How skills are derived on FO3

[Briosafreak]

How skills are derived in the new SPECIAL according to J.E. Sawyer:<blockquote>* they start at 0. tag! skills start at 20.
* they do not have a % symbol behind them, as it makes no goddamned sense.
* the cost on a per-rank basis is 1 for ranks 1-50, 2 for 51-100, 3 for 101-150, and 4 for 151-200 (maxxxx). each rank bought for a tag! skill is doubled.
* each skill has a bonus applied to all rolls that is equal to three ability score values (AG*3 or CH*2 + IN or ST + AG + PE, etc.)
* perks that require skill values only look at the rank, not the rank + bonus. e.g.: you want to take Advanced Research; the prerequisites are IN 8, PE 6, science 175. if the character's science only has 168 ranks, but it's effectively 182 because of his high IN and PE, he won't qualify.</blockquote>This was spoted at the Something Awfull Forums where he got this curious reply by someone called Zap:
<blockquote> So, that means a tag skill will go .5 for 1-50, 1 for 51-100, 1.5 for 101-150, and 2 for 151-200? The only problem i see is a 1.5 where you will be required to spend 2 points for 3. Not a big deal, unless you post on NMA. I thougth that you wanted to nerf the above 100 in a skill?</blockquote>No comments.

 

[Briosafreak]

Here is his latest views on the subject:

quote:Zap! came out of the closet to say:
So, that means a tag skill will go .5 for 1-50, 1 for 51-100, 1.5 for 101-150, and 2 for 151-200? The only problem i see is a 1.5 where you will be required to spend 2 points for 3. Not a big deal, unless you post on NMA. I thougth that you wanted to nerf the above 100 in a skill?

no, it's actually the same cost, you just get an extra rank every time you buy one. if you had a 55 Medic, it would cost you two points to increase it one rank -- but you would get an additional rank for free. it's not half-cost; it's double ranks.

i'm not opposed to skills with 100+ ranks. penalties can always bring the ultra high skill characters back into the realm of reality. it does make the late game difficulties high enough that only people with high skills have a chance of making the checks, but i don't think that's so bad.

quoteery good point here. What I see happening is that people will strive for those higher levels in the game instead of breezing right though it. Kinda sad when you can end an RPG at level 20 or so.

i think that perks don't actually all have to be the same value. however, the higher value perks should only be accessible by people with high (inefficient) skills. a skill generalist will get more bang for his or her buck by spreading points around. a skill specialist will make less overall progress, but will have access to more perks that make him or her even more badass with a skill than the rank alone would indicate.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

I'd still like to know what his hang up with percentages over 100 is. If you have 20 apples, and someone gives you five, you have 125% of the total apples you used to have. Either Mr. Sawyer only had the basics of math dealing with percentages, or his teacher was a complete buffoon, because a percentage is just another form of the ratio concept. It is, in fact, entirely possible for percentages to be over 100.

To put the whole thing another way, in the case of IPLY stock, it was at 4 cents. Then it climbed to 12 cents. That's a 200% gain, or 300% of what it was.

It's amazing he can be so pedantic over something he's completely wrong about, especially when that thing he's wrong about is a sixth grade concept.

 

[Malky]

It's amazing he can be so pedantic over something he's completely wrong about, especially when that thing he's wrong about is a sixth grade concept.

Maybe the guys at I-Play just aren't good at math...that would explain a lot of things.



-Malky

 

[4too]

Whaaa?

Whaaa?

What's the basis for all these numbers?

Were the roots arbitary, or rational, or irrational?
Were they weened and weaned during the days of yor, punch card days,
board game "simulations" and pencil and paper role playing?

Or some Cold War statistical analysis research?

If I structure my synapies to negociate these arcane systems,
will I be able to do my own taxes and program a VCR while chewing gum?

So they want to reward various behaviors with distinct dividends.
Is this any clearer than before? Or is this more smoke about talking
clarity and walking complexity.

