erm..that's it really. Was d20 the first system to have exact rules for working out the difficulty of various tasks - or if it wasn't, what was?

What do you mean? Various systems over the years have had systematic methods of setting difficulties, some more explicit than D&D. I recall MegaTravller had a standard scale that it set difficulties too, and the same concept is pretty implicit in FUDGE, unless I am missing your meaning.

I think the answer would pretty clearly be "no".  D20 D&d was not the first to do so.  One that jumps to my mind that had rules for figuring out difficulties for checks that was earlier was Earthdawn, but I'm sure there were lots of games that did so before it.  It seems to be a pretty common feature from my experience.

In addition to the systems others have mentioned, Interlock, Mekton, FUZION, 7th Sea(Roll-and-Keep), James Bond 007 and many others all incorporated difficulty values in some shape or form years before 3e/d20.

The Interlock-based games (Interlock, Mekton, FUZION), in particular, have a base resolution mechanic similar to D20/D&D (skill+attribute+die vs. TN)

Quote from: Caesar SlaadWhat do you mean?

In my experience, most rpg's will have a way of working out whether a character succeeds or fails at something that isn't covered specifically anywhere else - for example, roll 1d20 and you succeed if it's under the relevant attribute.

Most will have guidelines on allowing for easier or harder tasks (for example, add up to 5 to the roll for unusually hard tasks, or subtract up to 5 for unusually easy ones) and/or for degrees of success (for example, "if you roll a natural 1, this is a critical success"),

What I'm talking about is something like this from the SRD:

"DC15: Predict the weather up to 24 hours in advance. For every 5 points by which your Survival check result exceeds 15, you can predict the weather for one additional day in advance."

So if a character asks if they can tell if it's going to rain, the DM doesn't have to set a difficulty for doing that, and if the result is (eg) 18, they don't have to make up what that result means.

Quote from: Age of FableWhat I'm talking about is something like this from the SRD:

"DC15: Predict the weather up to 24 hours in advance. For every 5 points by which your Survival check result exceeds 15, you can predict the weather for one additional day in advance."

So if a character asks if they can tell if it's going to rain, the DM doesn't have to set a difficulty for doing that, and if the result is (eg) 18, they don't have to make up what that result means.

So is what you are getting at less setting difficulties and more "explicit and different levels of success". I think there have been a few of those as well, though many are fairly general.

Quote from: Age of Fable"DC15: Predict the weather up to 24 hours in advance. For every 5 points by which your Survival check result exceeds 15, you can predict the weather for one additional day in advance."

So if a character asks if they can tell if it's going to rain, the DM doesn't have to set a difficulty for doing that, and if the result is (eg) 18, they don't have to make up what that result means.

It sounds like what you are asking (and be I brave for trying to speak for you) is if D&D/d20 was the first system to utilize "levels of success" to determine various stages of accomplishment and/or failure via a TN mechanic?

The answer to that would still be "no." Unisystem, I believe, beat 3e by about a year or so with AFMBE. James Bond 007 (1983) had a very intricate percentile-based system allowing for up to four success levels for any task.

WEG's Star Wars (1st edition, yo') was my first inkling of the whole "static target number," approach to task resolution.

Didn't FGU do this back in '81. I am sure all their games from Aftermath to Davedevils to Bushido used the same base skill system with effect numbers. You needed to score so many effect numbers to complete a task and each skill check took a period of time. So to carve a jade statuette into a mermaid might be a 10 point task using sculpture and you get 1 skill roll per day.
When you did a d20 skill roll the number less than the target was taken off the effect number until you masses enough success. Difficulty modifiers were applied to the skill check. You could add effect numbers to the original target to do a better job. So to carve an exquisite mermaid migh be a 15 point task.

Seemed to work provided you had time constraints otherwise anyone with a skill could eventually achieve any effect number just through repeating the task many many many times.

Doesn't work so well with non task driven skills mind so the weather check is not an ideal compare but the effect number idea was easily adapted.

