In which I talk about the way in which I handle Skill Rolls in AFF2e,
especially the ‘problem’ of what to do with low SKILL characters who are meant
to be experts in a particular Special Skill. In short, don’t roll, and if you
do roll, roll high unopposed.
1. Special Skill Points
represent competency. This is independent of general SKILL levels. As per
AFF2e p.25:
1 = Basic Training
2 = Fully Trained
3 = Expert
4+ = Master
2. Don’t roll the dice. Adventurers
should succeed automatically when using Special Skills within the bounds of
their competency. The dice should only be rolled when Adventurers are acting
under unusual stress or attempting tasks beyond their competency. This means
that an Adventurer with SKILL 5 and a Special Skill of 4 is far more able than
an Adventurer with SKILL 8 and Special Skill of 1. In mundane situations, the
first Adventurer will rarely be called on to roll the dice. As a ‘master’ most
tasks will be within the bounds of his competency. The second Adventurer will
only automatically succeed at tasks within the competency of someone with basic
training. But when the situation is not mundane…
3. Roll the dice. The dice
should be rolled when the situation is unusual or perilous, or when an
Adventurer is attempting a task beyond their competency. In these situations
there will be no difference between the chances of success enjoyed by the two
adventurers described above. The Adventurer with SKILL 8 is able to make up for
his lack of professional expertise in such a situation by his or her sheer grit,
natural talent, ability to work under pressure, and/or downright heroism. The
Adventurer with Special Skill 4 can make up for his lack of natural talent with
his professional training. So, in such situations, does the Adventurer succeed
or fail?
4. Does the roll beat 14? All non-combat tasks should be resolved by
rolling 2d6, adding SKILL and Special Skill, adding or subtracting any
modifiers, and attempting to equal or beat 14{*}. This means that a character –
let’s call him John of Salamonis – with an effective SKILL of 7 (an average
human – SKILL 5/6 – with some training Special Skill 1/2) succeeds just a bit
less than 60% of the time.
5. Modifiers to Effective Skill (see
Capping Effective Skill)
A Legendary Feat [-8]
As an example, this is the
modifier to an Awareness test if a sneaking character is invisible. This would
reduce the effective SKILL of John of Salamonis, and most people and creatures
of Titan, to 0. This means that, if the Referee rules the action possible at
all, the chance of success is just under 3%. An Adventurer would need an
unmodified effective Skill of 11 before this chance is improved (to 8%).
Almost Impossible [-6]
As an example, this is the
modifier applied when fighting in darkness. This would reduce the effective
SKILL of John of Salamonis to 1. Again, this means that the chances of success
(vs. a target number of 14) is just 3%. However, expertise and talent tells
more quickly, with Adventurers with an unmodified effective SKILL of 9 having
an 8% chance, rising to nearly 17% at 10, and nearly 30% at 11.
Extremely Difficult [-4]
As an example, this is the modifier
applied to Swim or Dodge tests when encumbered by a very heavy weight. This
would reduce the effective SKILL of John of Salamonis to 3, which means that he
has an 8% chance of success.
Difficult [-2]
As an example, this is the
modifier applied with fighting while drunk. This would reduce the effective
SKILL of John of Salamonis to 5, which means that he has a 30% chance of
success. He will fail more often than not, but will succeeding often enough.
…er, but hang on. What about positive modifiers? What happens when
things are easier than normal? In most cases, I argue that this should mean
that Referee simply rules that the Adventurers succeed. Even the chances of our
everyman, John of Salamonis, shoot up to over 70% with a +2 modifier, over 90%
with a +4 modifier, and 97% with a +6 modifier (assuming double 1 is an
automatic failure). The exception is, of course, effective SKILL in combat, in
which positive modifiers do play a part (though I propose capping effective SKILL for human/mortal scale Adventurers at 12). In this case, the roll is not
to beat a target number of 14, but the Attack Strength of the opponent, which
can be much higher. The modifiers for combat are well detailed on p59 of AFF2e.
But note. Combat is the only place for ‘opposed rolls’ when I run
AFF2e. When Adventurers are engaged in a contest vs the environment the roll is
unopposed. Equal or beat 14, with modifiers for difficulty. In all non-combat
contests vs NPCs, Adventurers likewise roll to beat 14, with modifiers for
difficulty. I do not construct NPCs symmetrically to Adventurers. They have SKILL
and STAMINA scores for combat, but their non-combat expertise is handled by key
words and associated modifiers, which apply to the effective SKILL of the
Adventurers, not the NPC. So, if an NPC description has that the NPC is keen
eyed, I will also write that all Sneaking tests conducted against that NPC are
at -2, for example. I don’t have to give him Awareness 6 to make up for a feeble
SKILL score. Or the other way round – If Adventurers and NPCs are not
symmetrically constructed I don’t need to worry about the effect of giving an
NPC a high SKILL score – this only represents combat effectiveness, as per the
original gamebooks.
It really does make statting up NPCs a piece of cake.
{*} The AFF2e rulebook has a suggested target number of 15, which means
that there is a big difference between the default ‘roll low’ system and the
alternative ‘roll high’ system. With a target number of 15 for the ‘roll high’
system, a character with effective SKILL 7 would succeed just over 40% of the
time. In the default system, a character with an effective SKILL of 7 would
succeed in rolling 7 or under 60% of the time.
Some great points there. I love your NPC statting method. It does make it a piece of cake. I'm also for auto success for certain skill levels to stop someone spending all their xp on skill increases and ploughing through everything. Makes working on special skills more attractive and rounds characters out a bit. I also love your stat calculations. What seems like minor modifiers can create huge swings in probability, so you need to be careful. And good point for noticing that if something has a positive modifier, it might as well be successful . Takes out all that tedious dice rolling.
ReplyDeleteStuart, I've just seen your post on the AFF2e forum regarding automatic success for certain Special Skill values - it appears we were thinking along similar lines!
DeleteBut you got there first...
Great minds think alike. your version is an improved version, especially when it comes to simplifying NPCs.
DeleteAlso, it seems a bit off that most NPCs in the world (who have a skill of 5 and a special skill of 2 in their chosen profession according to the Heroes' Companion) would only succeed at their jobs 58% of the time if doing your job required a roll. They should be able to perform their duties without too many rolls, otherwise their skills would have to higher or the tolerance for incompetence on Titan is higher.
ReplyDelete58%? That's a real good chance! Well, compared to WFRP1e, where, by the book, mundane NPCs have a 30-40% chance of success when 'tested'.
DeleteI've come to believe that if a character - PC or NPC - is meant to be skilled in a particular area then under most conditions there should not be a 'test', just an automatic success. 'Tests' should be reserved for skill use under 'adventuring stress' and the like, and even then what counts as 'stress' or out of the ordinary conditions ought be determined by 'narrative' skill level.
Narrative? I mean the skill level in the fiction of the game world, rather than the mechanics.
DeleteI love this. Stolen.
ReplyDeleteRoll Skill+acrobatics to stop me!! :-)
Delete