|
Post by Quadhund/Greenhouse on Sept 14, 2005 16:07:56 GMT -5
*mutters* Stupid Bioware and no Disguise Artist skill ... and no sense motive skill ... and no useful skillz
|
|
|
Post by Spooks on Sept 14, 2005 23:57:53 GMT -5
Let us hope NWN2 has such useful skills
|
|
|
Post by kenny26 on Sept 15, 2005 12:01:14 GMT -5
no jump, banalnce, climb or ride. no disguise, alchemy or normal perform skill (seriously, i'd like a char with a few cross-class ranks in perform, just for the RP).
this has been bugging me for ages...
|
|
|
Post by soulfien on Sept 18, 2005 10:00:15 GMT -5
I'm against this skill thing.
iif a rogue dumps his points into bluff he's gonna easily outmatch just about any other class for spot.
I'll never understand why spot and listen are rogue only skills and cross class skills for everyone else.
This is why I don't allow anyone to roll dice on me. If they want to RP let them do it for real. The PnP 3.0 and NWN skill layout is EXTREMELY flawed!
|
|
|
Post by Munroe on Sept 19, 2005 0:42:34 GMT -5
Spot and Listen are also ranger skills and rangers get a small bonus to them while in "nature" settings. Which in NWN is any tileset other than the city, interior, and dungeon tilesets.
Druids and Clerics (and anyone else) with high Wisdom get their WIS bonus added to Spot and Listen so even if they don't have many (any) ranks in them, they still have the potential to spot something.
|
|
|
Post by soulfien on Sept 19, 2005 5:13:50 GMT -5
a 30 wisdom gets you a +10 to spot. Meanwhile a rogue can put 30 ranks in bluff and no class other than a bard, ranger, or rogue can ever hope to match it.
|
|
C'tair
New Member
Today is the first day of the Rest of Your life... Not Much to look forward to, is it?
Posts: 85
|
Post by C'tair on Sept 19, 2005 5:34:08 GMT -5
you're right, soulfien. there is another thread about this here frc.proboards37.com/index.cgi?board=roleplaydiscussion&action=display&thread=1110675795personally i think that bluff checks are a bit overrated. in most cases i would demand the one who's trying to bluff me, to make another check to clarify how much of the bluff i believe. if, for example, someone is trying to convince me that he just slew a dragon, i would let him make an intimidate check to see if i think him capable of slaying more than a wyrmling or a fairy dragon. there are alot of possibilities to combine skill checks this way. some may think now that it make the bluff skill useless, but that's not true. it simply doesn't apply in each and every case you may wish to use it. as always, just my thoughts and the way i prefer to handle this things.
|
|
|
Post by Booze Hound on Sept 19, 2005 7:38:32 GMT -5
The Disguise check should, IMO, be hide, because you are using your ability hide something. This is mainly because of what I do with clotho. I don't want to look like anyone. not like the celebrity, not like random person A, I just do want her to be recognized as her. If I were to throw a sheet over myself and walk by my mother she wouldn't know it was me unless I said something. I see Bluff as you are trying to lie to someone. And when you are lieing you GIVING something that isn't the truth. When i disguise clotho I dont want to give them the truth, I don't want to give them anything. I want to look like noone, so I'm not trying to bluff about who I am, I just want to put on something noone's ever seen her in, and walk through town. I am hiding who I am, without providing another identity. I am anonymous. I don't want to convince them that I'm someone else. I just dont want them to know anything about me other than that I am there. When I start talking I would submit to bluff, but I am just hiding everything, except my presence there. I can't believe just becoming anonymous is bluff. I believe it is hiding, if anything. here's my 2 cents... If a hide check was used for disguise, Vind could do some serious disguise type espionage. He has a really high hide skill as you know, but that totally has to do with his ability to blend in with his natural surroundings. He could stalk, and sneak around just about anyone (except Febrien) but I don't think he could do much of any convincing disguising around someone that knew him. that's just not his skill. I rather agree with @@@@8/ it's more of a bluff thing. but like I said tht's just my 2 cents.
|
|
Manshin
Old School
FRC2 Build Team
Posts: 703
|
Post by Manshin on Sept 19, 2005 11:35:45 GMT -5
Well... a rogue SHOULD be able to outmatch all others if that is what he wants to dump all his ranks into. After all, its not like a fighter doesnt outmatch him in swordfighting. The fact is, every class is better at somethings than others, rogues happen to be good at espionage. But how many straight rogues are there out there? And out of those, how many dump all their ranks into bluff? If you ask me, a character who does that should be a master of disguise whom you have little or no chance in spotting... Although, remember, no matter what your modifiers are, a natural 1 is always a failure, and an unmatched natural 20 is always a success (with tie going to the higher roll with modifiers.) However, most classes arent like a rogue, and most players have a lot better stuff to put ranks in than bluff. Your average tin-headed warrior is simply not qualified to spot a skillful rogue in disguise, not without getting lucky. However, when jo-blow fighter puts on a rubber mask and a fake mustache, you will find him not so difficult to spot.