4too

 

[Briosafreak]

a skill generalist will get more bang for his or her buck by spreading points around. a skill specialist will make less overall progress, but will have access to more perks that make him or her even more badass with a skill than the rank alone would indicate.

The first FAQ will probably be version 0.2, a still very incomplete FAQ, but a good start for those that just want to have a basis on the ideas that the BIS team for VB have.

I was reading what would be version 0.1 and thought the keyword in terms of characters was the creation of specialists, and not general characters with a tendency to something, beeing combat or charisma or whatever, wich through the years seemed to me the path the majority of FO players took. Then i read that quote above and i´m starting to think that maybe that general feeling isn`t all that distant from reality.

Will they be able to depart from what is a good start to the creative process, the archetypes, that allow focus on starting to balance the gameplay, to an end result that is more complex than the classes they are used to? I wonder if they will, it may be a keypoint on retaining the freedom of choice and the hability to go to more greyer areas of morals and behaviours, to a wider range of paths that the previous FO games had, if compared to BIS D&D games.

We`ll see, time will tell.

 

[Kindo]

Oh, brother! What is he doing to my beloved Fallout?

 

[atoga]

H.R. 3237 was introduced on July 16, 2009, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives. The Committee considered the bill in full committee mark-up on October 21, 2009, and ordered the bill to be reported. The bill was reported by the Committee on November 2, 2009, and passed by the House of Representatives on January 13, 2010. On January 20, 2010, the bill was received in the Senate and referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. The Committee considered the bill in full committee mark-up on May 6, 2010, and on May 10 it was reported by the Committee without amendment. The bill passed in the Senate by unanimous consent on December 3, and was signed into law by President Obama on December 18.

 

[Montez]

The more I read J.E.'s comments, the less excited I get about there finally being a Fallout 3. I'm just hoping that the things he's writing about work well in the actual game, cause they certainly don't seem too appealling on paper.

I guess the fact that he sees the system as "broke" overrides the fact that Fallout 1 and 2 are two of the funnest and most replayable games ever made, despite whatever flaws they have. Oh well - hopefully he's devoting as much time and energy to the story and atmosphere as he is the mechanics.

 

[Kindo]

* perks that require skill values only look at the rank, not the rank + bonus. e.g.: you want to take Advanced Research; the prerequisites are IN 8, PE 6, science 175. if the character's science only has 168 ranks, but it's effectively 182 because of his high IN and PE, he won't qualify.

Now that is just silly. There is one thing if you get the bonus to the skill via some magic item or the like, but if you're actual intelligence is so high that you get it easier to use science for example....omg. Then the science skill you have SHOULD be the actual skill. And what's so wrong with %?? It makes PERFECT sense in a CRPG.

*sigh* What's with this guy?

 

[SimpleMinded]

Well... I may be the lone man out but I think getting rid of the percentages makes sense. I always saw as you know x% of all science knowledge. So if 100% was the max, yea %'s would be fine because you know 100% of everything involving science. However, with a value that can go up to 200 I don't see it making sense that you know 167% of all science skill. While you guys made a valid point with having 200% gains on something... I dont think that qualifies in this situation as we aren't talking about gains or losses but rather the total knowledge of a field.

And now that the skills are starting at 0 and it seems to cost more to boost skills, will there be a much higher level max? And will you level faster? If I interpret the skill bonus idea correctly (3* agility etc) then that is pretty much what is already in the Fallout system. So that bonus doesn't really help to much. Or, if you don't level more, do you get more skill points when you level? And I don't know if having skills start at 0 really makes sense. If your anybody, you should have at least basic knowledge of multiple things. Though I guess the bonus points to each skill from your stats may make up for this. Not sure though.

Anyway, thats my two cents. PEACE.

 

[Sammael]

Well... I may be the lone man out but I think getting rid of the percentages makes sense. I always saw as you know x% of all science knowledge. So if 100% was the max, yea %'s would be fine because you know 100% of everything involving science. However, with a value that can go up to 200 I don't see it making sense that you know 167% of all science skill. While you guys made a valid point with having 200% gains on something... I dont think that qualifies in this situation as we aren't talking about gains or losses but rather the total knowledge of a field.

