Adding skills to ICRPG... Sort of

#1

Why, Meadbeard, why would you do this?

Well… I’m trying to convince my players to try ICRPG, but keep getting hit with questions and comments like;
“But without skills, how is my rogue better at picking locks than the barbarian, if we both have +1 Basic effort?”
“But without skills, how is my fighter better at swinging a sword than the archer, if we both have +1 Weapon effort?”
“But without skills, how is my…”
You get the picture. They want a bit more nuance between characters than what the effort system supplies. So, being an accomadating type of person, and because I REALLY wanna play more ICRPG, I baked up a way to add a bit more nuance to the effort system, to accomodate some sort of semblance of skills.
Thus, I submit to your brutal and honest critique…

Expanded Effort:
Basically I split up the four effort types into nine.

  • Fight (anything that has to do with melee weapon use. Replaces Weapon Effort)
  • Shoot (anything that has to do with ranged weapon use. Replaces Weapon Effort)
  • Cast (anything related to spellcasting. Replaces Magic Effort)
  • Influence (anything related to getting people to do what you want. Replaces Basic Effort)
  • Move (anything related to jump, climb, dodge, run, swim etc. Replaces Basic Effort)
  • Endure (anything related to resisting, enduring and overcoming influence. Replaces Basic Effort)
  • Investigate (anything related to spotting, searching, studying, learning etc. Replaces Basic Effort)
  • Operate (anything related to picking lock, operating mechanisms etc. Replaces Basic Effort)
  • Mend (anything related to healing, fixing, repairing etc. Replaces Basic Effort)

The reason for dividing effort into this 9 semi-skills, is that each applies to common situations where effort might be rolled, allowing characters to specialize in certain situations, but without having a mile long skill list (which I hate). Seriously, who needs 500 knowledge skills? Are you tracking the goblins through the forest? Roll INT or WIS, and then roll basic effort (d4) + Investigate.

This of course means that you should grant the players a few more Build Points at character creation. About maybe 10, rather than 6. And it would require some slight alterations to loot that grant bonuses to effort.
It adds a bit more nuance and diversity to characters, but other than that, doesn’t change any of the mechanics.

Let me know what you think, as I’m considering implementing this in my upcoming “Mirrors of Magradim”. Is it a viable solution to those who want a bit more character diversity, or am I a heretic for even suggesting such a thing?

(Edit): Note that there is no longer any Ultimate Effort bonus. That’s because the expanded effort system applies whatever bonus is relevant to what you are trying to do. Picking a lock with magical lock picks would use magic effort (d8) + Operate. Regular lock picks? d4 + Operate.

Skill system for ICRPG?
#2

Can I say something? :slight_smile:

Have them ask themselves why the hell their barbarian would even Attempt to pick a lock!!
And.
Instead of dishing out all those different Efforts give them Tags that give them Easy or even a Normal chance of doing what they want to do.
Or just give the Barbarian who clearly never mastered lockpicking HARD on his Attempt and the Rogue EASY because hey that’s his thing yo.
That’s my herocoin to this blablublibla of your players :smile:
IDK if I come off as harsh but I have all intent to this making it easier for You

#3

Not harsh at all :grin:
That is a very valid argument. But doesn’t that flood the characters with tags instead?
We stopped playing Fate exactly because everything ended up as an aspect (tag), and there were endless arguments whether or not a barbarian should be able to pick a lock. :rofl:

I guess my players don’t like looking at each other’s sheets and seeing similar stats, and wondering how my dude is different from that dude with the same numbers on the paper. And lack of granularity in skills is why they rage quitted on 5e.

#4

I would say to not make it tags and make it Loot.

The Barbarian can attempt a lock, but at a penalty for not having tools or equipment, making it HARD and then it would only be basic effort. The rogue has the tools and experience of using them to give them an EASY check AND allow them to use Weapon Effort plus bonuses.

If everyone is going in Turns as suggested, then it would be a waste to have to Barbarian open locks or chest instead of raging and attacking!

if there is a lot of opened time, just let the Rogue always succeed on opening chests or doors if there is no pressure.

The fighter is better at fighting because of his weapon list. he can shoot as well as the Archer if they have the same DEX, but fighters have to worry about STR and CON as well. the Ranger can dedicate more DEX and would have the Quick Quiver that allows them to go all Legolas on some orcs!

make the calls and let them know that they will be different enough and everyone will have to use their time and strengths appropriately in an adventure.

If I was the Barbarian, I’ll give the sneaky stuff to the Rogue because I’m “too proud to play these mind games”. but if the Rogue found the Great Sword RENDER, you KNOW I will demand it as the “little guy can’t handle a warrior’s weapon”.

