Skills and degree of success.

[Tirisilex]

I've had a problem with the RIFTS skill system. It's a Yes or No score. Either you succeed or you don't. I found this kind of Dry. So I came up with a Degree of success chart. It's my first attempt and it might be a little "buggy" but feel free to fix or modify this idea.

When you roll for a skill check you take the number rolled and subtract it from the skill level this gives you the degree of success. For example.. You have a skill of 40% you roll 25 on a d100 the degree of success would be 15.

.........................Time spent operating in Minutes
Degree of success...15......30.....45......60
1 - 20....................5%....10%...15%...20%
21 - 40.................20%....25%...30%...35%
41 - 60.................40%....45%...50%...55%
61 - 80.................60%....65%...70%...75%
81 - 100................80%....85%...90%..100%

The percent value indicates how much has been completed in the deisgnated time spent working. So if you were working for 60 Minutes and get a degree of 22 you would have accomplished 35% of your goal. Be it building a Radio.. Cybernetic Surgery.. Repairing a Tank.
If you are using tools you get a +10 to degree of success
If you have Parts (Mechanical, Artificial organs, Transplants, etc..) is a +15 to degree.
If your in a shop +20 to degree

Like I said this is my first version of this idea and would welcome others opinions and suggestions.

[popscythe]

That's a cool way of doing it, that's gotta be a lot of fun in your game! I bet your players love it.

[Rimmerdal]

Could also do a failure chart like that too.

[dragonfett]

What about skills that don't take 60 minutes to use (as opposed to just not having 60 minutes to use said skill).

[Tirisilex]

What about skills that don't take 60 minutes to use (as opposed to just not having 60 minutes to use said skill).

It's accumalative.. Say your first roll you do at 60 minutes ends up 35%.. then you go for another 60 minutes and get 20% which makes 55% done after 2 hours of work. Is that what you mean?

[dragonfett]

Actually, no. I was talking about skills that take minutes or even seconds to complete. i.e. Radio: Basic, the Language skills, Sing, Dance, Detect Ambush, Detect Concealment, Impersonation, Pick Locks, Pick Pockets, Field Surgery, First Aid, Paramedic, Piloting skills, Sensory Equipment, Cardsharp, Computer Hacking, Gambling, Gambling (Dirty Tricks), Palming, Prowling, Swimming, SCUBA, Climbing, Juggling, Seduction, Firefighting, Jury-Rig, and I am sure that there are others that I am overlooking. Basically, there are skills that by their very nature do not allow a player to be able to take a hour (or more) per roll, such as 1st Aid and Paramedic.

[jaymz]

Interesting idea however I, like dragon, would like to know how you handle instant use skills like several of the ones he listed. Much of the time the use of the skill has a limited time span in which to be used usually in a matter of melees not minutes.

[Tirisilex]

Oh I see.. For those kinds of skills I keep it as yes and no rolls. Because they are simple.. My Chart is for Building, Fixing, Repairing, Cybernetic Surgery, Transplants.. and such like.
For operating a Simple Radio I would use the normal skill roll.

Actually, no. I was talking about skills that take minutes or even seconds to complete. i.e. Radio: Basic, the Language skills, Sing, Dance, Detect Ambush, Detect Concealment, Impersonation, Pick Locks, Pick Pockets, Field Surgery, First Aid, Paramedic, Piloting skills, Sensory Equipment, Cardsharp, Computer Hacking, Gambling, Gambling (Dirty Tricks), Palming, Prowling, Swimming, SCUBA, Climbing, Juggling, Seduction, Firefighting, Jury-Rig, and I am sure that there are others that I am overlooking. Basically, there are skills that by their very nature do not allow a player to be able to take a hour (or more) per roll, such as 1st Aid and Paramedic.

[jaymz]

Ah ok thanks. That makes more sense. A sort of a take 10 or take 20 like idea as used in d20.

[Morik]

Nice work! I may use this for my player.

[Tirisilex]

I'm thinking about doing a damage system that uses the Degree of success idea. Computer systems get damaged, Sensers, Radio, such like.. The repair of these systems would require the Degree of success chart I made.

[jaymz]

I think palladium already has a random table system for that for once robots etc take x% of damage

[Tirisilex]

What book is that In? I havent seen it.

