>combat and non-combat skills both cost the same type of XP to improve
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
>combat and non-combat skills both cost the same type of XP to improve
>combat and non-combat skills both cost the same type of XP to improve
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
|
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
it's alright if you put a cap on the level of competence the character is allowed to have (ie combat skill level 1 max at this tier, combat skill level 2 max at the next, etc)
in GURPS I had a rule where you were not allowed to buy something that would push your SL above your total points/25 and +10 (so SL 14 to start with at 100 points, 15 at 125, etc). Resulted in some fairly interesting characters that all branched out into their own shit instead of just dudes with 20 in sword
If you have people that add more than 3 points (so 7 exp) into any given skill during char-gen in GURPS, you should stop them and carefully explain to them how the game works, rather than watching them waste exp on shit they don't even need, not to mention can afford. I mean frick, last time I saw anyone get anything more than just 3 points in any given skill was when it was an Action campaign, and everyone got a budget of 250 points. And people still preferred to increase DX rather than skills.
>combat skills can only be improved by spending non-combat XP and non-combat skills can only be improved by spending combat XP
wouldn't you just rename it at that point?
why did you respond to an entirely unrelated post?
>GURPS
Back to school solves XP nonsense
>how long do you wanna train your non-combat skill for?
>how long do you wanna walk around in a circle and fight weak ass enemies to level up your fighting skill?
Then roll and figure out how many hours of learning you got.
>just take a break from the game for a year bro
nah, more trouble than it's worth
>hey man can I have two tracks of XP
>Yeah just give me SP for doing my basic tasks like tying ropes and opening doors or any time I succeed or fail at anything
>and then track my XP for killing things or doing combat stuff
>oh and make sure to give me MP for casting spells because that should be a separate track too
>>And make sure to give me PP every time my character jerks off or has sex
No. Frick off. You get 400 xp a session and that's fricking final
Some games just have you put ticks by the skills you are successful at, so you only increase in those you use. I hope this isnt to difficult for you as you seem to have trouble tracking more than four things.at a time.
Why does shit like Diplomacy and Arcana cost the same shit that lets you interact with the actual meat of the game, which is combat?
WHAT IS THE GAME?
Game?
>GAME?
We don't talk about those here.
D&D of all things, ironically, does not have the problem described in the OP.
You can't exist shitstirring gamelets to actually read about the games they use to farm (you)s.
>D&D of all things, ironically, does not have the problem described in the OP.
eh it KIND of does but only to the barest degree, it's been a known issue for literal decades that basically every character is taxed with fundamental adventuring skills like perception and a way to escape grapples (you can pick between acrobatics or athletics, but you DO need one).
Pathfinder 1e added in "Background Skills" as an optional rule late in its lifespan, since they realized asking people to spend the same points on Perception, Use Magic Device, Stealth, and Acrobatics as they spend on Profession: Barrister and playing the trombone was kind of dumb.
>with the actual meat of the game, which is combat?
... which game?
Delta Green, obviously.
XP is just a measure of time invested so it's fine
It's not fine. Meme shit like basket weaving will never be equivalent to skills that let you kill people and should not cost the same resource to increase.
it's harder to learn and improve at weaving than most martial arts tbh
Everything is karate. That basket weaving form? It can be applied as a takedown
>*weaves your veins into a basket*
heh.. nothing personnel...
>Everything is karate. That basket weaving form? It can be applied as a takedown
this is unironically the wuxia/xianxia approach to skills, somebody who has spent all his character budget on being really fricking good at Go would still be able to go toe to toe with a sword autist because the Dao of Go and the Dao of the Sword are equal under heaven
You're putting too much emphasis on violence as the primary rubric. If A spends 100 hours studying calligraphy and B spends 100 hours practicing at the shooting range, then both A and B should have equivalent amounts of experience invested in their chosen skill.
And during the game A is a useless moron and B isn't, despite their equal experience.
What game?
All of them.
Name one.
You DO play games that aren't exclusively about murder, right? Like an investigation game, or something?
You do play investigation games, right? Then you'd know you have to fight in them.
But I don't fight in them.
I think you have an unheard fixation with death. You should speak to your therapist about this.
You should play a game for once in your life.
