Attribute Bonus House Rule

[Bocephas]

Is there any way to make attributes apply to skill roles in a general way, without the need to spend hope? It bothers me that they don't impact skill rolls in the slightest, unless you spend hope.

Something like this maybe:
Attribute 5-6: +1 to related skill rolls
Attribute 7-8: +2 to related skill rolls
Attribute 9-10: +3 to related skill rolls

Favored skills would use the favored attribute score for their bonus. You could still spend a point of hope to invoke a full attribute bonus just like in the RAW.

This would give heroes a +1 on skill rolls with their good attributes. If they were fortunate enough to have a 7 in an attribute, they would see a +2. They might see a +3 when using a favored skill with their highest favored attribute (9-10). Doesn't seem too unbalancing to me.

Maybe raise standard target number to 15 in order to compensate, but I'm not sure that is necessary. At skill level 2, which is supposed to be average, you already have a less than 50% chance to succeed at TN14.

You could give it to the bad guys as well, based on attribute level, to keep things fair.

[zedturtle]

If you're going to increase the value of the rolls, and you're going to increase the TN, then what exactly is the point? Bigger numbers?

TOR has a reasonably flat progression. Heroes with 1 or 2 skill dice need Hope. Heroes with 4 or more skill dice rarely use Hope (for Attribute bonuses). This is intentional.

Here's a very similar conversation.

{Hey does anyone know where my big breakdown of all the skill dice/TN permutations is? the above link isn't what I'm looking for...}

[MattG]

Playtest it for some time and if it works for your group go for it. If fellowship is diverse you will quickly see if it goes right.
I don’t think I have a solid grip on mechanics as it is difficult for me to use the systems fully for online gaming but I am afraid, if TN is raised across the board, it could be even harder to pass average test for those PCs without access to Attribute bonus in particular group of skills. On the other hand, if you don’t raise it, it will be easier for those heroes that are enjoying easier tests. So it seems, whatever you do or don’t after that modifier adjustment, house rule might affect the whole balance. And therefore I wouldn’t go for it even if it seems justified at the first glance.
I don’t consider attributes that much important when it comes to general use of skills except for those rare, important moments represented by Hope. I see attributes as not only set in stone definition of PC but also his potential. The most important is the proficiency in ranks of skills when taking action. I see attributes as only depth of PC accessed thru limited spending of those points when allowed. Body is a mix of strength, agility and looks but in my view, it’s not equal stand-alone stat for each feature. It pictures the whole package. Every now and then, when needed, that Hope is making the difference proportionally to the depth of that potential. Otherwise ranks are becoming not the same measure of proficiency for PCs with different Attribute levels and that might not be fair. One is always at favored head start in songwriting than another, because she is taller, stronger and better looking. Not always. Thanks to RAW, one might achieve better when reaching for Hope. Wouldn’t the whole system of spending AP to develop ranks be disturbed since with only exceptional circumstances some attributes can be raised in the game?

[Glorelendil]

At first the TOR systems seems odd because the attributes don't factor into most skill rolls, but I suspect that's only because going through skills adding (and subtracting) attribute/class/race bonuses and summing the final modifier is just the way every other RPG does it.

You can use whatever fluff makes you feel good...e.g. "trained skill matters more than innate talent, unless you dig deep into your heart" (a.k.a. spend Hope)...but if you just play the game you'll realize you don't miss it. Stat bonuses are simply another unnecessary bookkeeping task (like counting arrows) that took a board game designer to realize were ubiquitous only because E.G.G. thought it was a good idea and nobody has questioned it since.

Seriously, play the game. Many, many people on this forum have been playing RPGs for decades, and you are not the first person to show up (I was one) and say, "Hey this game is not bad; all it needs is stat bonuses/damage absorb/dual wielding/wizard class/sneak attack/cleave/Warglaives of Azinoth/etc."

Play the game. It's different, but it's also the best RPG ever published.

[Deadmanwalking]

I'll chime in and agree that I'd definitely try playing the game as is before making this change. It's extra bookkeeping and things to remember for little meaningful gain.

[Michebugio]

In my group, we are evaluating a house rule that doesn't unbalance the game, but lets players feel their character customization more during play.

It works like this:

Write your favoured Attribute scores separately from the sum with the basic score. For example, instead of writing Body 5 (8), Heart 6 (7), Wits 3 (5), you write Body 5 (3), Heart 6 (1), Wits 3 (2).

Favoured skills always sum the value in brackets to the final results of rolls. Using the values above, a character who has Convince 2 rolls 2 success dices and adds 2 to the final result (not 2 dices, just 2). If he had Awe 1, he would roll 1D+3 and if he had Travel 3, he would roll 3D+1 (and so on).
Skills that aren't Favoured do not sum anything to their rolls, of course.

When invoking an Attribute spending Hope, then, you simply add the basic Attribute score to the roll, whether the skill was Favoured or not.

I need to implement this to see how it works, but in general I think it would make decisions about the Favoured Attribute scores more important, and the players would really feel their character customization in every roll.
AND it would make the Expertise mastery a more interesting option.

What do you think?

[Deadmanwalking]

What do you think?

Hmmm....very interesting. By default, that's gonna make success much more likely on Favored Skills, but if you raise target numbers, you sorta screw people on all non-Favored skills...that seems a difficult balance to strike.

Still, very interesting indeed. And has the advantage of not a lot of added complication...

[Michebugio]

Hmmm....very interesting. By default, that's gonna make success much more likely on Favored Skills, but if you raise target numbers, you sorta screw people on all non-Favored skills...that seems a difficult balance to strike.

I don't think it would be necessary to raise the TN of rolls. If you do not spend Hope, you just add a maximum of +3 to the final roll (you got 8 with the dices? your final score is 11), and we're just talking about Favoured skills. If you spend Hope, the final result is exactly the same as without the house rule.

[Glorelendil]

The math all seems fine, but I'm still asking "why?" Sure, I understand the rationale but why the need? I've never, while playing the game, felt that too many skill rolls are failed, or that a specific character should be succeeding on more rolls that use a certain attribute.

Has anyone else experienced something different? Or is this just armchair theorycrafting?

[zedturtle]

It used to be, in the dark days before the revised edition, that it seemed like favoured didn't count for much. But now that it provides a discount to improvement, I'm not sure that this house rule is necessary or adds anything super beneficial to the game.

However, it is very elegant, and it might be worth playing around a little more to see if it changed anything drastically.