[jaymz]

Conversion Book 1 originally but RUE has it as well on 353

[Tirisilex]

yup.. I found it.. Overlooked it all this time.. Definatly going on my Gamemaster screen.

[Tirisilex]

Sweet! I'm glad people like the idea and are making new concepts. Please post it up so I can use it as well. If anyone can improve on the idea that would be great as well.

[Damian Magecraft]

I have just used the idea of the following for determining degrees of success...
Meeting the skill % is one success
every ten points past the skill % is an additional success
01 is an additional success.
this allows for a max of 10 successes.
Each success can be used to reduce the time or improve the quality or quantity of the results.

[Mercdog]

With most games that have a skill mechanic like Rifts, I use a 'Closest to without going over' equals a better degree of success. It's mainly just a storytelling gauge. But, if you actually hit your target number (ie you roll a 55 when you need a 55 or less) I rule it's a special success that might result in some bonuses depending on the skill and situation.

[Damian Magecraft]

With most games that have a skill mechanic like Rifts, I use a 'Closest to without going over' equals a better degree of success. It's mainly just a storytelling gauge. But, if you actually hit your target number (ie you roll a 55 when you need a 55 or less) I rule it's a special success that might result in some bonuses depending on the skill and situation.

I see this mechanic being suggested often.
To me it seems counter intuitive.
to succeed at the skill you have to roll low.
Therefore the lower you roll the better. (simple logic).
The roll low but roll high just strikes me as backwards somehow.

[Mercdog]

With most games that have a skill mechanic like Rifts, I use a 'Closest to without going over' equals a better degree of success. It's mainly just a storytelling gauge. But, if you actually hit your target number (ie you roll a 55 when you need a 55 or less) I rule it's a special success that might result in some bonuses depending on the skill and situation.

I see this mechanic being suggested often.
To me it seems counter intuitive.
to succeed at the skill you have to roll low.
Therefore the lower you roll the better. (simple logic).
The roll low but roll high just strikes me as backwards somehow.

Each to their own of course, but I look at it like this. If a 01 indicates the best result, any novice can create an ultimate masterpiece. But if 98% indicates the pinnacle of achievement, then it will typically require some experience advancement to truly become a master.

[Damian Magecraft]

With most games that have a skill mechanic like Rifts, I use a 'Closest to without going over' equals a better degree of success. It's mainly just a storytelling gauge. But, if you actually hit your target number (ie you roll a 55 when you need a 55 or less) I rule it's a special success that might result in some bonuses depending on the skill and situation.

I see this mechanic being suggested often.
To me it seems counter intuitive.
to succeed at the skill you have to roll low.
Therefore the lower you roll the better. (simple logic).
The roll low but roll high just strikes me as backwards somehow.

Each to their own of course, but I look at it like this. If a 01 indicates the best result, any novice can create an ultimate masterpiece. But if 98% indicates the pinnacle of achievement, then it will typically require some experience advancement to truly become a master.

which is why I incorporated the degrees of success (the higher your base the more degrees of success are possible) Plus I do not look at 01 as the "ultimate" (although a novice can have dumb blind luck sometimes) perfect result.

"Perfection" comes not suddenly but over time.
A degrees (or number of successes) mechanics helps show that result.
Lets say it will take (random number) 30 successes to complete project XYZ.
Character A has a 30% base skill (best number of successes possible is 4 [1 for rolling 30 or less, one for every ten points below 30 and one for rolling an 01]). Assuming perfect rolls every time it will take him 8 rolls to complete the project (every roll representing 1 sec/min/hour/day/week/month/year/etc... of time). Reality is more likely to require the player to make closer to 50 or 70 rolls to produce those 30 successes.
Player B has a 70% in the same skill (best number of successes is 8 [one for rolling 70 or lower, one for every ten points below 70, and one for rolling an 01]). Again assuming perfect rolls every time it will take him 4 rolls to produce those same results (half the time). Showing where better training/skill knowledge comes into play. Again the reality is it will in all likelyhood require the player to make 20 to 25 rolls to acquire the needed successes.
Beauty in its simplicity. (IMHO).

