Quote from: Simlasa;935114Agreed. I was thinking on this earlier... if I'd ever known anyone who was consistently intimidating and I couldn't come up with anyone.

Any number of bouncers would fit.

Quote from: AsenRG;935397Any number of bouncers would fit.

Against other bouncers? Against the sheriff/president/king? Against armed assailants?

Quote from: Simlasa;935423Against other bouncers? Against the sheriff/president/king? Against armed assailants?

Including against people that are used to using violence to get what they want, yes. I've had one of those guys explaining what kind of phrases are going to legitimize you as someone not to be trifled with.
Now, a SEAL/Spetznatz or a mafia enforcer probably won't be intimidated by the same tactics, but that's an argument for including level in intimidation and resisting it, not against the skill.

Quote from: Simlasa;935423Against other bouncers? Against the sheriff/president/king? Against armed assailants?

Intimidation skill might be thought to include a bit of knowing whom to use it on and when. And weaponry and ability to actually back up intimidation with action can just be modifiers to the success calculation, which itself can be a matter of GM discretion taking into account even numeric ratings. I run GURPS where there are not only rules for various levels of all sorts of skills, and intimidation is a skill with various suggested modifiers that ties into the reaction roll system which has other various modifiers and rolls available... I use the numbers and have the modifiers in mind, but I almost never actually roll the dice and use the indicated result as written unless I'm wanting to experiment with it (e.g. for some un-roleplayed interaction between NPCs I'm fooling around with between sessions). For intimidation and most social skill uses, I note the skills levels and the situation and whatever roleplaying is involved, maybe roll the dice for a bit of random input, and then just use my judgment about what the results are and how they translate into behavior.  Usually it's just "Oh this character has no Intimidation skill but that one has it at 13 - ok I'll roleplay them appropriately".

Quote from: CRKrueger;935204Watch movies/shows with Organized Crime or Corporate negotiations.  Watch Westworld and see Anthony Hopkins talk to the QA Officer and the Board Member who both are trying to get him removed.  There's your Intimidation.  Implied Threat, politely delivered.

Fantastic scenes, BTW. But thew thing that makes the threat credible - or not, since the threat doesn't seem to work exactly as intended - is that he can back it up with power. Otherwise, it would be deception.

Guess that is the gist of my post - intimidation is just an specific form of deception when practiced against the strong, and just common sense when used against the weak.

Also, which stat should you use for intimidation? Charisma? But it seems like the more menacing types are the less likable ones. Strength? That is really silly - only the very stupid will tremble in front of a Fighter while laughing at a fireball.

Anthony Hopkins is a great example - he doesn't seem like a likable character at all, just someone smart and driven.

Quote from: Eric Diaz;935486Fantastic scenes, BTW. But thew thing that makes the threat credible - or not, since the threat doesn't seem to work exactly as intended - is that he can back it up with power. Otherwise, it would be deception.

Guess that is the gist of my post - intimidation is just an specific form of deception when practiced against the strong, and just common sense when used against the weak.

It's also the ability to present the threat as credible and to make the target realize you mean it.

QuoteAlso, which stat should you use for intimidation? Charisma? But it seems like the more menacing types are the less likable ones. Strength? That is really silly - only the very stupid will tremble in front of a Fighter while laughing at a fireball.

Your Wisdom modifier, multiplied by minus one. Only to be used without multiplication when the PC is a Cleric and makes it clear that he or she would consider it a religious duty to hurt the NPC unless...
And of course, the difference in levels would apply in either case;).

Also, you want some movie example about intimidation? Look at Jack Nickolson:D!

Quote from: Eric Diaz;935486Also, which stat should you use for intimidation? Charisma? But it seems like the more menacing types are the less likable ones. Strength? That is really silly - only the very stupid will tremble in front of a Fighter while laughing at a fireball.

Anthony Hopkins is a great example - he doesn't seem like a likable character at all, just someone smart and driven.

Being liked isn't just what Charisma is about.  It's force of personality.  You can be the nicest guy in the world, and still be an utter pushover.  Take most 'fire and brimstone' style public speaker, they're not likeable, they are noticeable and impressive.

Quote from: Harg of the City Afar;931822Are some skills more trouble than they're worth? In terms of mechanical integration, that is.

I know Perception gives people fits.

Does it? Why?

I'll note that I don't see Perception as a skill, but an attribute. One that's sorely lacking from the Traditional OSR 6 in my opinion. Usually use Int as a substitute, but sometimes that feels like Int is being spread toothin, like how every character with high Dex is simultaneously a world-class acrobat and concert pianist.

QuoteCrafting skills have to toe an very fine line between being effectively worthless or campaign-bustingly broken.*

Again, have to ask how? I've never had this issue, and cant conceive of it.

QuoteLuck, as a skill, is tricky to implement in a way that isn't metagamey/immersion-breaking.

Perception might be a bit iffy,in that one could potentially train to improveit (though same goes for Strength, Agility, Common Sense, Constitution, etc), but I cannot in any way accept Luck as a skill. You can't learn luck, you can't teach it. You can't improve it by any means that aren't supernatural or philosophical.

QuoteWhat skills give you the most trouble and what do you do about it?

None. My game used a small list of broad skill-groups, allows players the option of specializing as a trade of for better proficiency with smaller applicability, and work just fine as part of my overall system. In the 20 odd years I've essentially used the same system/skill list, I've never had a single problem.

