Quote from: jrients;375992Did the D&D skills appear in BECMI as well?  I don't have the CMI part of those sets.

The skill system that appears in the RC was originally introduced in GAZ1: The Grand Duchy of Karameikos, published in 1987 (a year after the I, 2 years after the M, and 3 years after the C -- and, for that matter, 2 years after AD&D introduced NWPs in Oriental Adventures).

Quote from: jrients;375992Well I guess some trio of posters have to be the three dumbest motherfuckers on the board, but I honestly don't see how asking for some clarification on this point constitutes shouting Seanchai down.  Personally, I never would have said there was a skill 'system' in D&D prior to non-weapon proficiencies in later 1st edition AD&D and the optional skills in the RC.  Did the D&D skills appear in BECMI as well?  I don't have the CMI part of those sets.  I mean, am I talking crazy talk here, or didn't Runequest and many other later FRP games gain converts preisely because they had skill systems and early D&D did not?

I guess even so much as touching your dice constitutes a skill system, even if you are moving them out of the way to scribble some notes on your character sheet.  Who knew?

Obviously, 1st edition has to have some kind of skill system, otherwise the statement that 4e is almost exactly the same would not be true.  Which it obviously is.  Hence, there is a skill system in 1e, even if you have to define 'skill system' as 'anything involving dice'.  Otherwise, the legitimacy of 4e - which depends on being similar that creaky, old, shitty 1st edition that sucked at everything - would be severely undercut.

See?  Enough head trauma, and anything makes sense.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;375990The issue is seanchai is talking so he has to be shouted down by the three dumbest motherfuckers on the board.

It's rather that for some personal, fucked up, vengeful reason, you feel the need to stir the shit and insult people on the board.
Again.

Quote from: jrients;375992Well I guess some trio of posters have to be the three dumbest motherfuckers on the board, but I honestly don't see how asking for some clarification on this point constitutes shouting Seanchai down.  

It's not you, Jeff, just check for all the posts in the last 12 that have nothing to do with either skill systems or D&D. It's three dudes shouting at Seanchai and then loudly chuffling each others wieners over it. It's not free speech, it's clearly the suppression of it, by users who all happen to have accounts on some other Citadel and might be better off going the fuck back over there for that kind of nonsense. Meanwhile, the skill system conversation (both what it is, and when it first appeared..)  is actually kind of interesting.

QuotePersonally, I never would have said there was a skill 'system' in D&D prior to non-weapon proficiencies in later 1st edition AD&D and the optional skills in the RC.  Did the D&D skills appear in BECMI as well?  I don't have the CMI part of those sets.  I mean, am I talking crazy talk here, or didn't Runequest and many other later FRP games gain converts preisely because they had skill systems and early D&D did not?

I'm not sure why people see AD&D (1978) as so late to the party (EDIT- Wait, Am I thinking of the adventuring backgrouns in the AD&D DMG like "Fletcher" and "Cooper" and so on..? Those probably don't count...) , but yes, I agree that what we recognize as skills is probably the NWPs in OA. They had a skill for Calligraphy, for example. The developments in Rules Compendium (1991) are far later, despite it's lineage. My experience with D&D throughout the 70s and the 80s (And I didn't play anything but D&D until around 1989, and went back immediately to exclusive D&D in early 2000) was that yes, D&D was always dissed for not having a skill system.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;376006It's not free speech, it's clearly the suppression of it, by users who all happen to have accounts on some other Citadel and might be better off going the fuck back over there for that kind of nonsense.

Just as you are free to go fuck yourself, Peter.
You disingenuous son of a bitch.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;376006It's not you, Jeff, just check for all the posts in the last 12 that have nothing to do with either skill systems or D&D. It's three dudes shouting at Seanchai and then loudly chuffling each others wieners over it. It's not free speech, it's clearly the suppression of it, by users who all happen to have accounts on some other Citadel and might be better off going the fuck back over there for that kind of nonsense. Meanwhile, the skill system conversation (both what it is, and when it first appeared..)  is actually kind of interesting.

So you can go back to spewing senseless bullshit and not get called on it?  That might work with your friends who are still in high school, but this is the real world, cupcake.  Keep whinging about no one lapping up your transmitted wisdom like mana from heaven all you want, because that is all you do.  The fact of the matter is, this 'discussion' about when the skill system first appeared isn't much of a discussion, because it's fairly clear on when it appeared, except for a couple of cunts who insist on trying to re-define it as 'any time you roll the dice, it is a skill system', so the exchange is necessarily a refutation of that basic falsehood.

Supression of free speech?  Fuck, you are a worthless pile of shit if you are starting to whine about that.  Pundit is the only one that can 'supress' any kind of speech around here, you fucktard.  Join the actual discussion instead of pissing and moaning about the oppression inherent in the system.

I mean, fuck.

EDIT:  Forgot to add, thanks for promoing my site!

Point of information: this is not the real world.

Quote from: Aos;376010Point of information: this is not the real world.

I roll to disbelieve.

Quote from: Aos;376010Point of information: this is not the real world.

It's also not high school, where someone can get away with making bullshit arguments that have no merit and impress your equally uneducated friends.  In other words, we are all grown ups here, and crying about getting picked on because you can't make a coherent point that stands up to even basic scrutiny or challenge is really fucking weak.

