2 on the roll (you’ve never practiced it), Trained Skills suffer a +4 on the roll (maybe you heard something at some point about it), and Technical Trade Skills can’t be attempted at all (I don’t care if your aunt told you about the surgery she once had, you still can’t perform an appendectomy on someone).

#3 Remove these “innate” skills from the skill list and make them Attribute checks instead. See #5 below.

#4 Tie every Skill to an Attribute and average the dice together. Low Attributes will hinder high Skills (that 10 in Jumping is great, but your 2 Strength limits your potential) and Attributes in general may help or even allow rolls for low or no Skill values (That 2 Strength comes in handy if you have 0 Jump...now at least you get 1d10 to attempt it).

#5 For Attribute checks like grappling and lifting, create new rules to allow these to be improved. i.e. my “Talents” suggestion in the previous post.

Just my nickel in the pot, anyway. And again, wordy. Meh.

[cmdisc]

And I should just add that my comments above don't mean I think the game is broken. I like various aspects of it and I think most of it is very well thought out and put together. I'm just commenting on the stuff that might need tweaking. My wife deals with communications within the Army, and as she'd say "They never call to tell us the lines are working just fine. They only call to complain that something's broken."

[cmdisc]

Ok, apparently I have no Perception Attribute. I was looking through the rules and didn't see this until now:

"Knowledge Checks are influenced by the Intelligence Attribute."

...and this...

"Skill checks are influenced by certain character attributes. These attributes modifiers are influenced by a primary attribute. When a player requests a new skill that is not listed, GamesMasters should determine the primary stat."

(Both on page 13 for reference).

What do these statements mean? They would suggest that Attributes provide modifiers to Skill checks. I was of the understanding that Attributes and Skills were not interrelated at all. What modifiers are being applied? Or am I misunderstanding this?

[Ardem]

I was originally going to have them influence, and what your reading there I had cut out of the module manual. <I think>

The document I gave you was a working document unfortunately I had missed removing these completely.

I removed the influence of these attributes after trying to simplify it, as to many rules although realistic made the ruleset unwieldy. I could aim the rolemaster route, and have a 100 rules or minimise the rules aiming for the average. I end up choosing the average.

I think there is a case here for optional rules where attributes can give you a +1 or -1 to modifier on skill rolls. I would then have to link skills to an attribute. However I prefer the base set to be separate and go for an average and simplify the ruleset.

[Ardem]

@damned: Thanks for your input, and I believe your saying much the same as cmdisc, however it is a good point you could make throwing a coordination check(dexterity) but if you coordination is bad you could train in throwing. I think there might be something in this.

[Ardem]

#1 Emphatically state that characters MUST put at least 1 point (3 average) into these kinds of skills, just like characters MUST put at least 1 point (2 average) into every Attribute. These skills will have to be highlighted and extra points should be given out at character creation.

This is currently the way I am leaning towards, however I am reluctant to give more points at this stage, I made several good characters with good points and realistic, also now that we are scaling up on roll I think there is enough points

#2 Say that a 0 in a skill means you can still attempt it, but with a single die at a penalty on the TN. Maybe Innate skills suffer a +2 on the roll (you’ve never practiced it), Trained Skills suffer a +4 on the roll (maybe you heard something at some point about it), and Technical Trade Skills can’t be attempted at all (I don’t care if your aunt told you about the surgery she once had, you still can’t perform an appendectomy on someone).

I can see some positives in this as well, however the option above alleviates this need, and I think we have enough modifier atm too many more will be creating a GM nightmare.

#3 Remove these “innate” skills from the skill list and make them Attribute checks instead. See #5 below.

Not a fan of this one

#4 Tie every Skill to an Attribute and average the dice together. Low Attributes will hinder high Skills (that 10 in Jumping is great, but your 2 Strength limits your potential) and Attributes in general may help or even allow rolls for low or no Skill values (That 2 Strength comes in handy if you have 0 Jump...now at least you get 1d10 to attempt it).

I think I can add this as an optional skill, again its nice but increasing rules, maybe I can had some optional rules for players and GM to decide.

#5 For Attribute checks like grappling and lifting, create new rules to allow these to be improved. i.e. my “Talents” suggestion in the previous post.

I thought about talents and I going to have to pass on that sorry as it is not going with the aim I had.

--------------------------------------------

My thoughts are now to shake up Character creation and Skills a little.

I will make Innate Skills Section and Trained Skills

Innate Skills must have a value of 1 minimum, they will consist of various learnt school skills and art and physical attributes, and unarmed melee

Then I will have trained skills, these can have a 0 skill.

The character creation will split up a minimum percentage for innate, I am thinking around 60% but will need to look at it. This way I am not really modifying the rules to a great extend however making sure some of those required skills are filled in. This way I am still achieving my vision, however fixing up the issue where characters have 0 skill in those necessary skills.

As for attributes, I think there is something I can do here. If a Attribute is 4 for 5 they get an extra skill point to throw in each innate skill that applies to that ability.
Aka Strength will be Unarmed Melee, Jumping, Coordination Climbing, Intelligence, Maths, The Sciences, etc etc. This increase skill points for higher attributes in that section.