Regarding Perception as a problematic skill:

Quote from: Tristram Evans;935657Does it? Why?

Perception bothers me in D&D 5e more than any other skill, because it's used to avoid traps and ambushes but not by a random roll, so the character with a slightly better passive Perception (essentially, score if you roll 10 on d20) is never surprised unless the character with a slightly lower score is also surprised. I liked the old roll for surprise, because sometimes the ranger was surprised on a 1 when nobody else was. Since a surprise round can be pretty devastating, it's the skill (well, with Stealth, which is the opposed skill) that has the biggest impact on combat.

QuoteI'll note that I don't see Perception as a skill, but an attribute. One that's sorely lacking from the Traditional OSR 6 in my opinion. Usually use Int as a substitute, but sometimes that feels like Int is being spread toothin, like how every character with high Dex is simultaneously a world-class acrobat and concert pianist.

5e uses Wisdom as the perception attribute (that is, the skill is based on Wisdom but proficiency gives a separate bonus based on level); so animals typically have decent Wisdom but very low Intelligence (and often some Keen Sense that gives advantage if the sense is relevant).

Regarding Crafting:

QuoteAgain, have to ask how? I've never had this issue, and cant conceive of it.

I think maybe if it becomes too cheap/easy to make very useful resources (imagine every PC with 100 healing potions or other magic items).

QuoteNone. My game used a small list of broad skill-groups, allows players the option of specializing as a trade of for better proficiency with smaller applicability, and work just fine as part of my overall system. In the 20 odd years I've essentially used the same system/skill list, I've never had a single problem.

The problems I've experienced come when a certain level of skill gives a qualitative difference (e.g., can craft magic items) or when a skill is so crucial that all characters are forced into an arms race over that skill to be viable.

The most problematic skills are social skills.

Quote from: RPGPundit;938214The most problematic skills are social skills.

Do you mean problematic for roleplayers, or problematic for people on the Internet? ;-)

My game doesn't have social skills, a common simple solution, but I found perception a tricky issue to resolve.

If you're asking players to roll then that implies something's going on, unless you ask a lot, in which case it can take up a lot of time. Rolling once for the party is a problem as per rawma's observation.

I ended up getting players to roll a bunch of results in advance written on index cards (one result per character on each card). When I want a roll (or just as a bluff) I get someone to pick a card and I have a roll for all characters (or a particular character I need one for), rolled in advance by that player. It's worked well in practice, and I find I generally use it several times in a session. You could do this in any game.

A second issue is that Perception is an odd skill for characters to train in. I've given it as something you get a bonus in as a result of taking other skills. That is, you don't train to increase perception - you train to improve your Scouting or Ranger ability - but whichever you do also helps your perception. This means that if it gets trumped by investigative roleplay it doesn't matter as no-one actually spent any points in it.

Quote from: Eric Diaz;935486Fantastic scenes, BTW. But thew thing that makes the threat credible - or not, since the threat doesn't seem to work exactly as intended - is that he can back it up with power. Otherwise, it would be deception.

Guess that is the gist of my post - intimidation is just an specific form of deception when practiced against the strong, and just common sense when used against the weak.

Also, which stat should you use for intimidation? Charisma? But it seems like the more menacing types are the less likable ones. Strength? That is really silly - only the very stupid will tremble in front of a Fighter while laughing at a fireball.

Anthony Hopkins is a great example - he doesn't seem like a likable character at all, just someone smart and driven.

That's why I either like
1. A system like Mythras, where stats might determine a starting advantage, but overall Skill is really what is important.
2. A pool system where you might roll a stat die and skill die, so which stat gets used can change based on how you are using it.
3. A system where stats are just a mod tacked on to the skill roll, which gives you similar flexibility to 2.

Quote from: CRKrueger;939182. A pool system where you might roll a stat die and skill die, so which stat gets used can change based on how you are using it.
3. A system where stats are just a mod tacked on to the skill roll

Yeah, I'm decoupling skills from traits in my game for exactly this kind of flexibility.

Quote from: JoeNuttall;939159A second issue is that Perception is an odd skill for characters to train in. I've given it as something you get a bonus in as a result of taking other skills. That is, you don't train to increase perception - you train to improve your Scouting or Ranger ability - but whichever you do also helps your perception. This means that if it gets trumped by investigative roleplay it doesn't matter as no-one actually spent any points in it.

As I recall, EABA takes basically that approach.  Perception is a base stat and can be rolled with any skill, depending on what you're trying to perceive.  Looking for hidden doors in a dungeon?  Roll Perception+Stoneworking.  Looking for a concealed pistol?  Roll Perception+Firearms.  Looking for wild game?  Perception+Hunting.  Etc.

Quote from: nDervish;939265As I recall, EABA takes basically that approach.  Perception is a base stat and can be rolled with any skill, depending on what you're trying to perceive.  Looking for hidden doors in a dungeon?  Roll Perception+Stoneworking.  Looking for a concealed pistol?  Roll Perception+Firearms.  Looking for wild game?  Perception+Hunting.  Etc.

That's an attractive variant approach, but there are issues which stop me using it. Taking your examples, would being a sharp shooter help you spot a concealed pistol? When looking for hidden doors are there multiple skills that could apply, or just one? Presumably many, so what if the character is good at two do they get a better bonus? (Presumably looking for wild game is actually just Hunting, not Perception).