This is quite correct. I imagine that the rants about not having the "%" sign behind the skill number are just a bitter reaction to the other changes made to the system. Since a number of PnP systems use percentages, I can vouch that none of them that I have played (and I have played a lot) allow the percentage to go over 100. Some set the limit even lower, at 96 or 98%. Why? Because of the way percentage calculations work; you typically roll the percentile dice and then compare your result to your skill %, modified by the circumstance bonuses or penalties.

And now that the skills are starting at 0 and it seems to cost more to boost skills, will there be a much higher level max?

I think 200 (unmodified) is the max.

And will you level faster? If I interpret the skill bonus idea correctly (3* agility etc) then that is pretty much what is already in the Fallout system. So that bonus doesn't really help to much.

Hmmm... yes it does. You can have, for example, 50 ranks in some agility-related skill. If you have AG 10, your final score in the skill would be 80 - without having to spend 60 more skill points to get it there.

Or, if you don't level more, do you get more skill points when you level?

Huh?

And I don't know if having skills start at 0 really makes sense. If your anybody, you should have at least basic knowledge of multiple things.

This is what the initial skill point allotment and the ability to tag skills is for.

 

[Gwydion]

This is quite correct. I imagine that the rants about not having the "%" sign behind the skill number are just a bitter reaction to the other changes made to the system. Since a number of PnP systems use percentages, I can vouch that none of them that I have played (and I have played a lot) allow the percentage to go over 100. Some set the limit even lower, at 96 or 98%. Why? Because of the way percentage calculations work; you typically roll the percentile dice and then compare your result to your skill %, modified by the circumstance bonuses or penalties.

Fallout's limit is 95%. However, you're able to invest skillpoints beyond that level to compensate for negative modifiers.

 

[Sammael]

Fallout's limit is 95%. However, you're able to invest skillpoints beyond that level to compensate for negative modifiers.

As far as I know, this applies only to combat skills. There are many situations in FO2, for example, where you have to have a certain % in Doctor or Science to succeed at a task, and there is no chance of failure (not even the 5%) whatsoever.

 

[SimpleMinded]

And now that the skills are starting at 0 and it seems to cost more to boost skills, will there be a much higher level max?

I think 200 (unmodified) is the max.

Or, if you don't level more, do you get more skill points when you level?

Huh?

By higher level max Sammael I meant character level, not skill point level. Sorry for not making that clear. And the reason I asked if you dont level faster, then are you going to be given more skill points per level is because the new system seems to cost a lot more skill points for you to become any where near as proficient at skills as you could be in fallout. So are they going to simply make you more restricted in your abilities or find other ways to slip in the points?

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

This is quite correct. I imagine that the rants about not having the "%" sign behind the skill number are just a bitter reaction to the other changes made to the system. Since a number of PnP systems use percentages, I can vouch that none of them that I have played (and I have played a lot) allow the percentage to go over 100. Some set the limit even lower, at 96 or 98%. Why? Because of the way percentage calculations work; you typically roll the percentile dice and then compare your result to your skill %, modified by the circumstance bonuses or penalties.

OMFG! NONE OF THE PNP RPGS DO IT! WE CAN'T DO IT EITHER! LET'S CHANGE THE SYSTEM TO BE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE! YOU KNOW, BECAUSE PNP IS FAR MORE COMPLEX THAN A CRPG SYSTEM CAN EVER BE! NO NEED FOR SIMPLIFICATION IN PNP, RIGHT?

As far as I know, this applies only to combat skills. There are many situations in FO2, for example, where you have to have a certain % in Doctor or Science to succeed at a task, and there is no chance of failure (not even the 5%) whatsoever.