That's difficult because of my toddler. I am working on a one-shot, however.
Pay more attention to your kid, shitpost less. It will result in a better kid, more games an your improvement as a human.
Toddlers take naps, shithead
Call of Cthulhu, any edition. Optimal play is to avoid combat, when you have max 12hp and a shotgun deals 3d6.
The police is in on it 95% of the time so you still have to kill the cultists and everything they throw at you yourself. Thinking you'll somehow play it perfectly all the way through without ever being put in danger is also nogame speak.
Whole lot of assumptions for someone who thinks they've played Call of Cthulhu. There's a reason that chase rules occupy significantly more space of combat rules.
Go read those rules again then. It's the closest you'll ever get to playing a game.
That would be really hurtful if it actually meant anything and if you had a point. I accept your concession.
Concede some weight.
>he doesn't play a system where your calligraphy skill can directly or indirectly enhances combat abilities
baka
>homosexual thread takes the same space as regular threads
>character can do nothing but trudge through muddy wilderness and caves and kill monsters with their bare hands for session after session covering weeks of in-game time
>somehow this improves their charisma, their skill at lying, and also they learned 5 new spells spontaneously
Some of these problems are fixed by reading enough of the rules to know that it shouldn't be run like that, but it's a larger problem with class-based/level-based character progression.
Yes? Skills are just skills. Abilities are just abilities. Characteristics of a persona are just that; parts of that person.
Not everyone is a combat character. Not everyone is a talker or technician. Imagine the absurdity of every bank teller also being a commando. Imagine every guerilla fighter also being a professor.
Fricking moron.
>Not everyone is a combat character
There are two kinds of characters: Combat characters, and liabilities. Even in so called investigative games like CoC, you'd be stupid to not improve your combat abilities.
Year Zero Engine. PbtA. Actually D&D, because you can waste a feat on some bullshit like your culinary skills.
>Why yes, I *am* moronic!
You have never played a roleplaying game and you likely never will.
Meanwhile, I'll be right over here, playing technicians and thieves and executives and illusionists and priests and priestesses, and there's nothing you can do about it.
There's always that one guy in every group. The noncombat """roleplayer""" who gets mad when he inevitably gets his ass kicked.
there are campaigns without a single combat all over the world and you'll seethe about them
I do have to say, playing a tricksy illusionist has allowed me to kill many, many creatures, maybe more than the combat men if I think about it.
Sure I can't do shit in combat mechanically, but I can absolutely toss my extra rations at the hungry monster, scare people with fake spells, and convince people they're not being paid enough.
If you can slightly adjust someone's color, tell them it's a spell that will kill them if they don't do what you want.
>Actually D&D, because you can waste a feat on some bullshit like your culinary skills.
>+1 to WIS or CON, the latter of which is the god stat in 5e
>Free d8 of healing for everyone every short rest
>Free temporary hit points every long rest
>A proficiency, which are incredibly hard to come by - especially tool proficiencies - in 5e
It's only a waste if your GM is a drooling moron who just drags you through an endless string of mindless combat encounters, and even then you're still keeping the party going more consistently than a Cleric or similar. Honestly a variant Human Life Cleric with Chef and Healer who stocks up on healer's kits would be able to keep a party alive for as long as they can catch an hour (or less with the variant rules) for a short rest.
There are games where you get better at something by doing it.
>experience is treated like some kind of non-physical currency that you "spend"
I'm gonna be sick
The real problem here is that GURPS puts all its focus on realism and GMing advice on combat because it is deep down another dungeon crawler from the 80s with some other skills tacked on.
Summarizes why I hate 99% of classless RPGs: they force PCs to be all samey pieces of shit. The most balancing factor there usually is, is people whining because you made an effective character
>"Dr Med Urderhobo is now ready to see you Mrs Nogames"
>"I'm sorry ma'am, it's a terminal case of autism"
Touch grass etc etc
Can someone decipher this nonsense?
NTA
"You're out of touch and you need to reevaluate where you spend your mental effort. Your involvement with the hobby is superficial both in terms of time invested, and your understanding of it."
>NTA
kek I'm sure
TA
It's true 🙂
Anon, what system is this an "issue" in? GURPS is the only one I can maybe think of and I'm not very familiar with it.