See, it's kind of an interesting topic, and whether you agree or disagree (on what constitutes a skill check or when they appeared) it doesn't seem like it would ever be that controversial. I personally had never even thought of opening doors as a skill check before, but what would I use for that now? Probably an Athletics check.

But all these same douchebags ever do is turn these things into shouting matches after which they declare victory and begin chuffling each other when the entire thing becomes too exhausting to deal with.  

It's not the topic that's controversial, it's not even the fact that there's a grievous or heartfelt beef about the nature of skill checks. We have this shit here because Seanchai dared to participate in the thread in an on-topic and thought-provoking way.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;376013But all these same douchebags ever do is turn these things into shouting matches after which they declare victory and begin chuffling each other when the entire thing becomes too exhausting to deal with.

You are, of course, speaking from a position of authority here. All hail your abys(s/m)al wisdom.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;376013We have this shit here because Seanchai dared to participate in the thread in an on-topic and thought-provoking way.

Well, the only thought provoked on my end is "What the hell is Seanchai going on about?  At this point I've been hearing about people who prefer system X to D&D because they like 'skill-based systems' better for friggin' decades.  Either he's got some great point that's going to provide some Buddha like enlightenment on my sorry ass or he is totally making shit up."

Quote from: Seanchai;375971If a Search or Perception check only covers a square or a few squares and the PCs don't describe where they're searching, how would they find anything? You believe that the WotC skills Search and Perception were designed only to cover what lay at the PCs' feet?

 The Search text refers to things needing to be "generally" within 10' of the searcher, but nowhere in the description of the skill does it say that the DM needs to provide any details as to what the character even sees for the character to use the skill, nor does it require the player to be more specific than that the character is searching, which would apparently cover 10' in all directions. The Spot skill is even less specific, without even a maximum area specified, only a penalty for each 10' distance, but no required details mentioned. When I play 1e I have to describe what my character is searching specifically, and on the flipside, the DM has to describe what can be searched. Quite often, no die roll is involved at all. Dunno how you play 1e.

QuoteNo, it's a direct quote.

That has nothing to do with the point. Besides, I already granted you that we could talk about the listen at doors mechanic for everyone rather than the Listen at Doors skill for the Thief class and it still wouldn't be like Search or Spot or even Listen.

QuoteI don't need to redefine what we're discussing. It already covers Thief Functions.

Yet, you're trying anyway, which is what baffles me.

QuoteWhich is it, 1e relied on player skill or 1e relied more on player skill that WotC editions because it was looser and more open to interpretation?

Both. Depends on what actual mechanic or character action you're referring to. Do you believe they are mutually exclusive?

QuoteThe reason skills and skill systems are relevant is because they don't rely on player skill to any large degree. The presence of rudimentary skill systems (along other systems) lays to rest the idea that 1e was a mecca of player ingenuity, that it was the mind behind the character that mattered in those early editions and not mechanics.

Seanchai

Actually, it doesn't. Ask anyone who actually plays it. Nobody here has said dice are never rolled in 1e for things the character is trying to do, that's just the illusionary argument you're trying to pin on folks because you can't win the real argument, which is that 1e had no skill system, and especially not one like WotC's, which is what you originally tried to get away with writing. You can go on and on about how 1e didn't involve player skill in non-combat situations more than WotC versions (which doesn't mean WotC version don't involve player skill at all. Just, as RandallS pointed out, player skills in different things), and anyone here or anywhere who's actually played it for any length of time is going to know you're wrong. I've made my point many times over, and I'm bored with you now, so have fun going on and on about this shit. We can argue about something else later.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;375990I don't know. I would kinda define a skill system as anything that requires a dice roll (even just attribute checks..) that isn't combat. I seem to recall attribute checks in Basic D&D, but I can't remember. If someone had a big issue with that I don't think it's even worth battling over.

So a +1 to open doors is the modifier to the door-opening skill system. (Where you open doors on a 1-x on a y sided dice.

Why is it that the same guys every time are trying to simply trying to shout out dissent, remain completely off topic, and seemingly exist only to validate each other? This is an extremely trivial topic, and people could be discussing in it in a completely casual way, but it's being artificially escalated just to maintain solidarity. The issue isn't skill systems, really, let's just admit it. The issue is seanchai is talking so he has to be shouted down by the three dumbest motherfuckers on the board.

Edit: Ok, going to change this obscenity filled, defensive tourette's-like post to something else, trying to better myself after all.

I'm arguing with Seanchai because he attacked one of RandallS's stated prefences for 1e D&D over WotC editions by posting something vague, pointless, and just plain wrong and I decided to call him on it. I've now killed the horse, pumped a few more rounds into it, checked for a pulse, had a vet search for life-signs and find none, and then kicked it a few times just to make certain. So, the horse is dead and I'm going to stop kicking it and move on. If that makes me one of the "three dumbest motherfuckers" on the board, then so be it.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;376006Wait, Am I thinking of the adventuring backgrouns in the AD&D DMG like "Fletcher" and "Cooper" and so on..? Those probably don't count...

Those are skills, but they're not generally considered to be a "skill system" because there is no resolution system attached to them -- how those skills are actually used in the game is left entirely to the discretion of the individual players/GM.