[Mercdog]

With most games that have a skill mechanic like Rifts, I use a 'Closest to without going over' equals a better degree of success. It's mainly just a storytelling gauge. But, if you actually hit your target number (ie you roll a 55 when you need a 55 or less) I rule it's a special success that might result in some bonuses depending on the skill and situation.

I see this mechanic being suggested often.
To me it seems counter intuitive.
to succeed at the skill you have to roll low.
Therefore the lower you roll the better. (simple logic).
The roll low but roll high just strikes me as backwards somehow.

Each to their own of course, but I look at it like this. If a 01 indicates the best result, any novice can create an ultimate masterpiece. But if 98% indicates the pinnacle of achievement, then it will typically require some experience advancement to truly become a master.

which is why I incorporated the degrees of success (the higher your base the more degrees of success are possible) Plus I do not look at 01 as the "ultimate" (although a novice can have dumb blind luck sometimes) perfect result.

"Perfection" comes not suddenly but over time.
A degrees (or number of successes) mechanics helps show that result.
Lets say it will take (random number) 30 successes to complete project XYZ.
Character A has a 30% base skill (best number of successes possible is 4 [1 for rolling 30 or less, one for every ten points below 30 and one for rolling an 01]). Assuming perfect rolls every time it will take him 8 rolls to complete the project (every roll representing 1 sec/min/hour/day/week/month/year/etc... of time). Reality is more likely to require the player to make closer to 50 or 70 rolls to produce those 30 successes.
Player B has a 70% in the same skill (best number of successes is 8 [one for rolling 70 or lower, one for every ten points below 70, and one for rolling an 01]). Again assuming perfect rolls every time it will take him 4 rolls to produce those same results (half the time). Showing where better training/skill knowledge comes into play. Again the reality is it will in all likelyhood require the player to make 20 to 25 rolls to acquire the needed successes.
Beauty in its simplicity. (IMHO).

Much simpler to say 'Highest without going over wins." IMO.

[Damian Magecraft]

Each to their own of course, but I look at it like this. If a 01 indicates the best result, any novice can create an ultimate masterpiece. But if 98% indicates the pinnacle of achievement, then it will typically require some experience advancement to truly become a master.

which is why I incorporated the degrees of success (the higher your base the more degrees of success are possible) Plus I do not look at 01 as the "ultimate" (although a novice can have dumb blind luck sometimes) perfect result.

"Perfection" comes not suddenly but over time.
A degrees (or number of successes) mechanics helps show that result.
Lets say it will take (random number) 30 successes to complete project XYZ.
Character A has a 30% base skill (best number of successes possible is 4 [1 for rolling 30 or less, one for every ten points below 30 and one for rolling an 01]). Assuming perfect rolls every time it will take him 8 rolls to complete the project (every roll representing 1 sec/min/hour/day/week/month/year/etc... of time). Reality is more likely to require the player to make closer to 50 or 70 rolls to produce those 30 successes.
Player B has a 70% in the same skill (best number of successes is 8 [one for rolling 70 or lower, one for every ten points below 70, and one for rolling an 01]). Again assuming perfect rolls every time it will take him 4 rolls to produce those same results (half the time). Showing where better training/skill knowledge comes into play. Again the reality is it will in all likelyhood require the player to make 20 to 25 rolls to acquire the needed successes.
Beauty in its simplicity. (IMHO).

Much simpler to say 'Highest without going over wins." IMO.

Tried that...
It left too many confused looks on players faces.
Plus they seemed to like the easier to understand DoS (it is easier in implementation than description).

[Tirisilex]

With most games that have a skill mechanic like Rifts, I use a 'Closest to without going over' equals a better degree of success. It's mainly just a storytelling gauge. But, if you actually hit your target number (ie you roll a 55 when you need a 55 or less) I rule it's a special success that might result in some bonuses depending on the skill and situation.

I see this mechanic being suggested often.
To me it seems counter intuitive.
to succeed at the skill you have to roll low.
Therefore the lower you roll the better. (simple logic).
The roll low but roll high just strikes me as backwards somehow.