#5

Seconded. Giving loot that confers what would be class or skill bonuses gives the characters the specialization they crave without overloading you or them with more stuff to track, more charts to confer, etc.

A barbarian absolutely can try to pick a lock. If the rogue is knocked out, anyone in the party can try to do so. Or anyone could try to sneak in shadows. They might get lucky at it, they might not. Ruling that the barbarian’s attempts on lock picking or sneaking are HARD makes perfect sense to me. And if the barbarian fails on the lock pick attempt, it’s perfectly in character to see him hammer the door open in a fit of rage! :grin:

Skills, feats, class bonuses, and all the other stuff that D&D has fiddled with over the editions are one way to codify the abstract nature of “my character has a history that leads to some set of things they can do”, but the actual mathematical process leads to power gaming, mix/maxing, and long-term planning for how you’ll progress this character even before they experience their first adventure.

At low levels, and without much loot, what really constitutes the difference between a rogue and a barbarian? New adventurers aren’t experts at anything, so having all of them kind of on equal footing allows them to evolve their characters through RP as the game unfolds.

If your players really want some extra differentiation, make the LOOT or class-relevant skill concepts (anything sneaky for rogues, as a broad example) confer ADVANTAGE on the check rolls. Thief trying to pick a lock? Roll 2d20 and take the better roll. Barbarian trying to pick a lock? Roll 1d20. This keeps consistent the notion that classes have superior abilities in certain things, but anyone can try anything.

(Or non-class skills, thief trying to wield the great sword, confer DISADVANTAGE: roll 2d20 and take the worse roll.)

#6

Both alternatives presented are solidly in the spirit of ICRPG:

LOOT: transferable and lose-able upgrades to a character that can confer any skill-like advantage

TAG: permanent, immutable upgrade to a character that can do anything

Give starting characters their normal starting Loot and award them one occupation/skill-based TAG, and shower them with new Loot over the course of sessions, with an occasional new TAG that reflects how they’ve been playing or wish their character to be.

My two cents, anyway.

#7

anything beyond the core stat rolls, loot and tags becomes a slippery slope.
“we’ll only play ICRPG is we compromise it back into what we know” is what your players might be saying :stuck_out_tongue:

#8

exactly! there are also different ways of improving your characters that way:

  • loot
  • new tags
  • new stat point increase
  • combined or improved Loot abilities (1 Loot gives you more bonuses or improved version of the ability)
  • learned and mastered abilities from Loot that can be passed on (like the Ranger’s Quick Quiver being mastered and he can then give that to another character as a gifted Loot)
#9

have you also considered using ICRPG as a plug in for your game to introduce it to your players?

HEARTS as HP and effort, TURNS, group initiative, EASY and HARD, Timers, Room Difficulty?

once they see this in play, they’ll just be playing more streamlined D&D. simplify the rules for one move and one action for the players so that they don’t overtake too much time from other players (LOOKIN AT YOU, FIGHTER AND ACTION SURGE).

#10

I like your idea to try to expand stuff to help your players out, it is a very nice gesture as a GM to put that much work into helping them transition to a new game system, and I may be coming out of left field with this but… Could it be possible they are demanding mechanical differences to separate who their characters are because their characters aren’t really that different?

It is hard to focus on who your character really IS when most game books reward mechanical skills and advantages in combat. If they are basically the same personality wearing a different hat, whether it’s a rogues hood or a barbarians horned helm, then they may feel like their characters are a bit flat. In this case I believe they are looking for an outside solution to an internal problem.

Thankfully the simplicity of ICRPG is its salvation… so what if we have the same DEX mod, if we use those stats to do different actions and don’t step on each other’s toes it doesn’t matter. I use my dex to shoot the apple outta the orc’s hand to distract him while you use dex to sneakily slink up behind it for the coup de grace. Maybe suggesting cooperative actions, setups, and assistance can help players.

I know I always refer back to RFE, but dang it they are just such great examples. Sure, mechanically their characters are friggin powerhouses, but the focus isn’t on numeric escalation, the game revolves around the evolution of the story, the dynamics between the relationships of folks trying to overcome an adversity, and making sure everyone else is included in the spotlight.

So, if you want to try to steer your players into that sort of direction I would highly suggest checking out that YouTube channel. I know watching Alex, Jason, Joe, Brandon, Matt, and Kelsey run games has really helped me to look at the way I do stuff. Sure I still do some things the way I always have, but I have also dropped old bad habits, and I feel like it has brought a lot more fun to my table.

Anyhow, sorry for rambling so much. I hope this helped. Strength, Honor, and Fun RPGs!

