Random skillups
Curious if anyone has an opinion on the pros/cons of a random skill up system.
Most systems I’m familiar with, skill gains are done either automatically as you level up or you get character points when you level that you can then spend to level up your skills as you see fit.
There are a number of systems though that this is random. When you level up or even at the end of every session, you make a roll versus your current skill, sometimes only for skills you actually used during the session. If you either roll under or over (depending on the way the system mechanics work) then you go up in skill.
I’m not necessarily a proponent of randomization in character power this way, it makes life harder for me as a GM to create encounters of the power level that I’m trying to achieve.
The whole if you used a skill then you can try to level it up is something I’m against though. It merely ensures that every player is going to find some way to use every skill they have. And I can either accept that or block it. In either case it’s more bookkeeping than I personally want to deal with.
But with that said, I’ve never actually GM’d or played in such a system, so maybe it works out well enough. If you have an opinion on the matter feel free to comment.
7 comments
Andy Goldman
January 16, 2012 at 3:10 am (UTC -5)
I kind of like the idea of having a chance to level up skills that you have used during a session. To balance out players that might try to use all their skills every time (not necessarily a bad thing, though), I would suggest this as one solution: Players can choose the order in which they make the checks, and with each check, there is an increased penalty on the roll, so if they try to level up 1 or 2 skills, it should be relatively easy, 3-4 more difficult, 5-6 very hard, etc. It would limit the skill growth while still allowing some skills to most likely level up each session.
Dennis Dollins
January 16, 2012 at 3:25 am (UTC -5)
The most common random mechanic I'm familiar with kind of has that. Various d% based systems where you get one roll and if you roll over (assuming the better the skill the higher it's value) then you get to raise it up. So as you get better as a skill it gets harder to raise it or not so much harder as it happens less and less frequently.
Perhaps a limit of X skills can be raised per session and then assign a penalty mechanic so that the higher the skill the less of a chance it'll work. The player would try the skills in the order he wanted them to raise and if one didn't raise, he woldn't lose one of his X but instead just have to try another skill. If he looped all the way to the bottom of his skilsl then he'd start over at the top. This would over the course of time though tend to level out the players skills. The high ones would raise less often and the low ones more often no matter how he ordered them until eventually they were all in teh same ballpark.
Not sure if that's a desired result or not.
Andy Hauge
January 16, 2012 at 4:28 am (UTC -5)
Burning Wheel has this, sort of, but without the randomness. You advance a skill by logging a certain number of "routine", "difficult", and "challenging" tests, which are rated according to how many dice you rolled during the test. The game also very explicitly says that badgering the GM for tests that don't make sense is poor form, and the GM is permitted to just say "no".
I like that approach. I think that, if the GM considers it appropriate to say "no" to a player's attempt to shove in a skill test, this sort of thing is fine. After all, if it encourages the players to reasonably broaden their skill set, I count that as a win.
Dennis Dollins
January 16, 2012 at 2:40 pm (UTC -5)
+Andy Hauge Interesting but personally that strikes me as a lot of bookkeeping and potential source of ire/argument. "No I had to make 3 research rolls at the library, remember? I told you we should have been making tally marks on a skills list for everyone each time they use a skill. "
"What do you mean, no!? There might be a trap on our tavern door. Remember the thieves guild is looking for us, I should be able to check for traps and it count toward skill advancement."
Andy Hauge
January 16, 2012 at 4:43 pm (UTC -5)
That's where GM authority comes in. With that assumption of GM authority, he only has you make one research roll at the library, and rides the success or failure of the scene on that roll. (Well, either that, or he invokes a rule in the books about only counting the most difficult test you made, if you make the same roll a bunch of times in a scene. This becomes very important in fights.)
The latter example is handled by the "Say Yes" philosophy: if nothing's at stake for failure, the players don't have to roll the dice. They get a straightforward answer. So… "I check the door for traps." There's nothing at stake for failure, so the GM says, "You don't find any." No test. Again, badgering the GM for a test is something that the game explicitly allows him to clamp down on.
Dennis Dollins
January 16, 2012 at 4:46 pm (UTC -5)
Interesting. I'm pretty sure I picked up the core BW book back when it was first released although I've seen that there are newer editions. I'll have to go back and read it again.
Andy Hauge
January 16, 2012 at 4:47 pm (UTC -5)
It may have gotten more strongly elucidated, too. I've heard that Burning Wheel Classic is a very rough cut. (Going off of the Gold Edition here)