Each to their own of course, but I look at it like this. If a 01 indicates the best result, any novice can create an ultimate masterpiece. But if 98% indicates the pinnacle of achievement, then it will typically require some experience advancement to truly become a master.

which is why I incorporated the degrees of success (the higher your base the more degrees of success are possible) Plus I do not look at 01 as the "ultimate" (although a novice can have dumb blind luck sometimes) perfect result.

"Perfection" comes not suddenly but over time.
A degrees (or number of successes) mechanics helps show that result.
Lets say it will take (random number) 30 successes to complete project XYZ.
Character A has a 30% base skill (best number of successes possible is 4 [1 for rolling 30 or less, one for every ten points below 30 and one for rolling an 01]). Assuming perfect rolls every time it will take him 8 rolls to complete the project (every roll representing 1 sec/min/hour/day/week/month/year/etc... of time). Reality is more likely to require the player to make closer to 50 or 70 rolls to produce those 30 successes.
Player B has a 70% in the same skill (best number of successes is 8 [one for rolling 70 or lower, one for every ten points below 70, and one for rolling an 01]). Again assuming perfect rolls every time it will take him 4 rolls to produce those same results (half the time). Showing where better training/skill knowledge comes into play. Again the reality is it will in all likelyhood require the player to make 20 to 25 rolls to acquire the needed successes.
Beauty in its simplicity. (IMHO).

I dont understand this success thing.. How does 30 give you 4 succeses I can only count 3. Successes for what? Sounds like your trying to make a D100 into a D10 Success system like in Vampire: The Masqurade. So I must say Ilike my chart better.. How does it measure How much you have done and how long it took?

[Damian Magecraft]

A degrees (or number of successes) mechanics helps show that result.
Lets say it will take (random number) 30 successes to complete project XYZ.
Character A has a 30% base skill (best number of successes possible is 4 [1 for rolling 30 or less, one for every ten points below 30 and one for rolling an 01]). Assuming perfect rolls every time it will take him 8 rolls to complete the project (every roll representing 1 sec/min/hour/day/week/month/year/etc... of time). Reality is more likely to require the player to make closer to 50 or 70 rolls to produce those 30 successes.
Player B has a 70% in the same skill (best number of successes is 8 [one for rolling 70 or lower, one for every ten points below 70, and one for rolling an 01]). Again assuming perfect rolls every time it will take him 4 rolls to produce those same results (half the time). Showing where better training/skill knowledge comes into play. Again the reality is it will in all likelyhood require the player to make 20 to 25 rolls to acquire the needed successes.
Beauty in its simplicity. (IMHO).

I dont understand this success thing.. How does 30 give you 4 succeses I can only count 3.

You get one success for meeting or beating the "target number" (IE: your skill percentage) in this case that number was 30. (Thats one)
You get one success for each ten points below 30 (One at twenty, one at 10). (thats a total of three so far)
And one success for rolling an 01 (or critical success). (Total four)

Successes for what? Sounds like your trying to make a D100 into a D10 Success system like in Vampire: The Masqurade. So I must say Ilike my chart better.. How does it measure How much you have done and how long it took?

Successes can be used to reduce time it takes, increase the quality or increase the quantity of the results of a skill roll.
A success could represent seconds, minutes, hours, days, etc...
EX: defusing a ticking bomb is a time sensitive task so each success the player rolls can be used to to reduce the amount of time needed to stop the bomb (possibly important).
A success could also represent quality or finesse used to complete the skill.
A gymnast preforming a floor routine for example.
A success could also represent the the quantity produced.
Floral Arrangement for example each success can represent one bouquet or center piece.
The players get to decide how many of each success is applied where.
All I as GM do is set the base length of time (which is often a variable dependent on other factors) , and base quality is the bare minimum to be acceptable, and base quantity always starts at one.
My way does not require me to create (or search the web for) multiple complex charts that in all likely hood will only be applicable in very specific circumstances.

[Tirisilex]

tirsilex,

I stole/ expanded on your idea for skills to work for fails as well, slowing it down.

I am also doing a mass combat system and using a rendition of it for variable damage.

I would really like to see your what you have developed.

[Tirisilex]

Just curious to see if anyone has experimented on this idea? Improved it or altered it in some way.

[Shorty Lickens]

I allow penalties or bonuses to the roll depending on the nature of the task itself.