>The various Warhammer d100 games do this, but generally require you to branch out to advance your career, which is generally better than another 5% to hit.
>Genesys and FFG star wars provide plenty of options for noncombat encounters, and plenty of ways to use "noncombat" skills in combat, so this isn't much of an issue
>CoC 7e did this but you're not supposed to be fighting much, so it's liable to come up as most other specialist skills.
>D&D and derivatives don't do this.
I can go on. What fricking game?
It's awkward but very straightforward. Lurk moar if you can't even recognize "murderhobo."
>Anon, what system is this an "issue" in?
>literally names 2 different systems in a row where that's an issue
Are you moronic? Not even reading the rest.
homie i explained clearly why they aren't issues in those games
The game whose entire setting is defined by the phrase "there is only war" is definitely among the worst examples you could have used.
It's a game where you're going into crit in 2-3 hits no matter how good your skills are. Equipment and planning are more relevant. Stealth or a knowledge skill might do more than an equivalent amount of shooting skill.
Unless you're playing deathwatch, I guess, but I never did play that.
Admittedly, I haven't looked into Year Zero Engine.
PbtAs are barely games, I'd imagine that varies between different ones.
I will still argue again that D&D does not particularly suffer this, even in your goalpost-moving example, since:
>in 2e this didn't much exist at all because iirc noncombat training was a wholly different progression track, been a few years
>in 3.x there's plenty of of combat feats that will do less for you in combat than Skill Focus [Profession (Cook)], so it's more a matter of trap options than some combat vs noncombat thing
>in 4e you could in theory spend a utility power on something not useful in combat or a feat on skill focus I guess, but skill challenges should be common enough?
>in (modern) 5e even the "noncombat" feats like Chef have a direct combat benefit component
In none of the above do you need to spend any sort of combat resource to have basic competence in the skill. If you argument is that it's a problem if ANY combat thing and noncombat thing have the same price, you might be a moron.
>It's a game where you're going into crit in 2-3 hits no matter how good your skills are.
Only if you're a fricking moron who doesn't know how to make a decent character.
Why do nogames seethe so much when someone talks about mechanics?
>non-combat skills
Skills already fricking suck, but non combat skills is such a stupid meta thing.
Human characters should be able to do things every human can do. Want to do something specific, like tracking a prey? Find someone else to do It, like a hunting dog.
>Skills already fricking suck
wot
They suck. Skills suck, they are boring words in a paper that disincentivize creative problem solving and turn the game into starting at your sheet to find solutions. An individualistic boring experience. I fricking hate skill systems
>humans have never tracked prey before
Of course they did chump, but I meant it in the way a dog does It.
I could give other examples.
Player says can I "hey do I know about this very specific thing?". No, you gotta hire a wise Man or academic.
Player says "do I know how to pilot a ship?". No, you gotta hire a seaman and a crew of sailors to take care of the ship, depending on the size.
Player says "do I know how to climb?"
Well, do you have a grappling hook? Then yes, you can try climbing If you manage to fix It somewhere
Your gameplay sounds incredibly lame
Surely the rules that govern things like climbing, which exist in multiple systems without a share ancestors, suggest that they're very useful. Say, if I want to climb a wall with a grappling hook; automatic success. But if I want to climb a wall without a tool you are given a target to roll against and have to roll some equivalent of a climbing skill.
Makes sense to me. Sure, climbing is generally limited to scaling obstacles. But piloting lets you steal the jobs of hardworking NPCs, and escape on stolen vehicles. Mathematics let's you work in tandem with other characters to knock over a casino. Interior decorating is the means by which you ingratiate yourself to the cocaine baron and then have a man on the inside. I don't need to make a melee attack roll if my opponent is asleep, thinks I'm their friend, and I am holding a shaving razor to their neck.
why are the PCs bad at everything?
Why would they be good? They are level 1 adventurers; they are rookies, vagabonds, hermits etc.
but why should a high level thief need a grappling hook to climb or a ranger need a hunting dog, these things are part of the character's archetype they aren't things that you just get rid of
removing non-combat skills means that they CAN'T get better so there's no difference between a high level adventurer and a low level adventurer when it comes to any non-combat skills
Guess I made myself unclear, and Im to blame for that. I wasnt talking about class defining skills, like the one thieves have, or skills like being able to cast Magic for Magic users.
