Hello guys!

I'm pretty much decided on what to do, but I wanted to be sure I'm not breaking the game by what I do. I will soon (in a couple of weeks, I just received the book yesterday.) start a EotE game on roll20. I've put some of my preferences when playing with me, but I'm starting to think some of those characteristics are redundant. Here is what I've put for my player in the mechanics section.

Some skills will be fused. It's not that I don't like them, but I find some of them to be really to close to other one to really justify buying points in another skill. And to be fair, the definition is too close to justify me spending half an hour trying to explain why one can't be used instead of the other. I should not add skills that are not necessary to the game, but I can use two different skills to do almost exactly the same thing? No thank you! And it means you'll have more points to spend in areas that interest you, so it's a win-win situation!

• Cool and Discipline = Discipline only. Why? Because I really can't tell the difference. Oh sure some people came up with separate definitions like : Cool is used this to deal with player nerves. If a NPC mentions something and the PCs don't want to show a reaction. Or for initiating a combat they know is coming. And Discipline is focus or concentration, more of an active ability than Cool is. Resisting pain or torture, opposing Negotiation, Charm, or Coerce tests, etc. Those are definitely too similar to justify an investment of points in two different skills. For all purposes Discipline (with willpower being the characteristic, I don't see why presence should affect it.) will replace Cool when prompted to use that skill (not being surprised at the beginning of a fight, gambling, etc).
• Vigilance and Perception = Perception only. Why ? Same reason. Two different definitions according to people : Perception means being able to tell or spot something that is there, while Vigilance means being able to anticipate and react to something that is about to happen. This would mean two skills exists just to explain an active and inactive version of awareness. Waste of point there, and headaches for the GM when the player wants to use one instead of the other. Instead I chose to go with just Perception (because Cunning seems like a more justified characteristic when judging of people's awareness.) and you can replace Vigilance by it every time the game prompts you to use it in a roll.

I know it makes for less skills and allow characters to maybe spend some more points in other skills, but I don't think it will really break the game. And the fact that discipline can be used to resist all social skills doesn't bother me (actually I find it more logical).
Would you agree with me? Or did I miss something?

(I haven't yet read all sections of the book, so I could definitely have missed something.)

Thanks everyone !
Camille.

P.S: Oh and I'd don't have the names right here, but the definitions for those characteristics are from the forum. I actually read posts about those skills before deciding on what to do. I'd like to thank those people and apologize for using their phrasing if they didn't want me to.

I suggest you look through this thread addressing combining some skills. It's not quite on-point since IMO changing the combat Ability rules affects a lot more, but I think most of the ideas are the same.

If nothing else, I would suggest that any Career/Specialization that has Cool as a Career Skill has that replaced with Discipline, ditto with Vigilance and Perception.

For what it's worth, I see Perception as basically a Search or Spot check, while Vigilance is more about training your reaction time. Cool and Discipline, I absolutely see your point.

What are you gaining other than the fact that you are screwing up peoples builds and forcing them to take stats they dont want?

@ Kshatriya: Thanks for the link, I'll look into it. I'm considering the way it affects rules, so it could be spot on! And of course the carreer/specializations using the skills that I'll remove will have those replaced. I thought it was implied. ^^ I'll add it to my rule, thanks for reminding me!

Diggles, on 24 Oct 2013 - 5:38 PM, said:
What are you gaining other than the fact that you are screwing up peoples builds and forcing them to take stats they dont want?

I fail to see in what way this would "screw" people's builds, since they gain two skills in one instead of for example Cool being quite useless apart from a few opportunities. And what am I gaining? Time.

Because players will argue (that's almost for sure, as I also couldn't clearly figure which one to apply in many cases) about decisions when they feel they could use a certain skill when they actually can't just because the definition of the said skill is not exactly what they applying it for. And I will know what to apply when, instead of thinking "why can't I just use discipline instead of cool, he's trying to stay calm in front of the adversity, no? No as for RAW you should roll Cool. But whyyyyyy?!" ^^ That kind of stuff.