Like if you are just trying to repair a radio that was dropped: +30 percent.
Trying to build one from scratch with burned up pieces? -40 percent.

I also allow repeated attempts to have a slightly higher chance (maybe 5 percent at a time) if the character is not under duress and hasnt damaged or used up valuable resources.

[Dog_O_War]

Just curious to see if anyone has experimented on this idea? Improved it or altered it in some way.

Off the top of my head, because these skills are a percentage, just use the percentage.

I actually use a different skill system almost entirely.

Some examples include, skills you can't fail, because they are opposed. This means that if you rolled 60 over your 50% prowl skill, you're still successful, but now your opponent gets the difference (10%) as a bonus to detect you.

For time-related skills, and to put my first sentence into context, a type of job will take a certain amount of time. For instance, if you assess the repairs required for a vehicle to take one week in a repairshop, well then you've set your bar. The character will roll their skill as normal with no bonuses or penalties in a repairshop. If they're in the middle of the wilderness, they receive a penalty. If they're in a fully stocked garage with all the best stuff, they get a bonus. The end result is that the vehicle is fixed.

The time taken however is either reduced or extended by the percentage difference needed to succeed. That means that if you have a 50% skill in automotive mechanics, and you roll a 25, that's a 25% difference, meaning the time taken (one week) is reduced by 25%. If you rolled 75 however, then the time taken would be extended by 25%. And incorporating Palladiums' '98%' rule, on a roll of 98+, regardless of skill, you fail and have to start over/get replacement parts or tools.

It's simple, effective, and it rewards high-skill users, allowing them to be separated from the low-skilled but 'good rollers'.

For instant skills, I still use the succeed/fail method; the reward there is that your succeed rate goes up. An instance of such a skill would be using weapon systems to obtain a target-lock; you're either locked or not, and a skilled user will lock faster than an unskilled one.

[Incriptus]

It doesn't encompass multiple degrees of success but I'm toying with the idea of rolling under your bonus percentage being an extraordinary success.

For example Cooking. Lets pretend you have a base skill of 50%. You took the skill as an OCC skill and got a +20% to it. The skill increases by 5% per level and you're level 3. You opponent is an amature with the same base skill of 50%. The took cooking as a secondary skill so they got no bonus. He's only level 2. Your final opponent is also an amature, but this amature has been cooking for a long time and is level 9.

New Professonal:
Exceptional Success = <30% (20% bonus + 10% experience)
Standard Success = <80% (50% base + 20% bonus + 10% experience)

Complete Amature
Exceptional Success = <5% (5% experience)
Standard Success = <55% (50% base + 5% experience)

Experienced Amature
Exceptional Success = <40% (40% experience)
Standard Success = <90% (50% base + 40% experience)

[PigLickJF]

I have just used the idea of the following for determining degrees of success...
Meeting the skill % is one success
every ten points past the skill % is an additional success
01 is an additional success.
this allows for a max of 10 successes.
Each success can be used to reduce the time or improve the quality or quantity of the results.

Funny, I've been thinking of a similar system but using a higher is better take on it (similar to that suggested by Mercdog).

Success (ie rolling your skill or below) is one degree of success (DoS).
For every 10 points of your roll, that's an additional DoS.

Optionals:
Rolling your exact skill is a "critical success," +1 DoS.
Rolling "doubles" (ie 00,11,22,33...) is a critical roll: +1 DoS if ytour check succeeded, -1 DoS if it failed.

The math is effectively the same, but to me it's a bit easier to calculate, because all you have to do once you've determined success or failure is look at the 10s die. Whatever number is there is your extra DoS. No counting backwards from your roll, or subtracting your roll from your skill, etc. Of course if you want to use degrees of failure you'd still have to "count up" from your skill chance (or subtract your skill chance from your roll) and round down, so it doesn't avoid that completely.

Examples:
Skill chance 50%
Roll 45: 1 DoS for success, +4 for rolling in the 40s = 5 DoS

Skill chance 70%
Roll 13: 1 DoS for success, +1 for rolling in the 10s = 2 DoS

Skill chance 35%
Roll 42: Failure

(With optional criticals) Skill chance 65%
Roll 55: 1 DoS for success + 5 for 50s + 1 for doubles = 7 DoS

PigLick