Let's try thinking abstractly here. It's a measure of how well you can apply the science you know to a situation. On the basics, you know science very well at 100%. However, on tougher situations, say like using the cryogenic stuff in SAD, you may have to be able to think beyond the scope of your knowledge, apply principles in new, EXCITING ways. The same thing goes for lockpicking and other percentage skills. It's still a percentage, it's just weighted.

If you have a simple lock, it might have a weighting of -50%, meaning that you roll a percentage "dice", then subtract the weighting, and compare that to the skill. If you have an average lock, it might have no weighting, just roll and compare.. If you have a really nasty complex lock, though, it might have a weighting of +50% and that's where that lockpicking skill of 150% comes in handy!

It's a pretty goddamned simple concept here, guys. 100% is the absolute threshold of percentages, ever, and how Fallout handles it doesn't make it any less of a percentage.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

My only complaint about the percent was that it stops at 200% in FO and then at 300% in FO2. For me, it's more of a "why stop it at all" question. Why not 400% or 500% or just let the player put as many points into it as they like and get a skill of 1500% in Small Guns and cause UBER damage (provided they have enough skill points) and one shot everyone and everything and under JE's syetm be able to use some Super-Combo-of-Death-Kick-to-the-Head-Knees-and-Groin-All-At-Once-and-Cause-Uber-Damage move.

...and I'll stop right there lest J.E. then start to implement my little 110% idea.

 

[Sammael]

However, on tougher situations, say like using the cryogenic stuff in SAD, you may have to be able to think beyond the scope of your knowledge, apply principles in new, EXCITING ways.

I cannot even begin to describe how ridiculous this is. So, by your logic, Einstein actually had a 400% in Science, since he was actually able to "think beyond the scope of his knowledge?"

Saint, I've seen you make many worthwhile arguments. This is not one of them.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

I don't think you get Saint. His point (at least my understanding of it) is that 100% is "full knowledge". IE: A person with 100% Small Guns knows all there is about aiming guns and shooting them, and generally hitting their target. However, you can go higher. So above and beyond 100% makes you better at causing more critical damage, because you know not only HOW to shoot, but WHERE to shoot to cause the most damage. You have a greater ability to apply your existing knowledge.

Relating to one of the fuzzy skills like Science, the argument is that a skill of 100% means you know everything there is to know about Science. So you KNOW how to build a bomb, but that's provided you've read the manual. However, in a situation where you're encountering new concepts unfamiliar to you, you can use your base knowledge of Science (100%) PLUS the extra "brain power" (above 100%) to create something, IE: you can figure out how to build a bomb without reading the manual, a task which is harder to do.

So Einstein's 400% IQ helped him build the bomb, but someone with an IQ of 100% could read the manual Einstein wrote and build one too. Problem is, in the Fallout world, there are no manuals for some things, such as extracting the brain for Skynet.

As Saint said, anything above 100% is your ability to apply existing knowledge to new and exciting things and do things that no-one else has thought of before. Like that guy who first decided to jump on the back of a horse and ride it.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

DarkUnderlord is basically correct. In terms of guns, a gun with a 100% shooting skill would be the guy that could go to a firing range and hit the bullseye over and over again. He's got aiming as good as it gets under ideal circumstances.

Then turn off the lights on him! Well, his aim ain't as grand now, since he can barely make out the target. Add a big fan in the room.. Whoops, there goes his aim a little more. Make the range about three times as long, and his aim slips a little more.

If you want to argue over OMG! GUNZ R TEH DIFERENT THAN TEH SCIANCE!, then say you have a really good surgeon. He can rip typical tumors out of people's brains all day long, with a perfect success rate. But what about the tumors that aren't typical? What about the ones that are close to the optic nerve? What about the ones that are embedded deep within the cerebral cortex? Those things go above and beyond the typical situations.

The fact of the matter is, there's no such thing as the PERFECT SKILL in ANYTHING. There will always be circumstances that can complicate any event, no matter how routine it is to you - and that would be Fallout's 100% level. You're good enough to make something routine for you. Ideally, you're perfect. But things aren't always ideal. It's how well you handle things when they aren't ideal that gives a skill higher than 100%.