I feel like the Cool/Discipline distinction is razor-think and flimsy, it's drawing a distinction between not showing a tell or falling for a lie (Cool) with not being scared and having mental fortitude (Discipline). Both are an intangible asset and to me the training for one would be very similar to the training for the other. I also question having different Initiative skills based on whether you're prepared or surprised. I see a bigger distinction with Perception/Vigilance.

Because players will argue (that's almost for sure, as I also couldn't clearly figure which one to apply in many cases) about decisions when they feel they could use a certain skill when they actually can't just because the definition of the said skill is not exactly what they applying it for. And I will know what to apply when, instead of thinking "why can't I just use discipline instead of cool, he's trying to stay calm in front of the adversity, no? No as for RAW you should roll Cool. But whyyyyyy?!" ^^ That kind of stuff.

I would sit them down and make them listen to skill monkey. I find Fiddleback explains it quite well to new players.

Well anyway, the question wasn't about if you think it should be done, but rather if there are mechanics that will be broken by it.

Thanks for taking the time to reply everyone, from what everyone says, it seems there won't be too much broken rules. That's all I wanted to know. I think I'll deal with mechanics issues when and if they arise!

Though if you think of anything major that would be broken by it, don't hesitate to mention it!

I would sit them down and make them listen to skill monkey. I find Fiddleback explains it quite well to new players.

It's not only the players. I think those skills are redundant and the difference between them doesn't justify the creation of 2 skills for approximately the same mechanic effect. You are welcome to disagree, but (and I'm sorry if I made it look so) I have pretty much made my mind about it. I just don't find it necessary to split them in two skills when they can easily but made into one. If it breaks the game in any way, that is an entirely other issue, and then I'll reconsider. Thanks for taking the time though!

Yeah I really don't think this is on the level of merging Ranged: Heavy and Ranged: Light in terms of unbalancing the game.

CamileBC, you DID say you failed to see the difference between the mentioned skills, so I think that is why people thought that they should take the time to inform you of the actual differences (Obi-Wan is Disciplined & Vigilant. Han Solo is Cool. Also, someone who is Vigilant might not notice what a Perceptive person would notice, but that doesn't mean that they aren't ready for it anyway) and WHY it's a bad idea. This problem of perspective usually stems is a lack of experience in the system, and so I think people's hopes were that you could benefit from the collective experience of gaming & discussions had on the matter.

Obviously you can do whatever you want in your game, but as you just received your book yesterday, there are delicate game-balance considerations to be made that you don't seem to be making.

1) Discipline and Perception will be made into uber-skills. All your players will want them, and not having them will cripple any player that would otherwise have ranks in Cool but not necessarily Discipline, or Vigilance but not necessarily Perception. Discipline is also the skill used when rolling Force power checks.

2) Likewise, Willpower and Cunning will become awesome characteristics. Willpower already increases a character's starting Strain threshold and is used for numerous social applications. And Cunning is already incredibly powerful in the hands of a Deceptive and Skulduggerish character.

3) Presence will be devalued upon losing Cool. There are a number of mechanics where Present characters might succeed where others would use Discipline/Willpower. Recovering Strain and passing Fear checks are two such instances.

All things considered, when I played through a few adventures (and GM'd many more), I got a much better feel for the system than I had going into it. The changes you are making seem to be being made in too much haste, and I for one would hate for a gaming group to come to that realization further down the line. This game really is very well balanced as far as skills and characteristics go. If you start making changes in one area, I fear you will have to make more and more changes just to fix the changes you made in the first place. Better to figure out first if the changes NEED to be made, IMO.

And player arguments? Dude. If deliberation goes on for more than 10 seconds, I just make a call as the GM and then say that we can all discuss it after the game session. "We'll roll with this skill for now, but let's look into it after the game and see what we can do to prevent further disagreements."

Honestly, I have never had players arguing with me at length about what skill they should use for what application. They tell me what they want to do, I tell them difficulty and skill for the dice pool. If they ever come back and say they think "X" skill would work better and they have a REALLY good reason for it, I sometimes allow it (often with a Difficulty increase).

These skills aren't as similar as they seem up front. There's certainly some overlap, but if you really sit down and read the skill descriptions in full you'll start to see the difference and how the skills represent different character qualities and narrative effects.

