The Zombie Gunslinger gave me a reason for goofing off…
The characters in our hypothetical game system already have Abilities – characteristics such as Strength, Dexterity or Intelligence – but they also need to have experience and training: Skills.
Untrained Use: Skills that can be used untrained receive a -3 Dice modifier. That makes dice checks one category harder. That’s pretty much the gist of our task resolution system, and it fits with the -3 for absolutely abysmal ability scores.
Basic Training: In the post on skill and ability modifiers, we determined that rank 0 in a skill is equivalent to basic training without practical experience. Rank 0 avoids the untrained penalty, and allows use of skills that can not be used untrained, but does not give any bonus to the check.
Flexible Skill Coupling: Some game systems strictly associate a skill with a particular ability, such as Dexterity for Archery. Other systems make it entirely dependent on situation. I prefer the flexibility of the later, but admit that some skills should usually depend on certain abilities. In our archery example, a ranger who tries to keep track of several identical-looking targets may have to substitute his Intelligence modifier for his Dexterity modifier.
So how do our characters gain skills?
Remembering that the maximum our system can comfortably support is a +8 skill rank, we do have to limit the number of skill ranks available to a character in some fashion. An easy solution would be to use skill points and to escalate the cost of skill points for higher ranks. However, I believe there are disadvantages to this: We either have to allow characters to “save up” skill points until they can afford to buy an expensive skill rank, or we have to accept a high level of book keeping, if skill points have to be spent directly on skills, even if it does not result in an immediate skill rank increase.
Both methods also mean that a character who is waiting to improve an expensive skill will not see any character improvement in quite a while.
Instead, I had this idea to keep character improvement at a fairly steady pace, but to reduce the magnitude of improvement over time. The only way I can come up with to implement this are character levels, something I wanted to avoid. But I think it might work, especially if we do not hook other power increases (“hit points” come to mind) to levels.
Let’s whip up a table.
|Level||Exp||Skill Points||Max Skill Rank|
(And so on for levels beyond 10.)
So basically, the Game Master decides what level the characters start on. Each level, they receive a number of skill points that they can directly spend to increase their skill ranks. Since there’s a maximum skill rank, based on level, players can not start their characters out with unrealistically high skill ranks.
The game master then rewards the players with experience points – say, 3-5 points per game session. Every 2-4 sessions, all characters advance by one level.
There’s another benefit to this system: Newer characters can actually catch up to older characters, at least to a point..
|Level||Total Skill Points|
Older, more experienced characters will always have more skill points in total, but assume a character of level 10 and one of level 1. 18 points difference, but the maximum difference in a skill is 6 points.
By level 14 and 4, the difference will be 12 points; by level 17 and 7 it is 10 points. After that, the difference stays constant. That buys the more experienced character one additional skill at maximum level, or a total of three “+3’s”. It seems hardly game-breaking, especially if you consider that higher skill levels are subject to diminishing returns anyway.
In addition, the game master could reasonably hand out a few Rank 0 Skills to the “younger” characters. This is entirely within the scope of our definitions. Imagine if the newer character travels with an expert swordsman, the older character. Just watching him “in action” should give the young protege some basic hints about sword-fighting. It doesn’t really give the new character a big boost; spending even one skill point on a skill raises it to Rank 1 anyway, no matter whether the character had it at Rank 0 or not.
Such Rank 0 “Bonus Skills” should be awarded at the Game Master’s discretion. However, as a rough guideline, a number of Rank 0 skills equal to half the level of the level difference to the highest character may be appropriate. So if your new character starts at level 2, and the old hand has level 16, the Game Master could assign you a maximum of seven bonus skills at Rank 0. These should be in areas that other characters have high skills in, and should be awarded after you have traveled with your companions for some time (which might well be before the first session, if your Game Master allows it).
The exact numbers for skill points et al probably need to be based on how many different skills the system actually uses – and, of course, this all would have to be play tested to see if it actually works.
Brian Fargo of inXile wants to create a sequel to the 1988 computer role playing game Wasteland. He’s looking for funds through kickstarter. If you loved Fallout, Wasteland, or old school CRPGs, you should definitely support him. Oh, and, watch the movie, because it turns out, he’s a funnyman. 🙂
We still need to work out our actual abilities and their modifiers. In the last post in this series, Skill and Ability modifiers, I worked out a system of modifiers and how it affects task resolutions. I concluded that I have a +0 ..+8 range for positive modifiers, which includes both skill and ability modifiers. My gut feeling is that this should be split roughly into +2 for abilities and +6 for skills. By the definitions of the Skill and Ability modifiers post, +2 from abilities gives a talented person an advantage of 1-2 years of training, which does not sound unreasonable if you view a person’s entire career. Of course, in an abstract simulation such as an RPG this means high ability scores “front-load” skill use – that is, you gain a large boost to many skills before you ever receive any job training – but that’s okay; especially since I firmly believe that skills that realistically require training should also require so in a game; we can compensate with an “untrained skill use” penalty.
Anyway. Abilities. Since this is a genre-less game system, we will only define a few basic abilities. Specific genres could add abilities, such as a fantasy genre adding a magic skill. Also, I am a fan of having physical and mental abilities that roughly mirror each other.
Let’s use 2d6 as our random generator for attributes. This gives us a range of 2-12, average 7, with a bias towards the middle of the spectrum. We have a few options on how to proceed, all based on what ranges we define for what modifier. I like symmetry, so I came up with the following:
Using random ability generation and this modifier system almost half of the characters will have a +0 in any given ability. Close to 20% will have either +1 or -1, and 8% will have a +2 or -2. Almost 28% in total will have a low ability modifier, another 28% a high ability modifier.
I think this should work fairly well, especially if you consider that player characters will likely improve ability scores that are vital to their “roles” – be that strength for a sword fighter, agility for an Imperial marines sniper, or intelligence for a wizard. Player characters tend to be trained professionals, who would hone their abilities and skills as best they can. John Doe, his only hobby being slouching in front of his TV every night, rarely ends up packed with muscles.
Point Buy: Not everybody likes to generate characters by random. Since the average roll would be 7 per ability, six ability scores mean 42 points on average. Let’s give our Point Buy characters those points to spread among their abilities. This actually results in slightly above-average characters, since 6 is still a +0 modifier, and such a character could buy two 9’s and four 6’s. Two other optimized sets would be:
- 1x 12, 5×6
- 2x 11, 2×6, 2×4
These all work out to an overall of +2 in ability modifiers. You can easily assign your character low scores in abilities you do not expect to use much, but this still doesn’t seem to be excessively powerful.
Larger Than Life: In a very “heroic” campaign, the Game Master may simply let players buy abilities for a higher point value (see Point Buy system), or let them roll 1d6+6 instead of 2d6. That eliminates negative ability modifiers altogether. Besides improving chances for high end abilities considerably, it also has the side effect of eliminating negative numbers from the character sheet, simplifying matters ever so slightly.