I meant point buy skills that arent part of a characters class, or pointless and stupid overspecific skills like 5e enjoys adding to every character sheet, both combat and non combat alike.
That said, some classes in popular systems do go overboard on skills to the point that It incentivizes, once again, sheet starting for answers, but these werent the focal point.
>a level 1 bard should be bad at singing because he's level 1
Bard is a stupid class, but putting that aside, he doesnt need a class skill telling him he knows how to play something, he is a bard dammit, of course he does.
what are you trying to accomplish with this singing and dacing bard?
Oh um trying to gather some coins by playing my violin
Great, just roll under your CHA score and its a success.
Good, now roll d20 to see how many coins you get.
No need for a skill specifying It, its such a pointless thing when It comes to gameplay.
No for the Wizard example, I dont see the problem with It, a level 1 Wizard is a novice Wizard, so of course he is bad at research
you should stop reading osr crap and try actually playing a real game
Like 5e, pathfinder or GURPS?
Guess you mean I should start playacting then
moron, you're literally advocating for LESS mechanics. Skills are mechanical definition for a character's abilities, if you don't like skills YOU'RE the one who's playacting and worse still, you're playing GM may I for literally anything you want to do.
No no, I hate pointless shitty skills and/or point buy skill, the capacity of a MU to cast Magic or the capacity of a thief to open Lock is not a skill in this sense.
Pointless dumb shit is something like the many skills per level you get at 5e or pathfinder, skills for combat moves, skills for cooking, skills for crossing wilderness in half the time etc.
That said, its funny how these games with many many skills, builds and possibilities are the ones which gave birth to playacting narrativistic storyplaying games, that are all dm told stories intercepted by pre determined combat scenes, and this happened all because the game became boring as shit.
You claim to play a game because you got a bunch of pointless numbers on your sheet, but really what you are doing is play acting in between dragging bloated combat scenes.
>I hate pointless shitty skills and/or point buy skill
Skills are only pointless if they serve literally no purpose in any game run in the system, otherwise they're not pointless. Also, point buy is the superior method of chargen compared to class-based slop.
>the capacity of a MU to cast Magic or the capacity of a thief to open Lock is not a skill in this sense.
Name one system where magic casting is a skill. Also, opening a lock is a fricking skill you troglodyte, and thieves are not the only ones who can do so. That's why it's a skill.
>Pointless dumb shit is something like the many skills per level you get at 5e
Prove you're a nogames without saying it, you don't get skills per level in 5e. That's a 3.X thing.
>skills for combat moves
Hilariously, you're further proving you're a nogames because none of the systems you listed have combat skills.
>skills for cooking
That's a useful skill, not only for survival while exploring but also it can come in handy in social situations. It's a very, very useful skill.You're also ignoring the RP part of RPG, where you might be roleplaying a character who knows how to cook. If you want something where you don't have to interact with the game world in a meaningful way through your character or do any roleplaying, might I suggest video games?
>skills for crossing wilderness in half the time etc.
Again, that's not a skill in either of the games you used as examples, but I see no reason why you couldn't use Survival or Athletics to allow players a chance to expedite travel.
>You claim to play a game because you got a bunch of pointless numbers on your sheet
First of all, they're not pointless. They're important to the RULES of the GAME. They're what make it NOT just sitting around playing pretend with your friends, they codify the abilities of your character and tell you and the GM what you can and cannot do. Second, they're hardly pointless because they directly influence your chances of success or failure, in and out of combat.
>really what you are doing is play acting in between dragging bloated combat scenes
As opposed to TSR/OSR crap where you're play acting in between rolling new characters because you couldn't GM May I your way out of a situation and you got rocks fall'd so there are always zero stakes because your characters are disposable statblocks instead of people who were born into and live in the game world.
TLDR, you're a nogames, ESL moron and you should paste what little gray matter you have all over your bathroom wall with a 12 gauge you absolute failure at life.