Just like a good referee if the Players start bickering, you as the GM have to kindly but firmly be able to say "I understand you disagree, but this is my call" and then get the game going. Players disagree with refs all the time, and as mad as they get, as loud as they yell, by the second half the games changed enough that they've moved on.

A good GM won't lose his Cool when confronted with a complex rule. They will have the Discipline to read a rule entirely and make sure they understand the what the core book actually says. They must be Perceptive, noticing differences like "may" and "must", and Vigilant enough to stop a problem at the table before it ruins everyone's fun.

It's not only the players. I think those skills are redundant and the difference between them doesn't justify the creation of 2 skills for approximately the same mechanic effect. You are welcome to disagree, but (and I'm sorry if I made it look so) I have pretty much made my mind about it. I just don't find it necessary to split them in two skills when they can easily but made into one. If it breaks the game in any way, that is an entirely other issue, and then I'll reconsider. Thanks for taking the time though!

Use whatever skills you and your group want to for your game. I still suggest Skill Monkey to all.

Well thanks awayputurwpn, that is quite a lot of reasons!

First, sorry that I misled people into explaining the difference between the skills to me (even if that is useful ).

I didn't see it that way.Though I'm not completely sure Cunning and Willpower will be made overpowered ( ), I'll take your word for it and the fact that character with a good presence have one less skill to rely upon is a good point.

The player argument is not really about them bickering, but more about the need to explain in detail what each skill do and cannot do, which shouldn't be the case IMHO (I mean up to a point).

But you convinced me (and all those who posted) to try my first game with the skills as written, and only modify it if I find it necessary. Hopefully it won't be much of a problem and I will be able to get on with it!

Thanks to all those who took the time to help me!

Camille.

PS: And thanks for the link to skill monkey, Fangrip!

But you convinced me (and all those who posted) to try my first game with the skills as written, and only modify it if I find it necessary. Hopefully it won't be much of a problem and I will be able to get on with it!

...

PS: And thanks for the link to skill monkey, Fangrip!

You are quite welcome for the suggestion, but sorry I didn't think to add an actual link.

I find it best to at least run a full adventure or two with RAW before making modifications. That way we can all get a better handle on what they are and why they were intended. Then we can fiddle with them all we want. Just keep a few notes so you can ask what your players thought of the RAW when you are ready to make that change.

That said, its your game so house rule away no matter what anyone (aside from your players) think.

Ha-ha, I thought you did. Anyway I found it so thanks.

In case one's Google-fu is not up to the challenge, and for general edification: http://theskillmonkey.blogspot.com/

Hope your game goes really well, Camille.

More people might bother with that skill monkey site if it wasnt so god awful to look at, seriously...who is the webmaster and why do they think the BRIGHTEST YELLOW AVAILABLE makes for good website? Looks like ugly trash from geocities in the 90's. Infact its downright insulting how terrible that site is.

More people might bother with that skill monkey site if it wasnt so god awful to look at, seriously...who is the webmaster and why do they think the BRIGHTEST YELLOW AVAILABLE makes for good website? Looks like ugly trash from geocities in the 90's. Infact its downright insulting how terrible that site is.

I assumed it was yellow for bananas.

Well I didn't care much for the look of the site, the only thing that I didn't really like was the music behind the voice of the narrator.

It is quite clear on the issue of the Vigilance skill (Though I already knew what he was talking about. I'm still not convinced of the usefulness of having two separate skills --maybe even less so after listening to that pod-cast-- but well, we'll see after the first game --I'll do as it was explained to me before. ) but I didn't take the time to listen to the rest right now! (I really have to force myself to listen to it. It really is interesting but I'm really NOT fond of the style used).

No offense, but based on your original post all I get out of your comment is; I don't understand it so I'm changing it.

How about you spend the time in understanding the differences, because there is a big difference. Google skill monkey and listen to the podcast.

Not that it matters since you posted you have already made up your mind, so not sure why you posted in the first place.

Hi,
Great thread, OP ! There's my 2 cents about your houserules suggestions :

I disagree to melt Vigilance and perception : Vigilance is a passive skill, relying upon instinct, while perception is an active one relying upon method and observation. I would keep them distinct.