|
|
|
Post by Quadhund/Greenhouse on Sept 19, 2005 12:32:23 GMT -5
By saying you are ignoring bluff checks and the like (intimidate and persuade) you make these skills useless. So what is the point of putting ANY ranks into them. Undoubtedly, your argument does have merit in that any character that does put all his ranks towards bluff (or the like) will be hard pressed to be caught. But that is the point. They are really good in one area, but your character is really good in another area. I mean, you dont necessarily have to go along with what someone says, but you shouldn't completely ignore an extremely high bluff. Say someone comes up to you and bluffs that they are elminster. They roll a 40 bluff (something damn near impossible to beat). SO you believe he is elminster, but are somewhat skeptical. So ask him to prove he is elminster. There are ways to work around good bluffs and such, you just have to be smart about it.
It kind of reminds me true seeing basically making hide and MS skills useless. Imagine if there were items with perma true seeing on this server, us rogues would be out of business. As it is, people who want to discuss something important usually quaff a potion or cast a spell before beginning.
And finally. THERE IS NO AUTOMATIC FAILURE OR SUCCESS IN SKILL CHECKS. Sorry to say it that way, but it is true. A prime example if you don't believe me is say I pick pocket some one. If I roll a one but my modifier is still high enough to succceed, then I will succeed.
|
|
|
Post by DM Richard (Retired) on Sept 19, 2005 12:39:48 GMT -5
This is why I hate DND as a roleplaying system. It is stereotypes and not individualistic. Why do classes exist? It should be a point system and you build your character abilities based off of a character concept not a stereotype.
DND stinks! GURPS RULES!!!!
LOL
|
|
C'tair
New Member
Today is the first day of the Rest of Your life... Not Much to look forward to, is it?
Posts: 85
|
Post by C'tair on Sept 19, 2005 15:54:22 GMT -5
ignoring bluff checks is somewhat pointless. when you ask the hooded assassin what his name is, and he answers with a false name, what are you going to do then? how would you expect him to RP his lie?
as for combining skill checks, there is a point where the bluff ends and starts to be something else. tell me that you've just killed a dragon, and i may believe you if you succeed the bluff. tell me to hand over my money because you're a dragon slayer and i better do what you say, and you basically try to intimidate me. then i will ask you for an intimidate check as well.
edit: i have no problems with the fact that rogues can be expert manipulators. i have never asked anyone to make more than a bluff check and i never even used anything but my wisdom modifier to counter it, even though i think it's unfair. everyone i know used bluff in a situation i found it to be appropriate. when however someone would start to 'dump' all his skill points into bluff, even though he has every other social skill as a class skill as well, and thinks i would let him use them interchangeable because bluff is where he can beat each and everyone on this server, i fear, i will be more than ready to have a long discussion about what it really is he's doing there.
|
|
|
Post by soulfien on Sept 19, 2005 16:16:23 GMT -5
Manshin, my point is not prowress. Spot and listen have notyhin g to do with swordfighting. they have to do with perception. Why are rogues better listeners? Why do they have better eyes? Hmm?
It's not a class ability. Or at least it shouldn't be. 2nd edition didn't have it like that. It started in 3rd edition. Also, wanna know what else happened in 3rd? Natural 1's on skill checks aren't automatic failures! Make a rogue and put ranks in tumble. Make sure you have exactly 15 ranks in it with all modifiers included. And then run around- you'll pass every tumble check even when you roll a 1. 1's only fail on attack rolls now. So, once a rogue hides himself, not even the sharpest eyes of an elven wizard can see through it because elven wizards don't have the "rogue" ability to see.
oh, and 20's on skill checks aren't automatic successes either. Only on attacks.
|
|
|
Post by Grozer on Sept 19, 2005 16:47:43 GMT -5
as for combining skill checks, there is a point where the bluff ends and starts to be something else. tell me that you've just killed a dragon, and i may believe you if you succeed the bluff. tell me to hand over my money because you're a dragon slayer and i better do what you say, and you basically try to intimidate me. then i will ask you for an intimidate check as well. No offense Rav, but this really isnt the grey area in my opinion. Trying to come off as a dragonslayer is so far fetched in my opinion that I would expect disbelievers even if you have a uber high bluff. What is really going on... someone walking around with a hood pulled over their face, completely different clothes, not saying much and then being asked to make a bluff check... hmm no matter how you paint it, this really is not that difficult, sorry I know I will have those that totally disagree. It really boils down to the character... for a character that has made his face, voice, mannerisms public, forget it.. there is too much to give him/her away... but someone that has pretty much kept to themselves, I dont care how high you DC is, you still may not recognize them, even if they roll a 1. (And I agree with Soulfien 1 and 20 are not automatic on skill checks). In addition, I am not sure I want DC to dictate what happens to my character, his/her actions reactions are based on personality traits and flaws not on the roll of the dice. If I wanted decision controlled by random dice outcomes I would be gambling in Las Vegas. After all we play this game for the RP and for me thats all based on the character motivations, personality, traits, flaws, etc... I will abide by whatever a DM tells me to do as far as DCs but heck if I am RP'ing him/her correctly based on the above it doesn't matter, because I will probably make the in character decision that would have occured anyway. Anyway just another thought to keep in mind.