However it does not impact trained skills

[cmdisc]

I was originally going to have them influence, and what you’re reading there I had cut out of the module manual. <I think>

No problem. I just ran across that and was confused. I wasn’t sure if it was old info or a new adjustment.

@damned: … it is a good point you could make throwing a coordination check(dexterity) but if you coordination is bad you could train in throwing. I think there might be something in this.

I think this is a great idea. Would you consider a few new “companion” skills that can be used in place of a straight Attribute check? Players have a choice to go with the base Attribute roll or to develop a skill that provides him with better dice and it represents real world abilities to improve on things such as throwing, lifting, and memorizing. Example; my Coordination is average (2d10), but since training as a Baseball pitcher, my throwing accuracy has increase greatly (Combat, Throwing 5; 3d10). Some Skill ideas:

Power Lifting (in place of STR checks to lift and carry heavy loads)
Combat, Unarmed (already exists, but can be used in place of STR checks for Grappling and Tripping)
Combat, Throwing (in place of COOR checks for throwing)
Memorization Tricks (in place of INT checks for storing/recalling info)
Codecracking (in place of INT checks for figuring puzzles, riddles, codes, etc)
Observant (in place of PER checks for noting details)
Focus (in place of DET checks for pushing on with a dedicated action despite stress or distractions)
Overcome Pain (in place of Body Resistance checks for whatever this is used for. :P )

These don’t have to be hard-coded in. Players might be free to talk with their GMs about specific new skills that they can train in when they discover an Attribute check that they want to enhance.

In fact, while on the subject, other possible regular skills to consider:

Farming
Cooking
Empathy (detecting moods, lies, emotions…good for counselor types)
Music (writing, singing, instruments)
Forgery
Disguise
Astronomy
Street Law (gangs, black markets, etc)
Sleight of Hand (palming objects, picking pockets)

#1 Emphatically state that characters MUST put at least 1 point (3 average) into these kinds of skills, just like characters MUST put at least 1 point (2 average) into every Attribute…

This is currently the way I am leaning towards, however I am reluctant to give more points at this stage, I made several good characters with good points and realistic, also now that we are scaling up on roll I think there is enough points.

The options I posted were various thoughts, although I wasn’t keen to all of them. This one, however, was my favorite. I agree with you shaking up the skills some. I can see a distinction between skills that everyone should know and skills that people may or may not be trained in. However, as 75-90pts are needed to nicely round out characters and our Average Joe only has 60, I’m still of the mind that more skill points are needed at creation so that players aren't "forced" to play above average INT and DET characters. But before discussing that further, I’m curious to see the changes you apply to the skill system. Then I’ll try to build an Average Joe under the new rules and see what happens.

As for attributes, I think there is something I can do here. If a Attribute is 4 for 5 they get an extra skill point to throw in each innate skill that applies to that ability.
Aka Strength will be Unarmed Melee, Jumping, Coordination Climbing, Intelligence, Maths, The Sciences, etc etc. This increase skill points for higher attributes in that section.If you link

Innate Skills with matching Attributes, then consider for these only:

Action Check = (Skill Rank + Attribute – 2)/2 versus TN. This number is rounded up and capped at 5d10. It makes above average Attributes grant a boost to these skills. Knowledge checks could either not include an Attribute or factor in INT only.

[cmdisc]

BTW, it may have gotten lost in the discussion, but was there any update on how you want to handle the "Rule of 1"?

And have you given thought to a "Rule of 10" (i.e. 1's remove a success and 10's add one...or some such)?

[Ardem]

More Skills this is why I have a second section for skills, the list of skill in the modern world can go on forever. I think the list of common skills that I have done I will stick with, it a slippery slope. Cooking putting something in a pot and eating it is rudimentary, however making a resturant quality meal, a person should add the chef trade in the skill set. Cutting up an animal for use, then a butcher trade is needed. These call can be added in the additional trained skills.

Due to how I am approaching it above, I now added 'throwing' to innate skills (catching and grabbing and reflex checks cordination attribute however, I did throwing as it used in combat and more of an skill in aiming), innate skills are now influenced by higher attributes. However trained skills are not, how have I determined what is innate, these are skills we learn between the ages of 0-11. Children lie, children punch, children play hide and seek.

I think skills like power lift and perception skills are not needed if you character is a body builder he will already have 4-5 in that trait again it is also about simplifying the ruleset, house rules can always be done but for the base set I think we need to keep it more simplistic.

Thought for the rule of 10 is 'not needed'.

I just did a roll test where I rolled 30 dice
On the average target of 5 (to beat)
5 dice 80% success, 10% Fail, 10% GM Event aka critical fail
4 Dice 85% success, 10% Fail, 5 % GM Event
3 Dice 75% success, 15% Fail, 10% GM Event
2 Dice 65% sucess, 30% Fail, 15% GM Event
1 Dice 55% success, 25% Fail, 20% GM Event

As the target number goes up so does the failure but the GM Event stays the same roughly. This is exactly the numbers I am after.

With the 3 now being 2 dice and the little buff on 4 or 5 attributes, this make more then up for spreading out the innate skills. If you look at 3-4 being the average person. An average tennis player server 65% of the ball over the net. A Junior Professional 5-6 75%, A Professional 7-9 85%