Post originally by Benjamin Rogers (BBRACK) at 2003-06-30 11:15:22
Converted from Phorums BB System

Brian asked:
<i>...the issue of multiple synonymous skills keeps being brought up in regard to the "deception" skills. Are these the only skills that have are so similair, or are all of the skills like this? ... I'm wondering if its just the con/bluff/etc. that this is true for. How is it?</i>

The most "redundancy" is in the social elements of the skills. Particularly in deceptive practices because deception and how it is done is such a large component in the various cultures.

What hasn't really been talked about is that most of these skills are grouped into something called a "cascade". Where knowledge of one skill will help you with the others and you do not default back to your attribute for the lack of a specific skill if you already have a similar skill.

<i> I find one of Benjamin's comments a bit condescending, sort of along the tone of "well, you just aren't intelligent enough to understand the differences". I want to point out that not liking the level of realism and not understanding it are not same.</i>

I apologize if you thought something I said was condescending. I re-read the last comment and found where I had said something about the Western mind not being trained in some of these subtleties--but I assure you, no condescention was intended.

It is simply a fact of the cultures that we don't think in quite the same ways about the same things as those in another culture. This is the very heart of cultural conflicts, misunderstandings and--in extreme cases--wars.

The Western cultural mindset is a little differen than that which you would find in the semitic cultures (most of the Middle East, Northern Africa, Southwest Asia, etc.). It is certainly not condescention to say that there are misunderstandings. Look at our history and you will see the world rife with misunderstandings!

I do apologize if you took my words to be condescending.

<i>In a modern RPG, it would make perfect realistic sense to have a different skill for driving a clutch, an automatic, a truck, and a motorcycle. (And many RPGs do have those skills). Some people find this great, others (myself included) find it a needless waste of effort when one "driving" skill would suffice. That doesn't mean that I don't understand that driving a car and a motorcycle are not the same thing; it means I do not think there is a worthwhile return in drama or play value to be worth the complexity of the extra skills.</i>

Let me clarify it:

Additional skills are not mean as a "bottleneck" so that a Bard (GM) can say, "Oh, you don't have the specific skill out of the 285 available to do the specific task I was imagining here? Oh, well you fail!"

Rather, the diversity was intended to make more obvious the subtle differences in the way actions can be performed. In our eyes, there are 285 ways to do *anything*--just that some of them may have more modifiers.

Example in point:
At Origins, one of the players during the adventure chose to use "Animal Husbandry" to determine the mood and tone of a Loshad (bipedal horse-like being). Rather than use "Observation" or "Instinct" or even "Cold Read"--they used "Animal Husbandry".

They rolled very well on their attempt, even with the -12SV modifier. They were successful and gathered information about the subject with what most would consider a "total unrelated skill".

Again, the skills are there not to constrain the character into a specific course of action.

If you know how to "Drive (Car)" and you get on a motorcycle, you're not going to be the best at it--but you'll be better than someone who has no idea of how to work a clutch, change gears, accelerate, brake, etc. So, yes, you <i>could</i> use your knowledge of how to drive a car when riding a motorcycle.

Some other examples of how skills have been used:

Storytelling was used to see if the PC could remember any specific stories that might give him some insight into the way Djezinti think.

Tanning (as in "tanning leather") was used to determine how old the dessicated flesh of a body found in the desert was.

Etiquette has been used to determine if someone is lying. (More as a "does this jive with the mores and values of the culture they are claiming to be from?")

The point is that skills are not there as a means to restrict characters to particular sets of actions--but to provide them a "jumping off place" to customize their character to do anything--but in a specific way.

The out-and-out liar will never bother with "Deceit", even if he is trying to do exactly the same thing as his diplomatic counterpart who is constrained "not to tell a lie".

I encourage you to take a look at how we have presented the skills and how we encourage game-play. I think you will find it is very open to roleplay and freedom of action.

<b>Promised Sands</b> focuses on story over mechanic and good story-telling over "restricted freedom". It's why we provide something called the DISk for the players to "take control of the story" for a moment and weave in their own strands.

I'd be quite interested to see what you think after you've looked it over and played a session or two. If you come to GenCon, we'd be happy to show you how to play.