|
|
|
Post by Laurk on Sept 19, 2005 16:49:58 GMT -5
Rogues are better spotters and listeners because they know what to watch for and what to listen for. They know the tail tell signs of a fake, because they are experts at being fakes themselves. They are better at spotting and listening for stealthy enemies because they themselves do it. What might appear to be a rock near a bush to someone else would be suspicious to a rogue who was just pretending to be a rock against a bush an hour ago in order to fool his enemies. These are a rogue's occupation. Being far more alert and knowledgeable about the types of sounds he is hearing. Being able to understand what it means when a cricket chirps a certain way, or when a shadow doesnt fit right. Things the average warrior who spends his days training and polishing his armor just doesnt have the experiance to notice. All these things go into you "skill" Its not a matter as simple as 20/20 vision, or perfect hearing. The skills represent how you use that vision, what you know about disguising and bluffing. As far as elves having better ears and eyes... well, thats why they get a +2. As for it being cross class, well, look at it like this. While the fighter is training to be able to fight... the rogue is out and about. Every night, he is stalking about, listening to the sounds around him. For someone who lives submerged in such a life, such skills are going to come more naturally. Same with Rangers and Druids. Fighters train with weapons. Rogues train with espionage. Thats why they are better at it. As for the natural 1 and natural 20 issue, oops. I thought it applied to all checks. I guess not. HOWEVER! Maybe it should. Why not? Granted, the ones that are hard coded in, like tumble, we cant do anything about, but we are all big boys and girls here. If we feel it makes more sense to have automatic success and failure to keep anyone from totally abusing their super mondo skill sets, then lets do it. Point here is, there just is no sense in lamenting what we dont have. Instead, lets find ways to make what we do have work!
I vote for natural 1's and 20's to count for automatic failure or success when opposing skill checks against other players.
One last thing. Some things should be left to RP, not dice rolls. If someone tells me a lie, I am either going to believe it or not I dont need a dice roll to make me believe that smurfs have taken over Redmist. The only time when it would make a differance would be if there was OOC information involved... but hopefully, that wont be a problem anymore.. because hopefully people have put a lid on the free trade of OOC information.
|
|
henny
Proven Member
No Comparison. Period.
Posts: 218
|
Post by henny on Sept 19, 2005 17:08:55 GMT -5
On the technical side of this question. I'm aware you can have items set to an 'unidentified' state. Is it possible to script something similar with pc's? maybe based on there spot + level opposed by bluff or hide or whatver + level? Result of failure would be the person's floating data would read Unidentified or unkonwn?
|
|
C'tair
New Member
Today is the first day of the Rest of Your life... Not Much to look forward to, is it?
Posts: 85
|
Post by C'tair on Sept 19, 2005 18:55:18 GMT -5
it is a grey area. this was intended to be a reply to soulfiens and quadhunds posts. sorry, the topic stretched a bit here. anyway, back to disguises. you're of course right. if i don't know you, i have absolutely no way to determine who you really are. in the example you've given, i don't need to see the bluff check you've made for disguising yourself. i can clearly see that you're hiding your face. perceiving hoods and in the following helmets as disguises is pretty pointless IMO. walking through a town like isinhold with your face covered this way, may draw the attention of certain people. that's a fact. you may get along unbothered because most of them have no reason to stop you. if you however approach the campfire and linger around there for some time without showing your face, it's highly suspicious. you pretty much ask for someone to become curious and ask you questions. the interesting question is, if you know that you've next to no points in bluff, why do you do it at all? if you want to spy on someone there, why do you take the risk, even though you're not the right person for the job? determining who is hidden behind a disguise is one thing. recognizing a lie is completely another thing. they may see that you've been lying, but they still can't tell who you are unless you drop the mask. while writing this, i had a specific encounter in mind. the one between luis and gial yesterday. don't know if this is what you're referring to. if it's more a general question, i can see the point, that it's hard to say if you could ask for a bluff check from someone you absolutely don't know when he's telling you a trivial lie about his name. i wouldn't do it. well, as long as he's not dressed like a zhent soldier that is.
|
|
|
Post by StabbingNirvana on Sept 20, 2005 12:50:27 GMT -5
I vote for natural 1's and 20's to count for automatic failure or success when opposing skill checks against other players. well, when you roll dice from the dicebag, you never EVER 'take 20'. therefore, it should be a critical failure/success system. if not, that means one person is absolutely perfect at something.
|
|
|
Post by Quadhund/Greenhouse on Sept 20, 2005 13:57:06 GMT -5
I'm against it, I was going to give examples, but I figured it would be a waste of time.
Should we start a vote somewhere?
|
|