Can I tell if its goign to rain tomorrow.
Make a survival check.
Okay my skill is 13 , rolls 7 - effect number 6
Gm has determined that this is a non modified check and every additional 5 effect points will give an extra day's information
Yeah you think it will rian tomorrow from the look of that cloud from to the East. In fact you think you are in for a couple of days of rain.

Quote from: Age of FableWhat I'm talking about is something like this from the SRD:

"DC15: Predict the weather up to 24 hours in advance. For every 5 points by which your Survival check result exceeds 15, you can predict the weather for one additional day in advance."

So if a character asks if they can tell if it's going to rain, the DM doesn't have to set a difficulty for doing that, and if the result is (eg) 18, they don't have to make up what that result means.

One example from 1977 on. Classic Traveller (CT) is chock (too) full of such paragraphs, with Dice Modifiers (DM) and applicable skills (and levels of) listed. It didn't have an explicit, universal difficulty level chart per se. There's an implied one, either starting at 6 or 8, depending on how you look at it.

Digest Group Publications streamlined the DMs and published the Universal Task Profile (UTP) in Traveller's Digest during the later days of CT. Incorporated into MegaTraveller, which has plenty of such examples.

UTP PDF from here. I think that's not as detailed as the version in MegaTraveller, which IMO is a bit clunky.

Quote from: jibbajibbaCan I tell if its goign to rain tomorrow.
Make a survival check.
Okay my skill is 13 , rolls 7 - effect number 6
Gm has determined that this is a non modified check and every additional 5 effect points will give an extra day's information
Yeah you think it will rian tomorrow from the look of that cloud from to the East. In fact you think you are in for a couple of days of rain.

What I'm talking about is more that the rules would specifically say that every additional 5 points = an extra day's information.

Quote from: Casey777One example from 1977 on. Classic Traveller (CT) is chock (too) full of such paragraphs, with Dice Modifiers (DM) and applicable skills (and levels of) listed. It didn't have an explicit, universal difficulty level chart per se. There's an implied one, either starting at 6 or 8, depending on how you look at it.

Digest Group Publications streamlined the DMs and published the Universal Task Profile (UTP) in Traveller's Digest during the later days of CT. Incorporated into MegaTraveller, which has plenty of such examples.

UTP PDF from here. I think that's not as detailed as the version in MegaTraveller, which IMO is a bit clunky.

This looks more like what I'm talking about. I'm assuming that there's also a list which says something like "forging a signature is..." such and such difficulty?

Quote from: Age of FableIn my experience, most rpg's will have a way of working out whether a character succeeds or fails at something that isn't covered specifically anywhere else - for example, roll 1d20 and you succeed if it's under the relevant attribute.

Then you need to get around more.  For example Shadowrun 3e (1998) has things like targets and modifiers in excruciating detail for skills. I don't recall exactly how 1e/2e did it (going back to 1989), I never actually played them just a quick perusal, but it was at least similar. Of course it is skill based so that makes a lot of sense.

So no, 3e wasn't even close to first. What you describe is in my experience uncommon. In fact the only place I recall using something like that was AD&D (although it could have been a house rule? I never DMed using it, it seemed silly when you looked at the odds)

Quote from: Age of Fableerm..that's it really. Was d20 the first system to have exact rules for working out the difficulty of various tasks - or if it wasn't, what was?

No. There was also FUDGE. Simple as could be. Four six-sided dice. Two sides with plusses, two sides blank, two sides with minuses on them. The plusses determined the challenge level overcome thusly...

+++++ Legendary
++++ Superb
+++ Great
++ Good
+ Fair
0 Mediocre
- Poor
-- Terrible
--- Disastrous
---- Catastrophic

You would need three plusses or better to beat a Great Challenge... and could only meet a Legendary Challenge provided you had some other circumstance modifier in your favor.

Ummmm... Vampire?

Shadowrun did it even more explicitly before that.