The term "Mother may I" or its variations, and criticising it, is a bit like saying "Everyone lies all the time". It reveals more about your experiences than your attitudes, because "GM, may I?" is literally how RPGs are played and only people who have had a bad relationship with their GM would see it as a problem that needs designing yourself out of. A bad relationship with the GM means that either the GM was just plain bad, which is possible, or the player is bad at cooperating with the GM, which is likely.
>its funny how these games with many many skills, builds and possibilities are the ones which gave birth to playacting narrativistic storyplaying games
You mean Roleplaying Games? The Games where you play the Role of your Player Character, who within the context of the game world is a living, breathing person with wants, needs, and goals that are separate from yours as a player? Because you're just spouting meaningless buzzwords (playacting, narrativistic, storyplaying) that are just describing what you do in a roleplaying game.
>that are all dm told stories
If your shitty English wasn't indicative enough, you're a moron. All good RPGs have a narrative, if you don't want narrative go play war games where you play a bunch of faceless units who amount to little more than statblocks. The difference is that in a TTRPG, the narrative changes based on the choices of the players, what their characters say to who, and the results of dice when the outcome is in question, as it's always been. Anyone who says otherwise is a lying zoomer nogames.
>intercepted by pre determined combat scenes
The sheer fact that dice are being rolled means no combat is pre-determined, it's the ultimate uncertainty and the core use for rolling dice because you can't talk your way around a sword slitting your throat. You can prevent some battles with proper planning and clever wordplay sure, but bears don't care about your flowery words and neither do more fantastic monsters. Sometimes fights just happen.
>this happened all because the game became boring as shit.
The games became more interesting mechanically. More moving parts, more ways to make a character, more stuff to do in and out of a fight, compared to TSR/OSR shit where it's all a big game of GM May I where one of the fricking CLASSES is elf.
>GM May I
Who hurt you?
>GM May I
Who hurt you?
You never played a single OSR game
And yet you really did just spend at least 10 minutes writing this wall of text to in the end pretty much admit you enjoy homosexual level storyplaying and staring at a paper sheet
You have to be a nogames because there is no way you could like these shitty games If you had played more than 5 sessions in your whole life. Just admit your whole experience with ttrpgs are critical role, dimension20 and autistically reading rulebooks alone in your room.
>The sheer fact that dice are being rolled means no combat is pre-determined
Dice that wont matter because in your homosexual games nothing may diverge the game from the story envisioned by the DM, as there is nothing else to offer besides that and an awfully long combat.
>Prove you're a nogames without saying it, you don't get skills per level in 5e. That's a 3.X thing.
Sorry I didnt play these shitty games more than a handful of times in my life, I generally keep to things I enjoy.
>It's a very, very useful skill.You're also ignoring the RP part of RPG, where you might be roleplaying a character who knows how to cook
Try roleplaying someone that has seen a pussy at least once in his life next time
>a level 1 Wizard is a novice Wizard, so of course he is bad at research
>once he kills enough goblins to become a level 3 wizard, then he'll be better at research. obviously.
>a level 1 bard should be bad at singing because he's level 1
>a level 1 wizard should be bad at research because he's level 1. he'll obviously be much better at research when he reaches level 5
Accept the enlightenment of Mouse Guard and adapt it to your system. I am no longer asking.
>Require X successes and X-1 failures where X is your skill level
Development means pushing yourself to the edge of your abilities.
For the truly autistic and powerful, Burning Wheel that MouseGuard derives from has a more complex version of this where you have to take different difficulty levels of tests to level up where difficulty is determined by how many dice you roll in your dice pool versus the target number of successes. You need to do some easy things, some hard, and some basically impossible to level up. The easiest way to mitigate this is to help someone else do something which you can use to aim for specific tests, as when you do you compare your raw skill to the obstacle not the number of dice being rolled. This makes it easier to get harder tests for advancement. At the same time the person being helped gets more dice which makes the rest easier if they need more easy tests to advance. And you can help a skill with a different skill if it is appropriate.
91002755
>t. nogames
>Loot as xp
The only systems I can think of that do this are RPG's where it makes sense like vampire the masquerade where violence is usually the plan B or C for resolving an encounter.
>undead capeshit
>violence is usually the plan B or C for resolving an encounter