I agree to erase Cool and keep discipline : Cool and discipline do mechanicaly rely on staying calm in stressful situation. The fact a scoundrel and a jedi doesn't roleplay it the same way shouldn't matter in the game design and simplicity (sometimes, it is hard to know what skill you should use in social opposed check). I think Willpower is the right ability to do that, not Presence(EOTE)/fellowship(WFRP3).

+ My concern about Cunning ability : I guess jay little (WHFRP3 and then EOTE designer) started EOTE design on warhammer's basics and deleted Toughness while he still wanted 6 abilities in EOTE, so he created Cunning and threw in a bit of this and that from fellowship/presence (guile/deception), agility (skullduggery), and intelligence (folklore/streetwise, naturelore/survival, observation/perception) while focusing Intelligence on mechanical and technical skills.

= make Pilot a Cunning skill : Agility is important because it's used to accomplish perillous movements, is very important because all range combat skills are under it, and absolutely important because Pilot skill is under it.

Houserule : Pilot is a Cunning Skill. It seems more thematically appropriate (every pilot hasn't to be a great dancer, and it will not make every great shooter -common stuff in SW rpg- a great pilot) and will enhance a bit Cunning interest.

Edit : clarifications.

When discussing these skills it's worth remembering that the overlap (and distinction) between them is intentional. You as a GM can provide your players with a choice when it comes to certain situations, thus empowering them. You can also deny them from using the skill that they are most proficient with, if the situation or story warrants it.

E.g., some fear checks are so general that each player can choose whether they want to use Cool or Discipline, other checks aren't. This provides opportunities for the GM to set up the unpresent Jedi with a daunting task of trying to pass a Cool-based fear check, as well as situations where most party-memebers have some chance of success.

Same goes for Vigilance and Perception, and also Athletics and Coordination. Running through the undergrowth of the Cholganna jungles may or may not depend on brute force.

Consider first that there ARE overlaps and distinctions between these skill pairs - and what good this does to the game, then WHAT those overlaps and distinctions consist of.

No offense, but based on your original post all I get out of your comment is; I don't understand it so I'm changing it.

How about you spend the time in understanding the differences, because there is a big difference. Google skill monkey and listen to the podcast.

Not that it matters since you posted you have already made up your mind, so not sure why you posted in the first place.

Well as I've put some examples of what is Vigilance and what is perception, I think I quite understand it (well I could be wrong, but I don't think people actually told me that. In the end vigilance is a passive skill that allows to remark things about to change, or a situation that changes quickly, whereas Perception is more of an active skill, allowing you to notice something unusual in a static situation).

I was wondering if that distinction was necessary, as I didn't feel it quite so. And considering that I've actually said that I changed my mind and will try first RAW before doing any changes, I feel like posting was justified. It allowed me to realise effects and changes in the balance that I was not considering. Is that not a good reason? Please read the entire posts before responding please.

PS: And I actually also said that I listened to the Skillmonkey podcast. Not all of them that's true

@tinnitus:

Thanks for another insight on the thing. It is true that it allows people with different builds to successfully achieve the same thing. Another thing I didn't take in consideration. I'll take the time to use those in game to get a feel of what differences there are.

@willmanx:

Thanks for those ideas, I'll keep them in mind after I play my first game RAW. I'll see if the changes are justified, or if I just can do it like the book says!

PS: And I actually also said that I listened to the Skillmonkey podcast. Not all of them that's true

Aren't they great? I have hooked my wife and gaming group on them.

Once you get over the weird music and style, they are good! Well to be fair I've always found difficult to listen to the radio chatter in general. So there you go, I'm not a great listener.

Still, there are some really great advice there, I'm gonna start listening to them from the first one. See you in 6 months, when I will have managed to force myself to listen through all of them.

Once you get over the weird music and style, they are good! Well to be fair I've always found difficult to listen to the radio chatter in general. So there you go, I'm not a great listener.

Still, there are some really great advice there, I'm gonna start listening to them from the first one. See you in 6 months, when I will have managed to force myself to listen through all of them.

I actually find myself bouncing in time to the music.