#11

Thanks for all the replies. Those are some solid advice, and I shall heed every single one of them. :beer:

#12

Simple answer. The barbarian rolls hard. The thief rolls easy.

That’s a six point swing!

If the thief has lockpicks, that’s an extra +3 on his roll, a nine point difference! He’s clearly better by a landslide.

If you need more than that to differentiate between characters, you are in trouble with those players.

#13

Keep it simple. To me that is the key of ICRPG table top fun.

It means don’t do what you are suggesting.

STEP ONE: make them play a one-shot with rules as they are. Just to try the system. Let them decide if they REALLY need more or if they actually like it as is. You might be shocked.

STEP TWO: after they experience the system and if they still are not pleased, ask them if they are cool with this one inclusion — “deal ULTIMATE effort for NON-COMBAT actions you can argue as class specific.”

A thief picking a lock, a barbarian setting up a camp, a mage solving a puzzle, a fighter repairing his gear, etc.

Then you are done and don’t have to keep trying to remember the rules you chose to add in to the game.

#14

I love the idea of negotiating for class specific talents. ULTIMATE effort sounds super badass for those abilities. I would like to use that in my games, but i would keep an eye out for it being a little too powerful. If the player rolls a 12 + their applicable effort + bonuses they may be able to clear a 2 heart obstacle in a single roll. Though, admittedly, that could make them feel super powerful in really specific situations where their class would shine so that could be perfect.

Other options could also be:

  1. Giving the applicable stat bonus on top of effort on those class specific actions (Dex+ 1d6+ Weapon effort bonus for the rogue picking the lock with their lockpicking tools)
  2. Adding a second die to the effort (2d4 for basic, 2d6 for weapon, etc.)
  3. Bumping up the effort die to the next highest step (d4 to d6, d6 to d8, etc)
#15

I personally let my players do things that just make sense their characters could do.

Druid wants to cleanse corruption from a tree? Sounds legit. Give that 2 hearts of effort to complete.

Cleric wants to create light from their staff to light the dark cave? Sounds good.

Rouge wants to pick a lock? Sure they can use a bobby pin they probably have for basic effort. They have actual loot item called Thieves tools or lock pick? +3 to attempt and does weapon effort now.

Barbarian wants to open the chest? Lock picking? HAR HAR HAR Swings axe for weapon effort

If you want you can make picking the lock a 1 heart task and breaking the door/chest a 2 heart task.

If it makes sense the character could do an action, go for it.

Take into consideration the characters back stories.

They an old cleric? They they probably could do an exorcism on someone for 2 hearts of effort.

They a young newbie cleric? Might need a teacher or book to teach them how to do that.

#16

I am really quite new to this game but it seems that adding skills goes against the streamlined simplicity of ICRPG. A lot can be done with loot and how the players envision their characters at the start of character creation. I really think it may be a matter of how the characters are played in-game (actual roleplaying) that will make them different rather than relying on numbers on a page. The beauty of ICRPG is that it encourages role-playing and action because it is open and efficient and not numerically charted out to cover every minute potentiality. As suggested above, I say run them through a one shot with the core rules as is and show them some awesomeness!

#17

I don’t know that any of us need read any farther than this.

:wink:

#18

My 2 cents…

For the next game I DM, I will be giving my players a set number of tags each. Maybe 3 to 5. They can pick any word they like for the tags.

The tags give bonuses to any applicable situation, and based on how specific or general their tag is, they will get a higher or lower bonus. A more specific niche tag gives a high bonus but in fewer situations. A very general tag gives a low bonus to lots of situations.

For example:
Athletics (General). +3 to running, jumping, climbing.
Climbing (Specific). +0 to running, jumping. +6 climbing.

In this way, players can build min-maxed specialist, jack of all trades generalist, or something inbetween, as fits their character concept. And I don’t need to give them an exhaustive list of possible tags.

I’ve not fully decided if tags can affect combat attacks, but my gut feeling is no, I would exclude this. I see tags as a flexible skill/traits system.

#19

Jeremy, That is the very reason we stopped playing Fate, and why they “need” some sort of codified skill system…

I create this tag on my character: “I win!”

An actual true example from our group.

But, yeah, all some solid advice. I’m gonna run them through a one shot at some point, and if it doesn’t click with them, I’ll always have Roll20, and you awesome peeps. :+1::grin::+1:

#20

This is an interesting expansion of the Effort mechanic. I wonder if too splintered and needlessly over- complexified, when the answer to most of those scared PC questions is “EASY/HARD rolls”, “LOOT” and maybe also, if they just gotta: “TAGs.”