Douglas Cole's "By Default" and the Rule of 20

[nerdvana]

I am implementing this alternate rule in my games but I have run into a quandary with the Rule of 20 (p. B173) and the Super Attribute enhancement (p. 17 of Power-Ups 4: Enhancements).

When using "By Default" are defaults still going to be maxed out at attribute 20 (i.e. Average skills max at a default of 10 instead of the RAW 15) or would you adjust the Rule of 20 to be the Rule of 32/30/28 to maintain the maximum default skill values from the RAW?

I am curious what others would do about this question in their games if they were using the "By Default" rules... also specifically WWDCD (What Would Douglas Cole Do) obviously.

Thanks in advance for replies

[vicky_molokh]

I'd ignore the Rule of 20 completely. With Attribute/2, the skill defaults are so nerfed compared to a flat subtraction, that it takes absolutely godlike attributes to get godlike defaults. I think it just fixes itself.

[nerdvana]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

I'd ignore the Rule of 20 completely. With Attribute/2, the skill defaults are so nerfed compared to a flat subtraction, that it takes absolutely godlike attributes to get godlike defaults. I think it just fixes itself.

In my game (based on White Wolf's Scion) attributes could go over the 30 to 40 range. So I could get into the more than RAW max values. However, that is a valid option.

Additionally, what you call "nerfed" I call a valid feature. But I understand that we are of differing opinions on DC's "By Default" optional rule.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by nerdvana

Additionally, what you call "nerfed" I call a valid feature. But I understand that we are of differing opinions on DC's "By Default" optional rule.

A nerf can be justified/valid, as in this case. Remember, I do support making attribute-based defaults calculated through Attribute/2 in a hypothetical GURPS 5e.

I'm not so happy about the idea of using attribute/2 for trained skills.

[nerdvana]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

A nerf can be justified/valid, as in this case. Remember, I do support making attribute-based defaults calculated through Attribute/2 in a hypothetical GURPS 5e.

I'm not so happy about the idea of using attribute/2 for trained skills.

Right. Forgot that. See, I'm ok with buying up from the 1/2 attribute value also. Just see that as another feature of the "By Default" rules. :)

[vicky_molokh]

Buying DX to 30-40 is so expensive that godlike defaults of 15-20 + mods are a very mild benefit compared to other stuff you could buy with those points. The whole By Default rule about Defaults seems to tackle precisely the problem that Rule of 20 seems to tackle, and in a more gradual way too!

Originally Posted by nerdvana

Right. Forgot that. See, I'm ok with buying up from the 1/2 attribute value also. Just see that as another feature of the "By Default" rules. :)

Well, you already know some of the issues with it posted by Douglas Cole here and there.
Here's one that I don't remember being mentioned:
I want to punch an enemy.
I can either do it at my DX 20, using Deceptive Attack or whatever I need thanks to those high base levels.
Or I can use my Karate. I have [4] in Karate, so I get +1 to damage (I'm super-dextrous, not super-strong). But wait! I have 4 points in the skill, which means that I have it at Default+6. And the default is (DX/2)-1, or 9. So 9+6=15. Effectively a -5 to a DX-based roll for a +1 to damage. And the more dextrous the monster, the higher the penalty for being a Karateka.
That seems counterintuitive.

A similar things happens to Observation, where the more Per you have, the less useful it becomes to use Observation in place of Per.

Edit: maybe I misunderstood the way By Default works with defaultless skills and points in skills?

I'm not sure how to express my stance:
I want By Default to be somewhat reworked and integrated into a hypothetical 5e, but I'm not comfortable with some of the things it does, such as the point above, or the effective increase of attribute cost for skill purposes, or the rounding. I do feel that it's a great idea with a great future if it is ever considered for integration from the very beginning of an edition.

[nerdvana]

You've won me over, vicky_molokh. Luckily the game hadn't started so I can convert over to the RAW skill prices.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by nerdvana

Right. Forgot that. See, I'm ok with buying up from the 1/2 attribute value also. Just see that as another feature of the "By Default" rules. :)

For natural movements like puching and kicking, experiment with changing the basis from "Defaults to DX" to "base a punch on Default+5" and "base a kick on "Default+3."

That would put a DX 10 guy punching naturally at 10, kicking at 8. DX 14 is 12 and 10. DX 20 would punch at 15 and kick at 13.

That also makes the natural punch/kick default a bit closer to the skills-based options provided by Brawling, Boxing, Karate, etc.

You'll want to look at that every time you have a skill that can replace an attribute in a casual test (Roll Perception of Observation!) since the raw Per score will potentially be much higher than the skill-based observation.

[nerdvana]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

For natural movements like puching and kicking, experiment with changing the basis from "Defaults to DX" to "base a punch on Default+5" and "base a kick on "Default+3."

That would put a DX 10 guy punching naturally at 10, kicking at 8. DX 14 is 12 and 10. DX 20 would punch at 15 and kick at 13.

That also makes the natural punch/kick default a bit closer to the skills-based options provided by Brawling, Boxing, Karate, etc.

You'll want to look at that every time you have a skill that can replace an attribute in a casual test (Roll Perception of Observation!) since the raw Per score will potentially be much higher than the skill-based observation.

I knew I should have waited to hear from you Douglas, now I need to reconsider the options.

[DouglasCole]

The thing you have to watch for in edition-level changes is to always ask what's the point. The By Default concept was a thought experiment to push optimistation to skills from stats. It also allowed for double defaulting g and maybe makes 15-point talents worthwhile.

But in doing so, anything skill-like probably needs a skill-analog. "Do you keep your balance?" as a DX roll is probably fine. "Do you punch a guy? or "Do you decipher the noise you just heard" are better as skills.

It's going to take some fiddling.