Rolemaster and MERP both had a fixed difficulty scale in their earliest incarnations.

Like I've always said, with third edition, D&D finally caught up with early eighties game design.

The first game I remember that had specific target numbers for skill checks in a graduated series was R. Talsorian Games' Mekton 2. IIRC, that one came out in 1983 or so, I know it was before Megatraveller.

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

Same here.  That's definitely the system I associate the concept with.  the first time I read 3.5, my reaction to DC was "Hey, I recognize that from WEG."

Quote from: David JohansenLike I've always said, with third edition, D&D finally caught up with early eighties game design.

That kind of 'catching up' reminds me of Fonzie waterskiing over the shark on Happy Days or Chuck Berry singing My-Ding-a-Ling.

Quote from: LancerIt 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." [...]

Quote from: jibbajabbaDidn'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.

My copy of Aftermath! (1981) says,
   "The Basic Chance of Success (BCS) [...] will be modified by various factors to give the Adjusted BCS. It is this number tha the player must roll less than or equal to on 1D20 in order for the character to be successful in using that Skill. [...]

"In order to gauge the results of an application of some Skills, an Effect Number is used. The Effect Number is the difference between the Basic Chance of Success die roll result and the modified Base Chance of Success."
That's the old-fashioned roundabout wargames-rules-style way of saying, "your skill will be modified according to the situation, you have to roll under that modified skill to do it right, and the more you make your roll by, the better your result."

And as Casey said, classic Traveller had lots of this stuff.

d20 is way behind

Quote from: David JohansenRolemaster and MERP both had a fixed difficulty scale in their earliest incarnations.

Like I've always said, with third edition, D&D finally caught up with early eighties game design.

I always had the impression that D&D3 finally got what other games already had since a long time ago, like a decent skill system.

Quote from: ClaudiusI always had the impression that D&D3 finally got what other games already had since a long time ago, like a decent skill system.

That's pretty much it. Now with 4e they are adding something to do with the Skills.

Quote from: GameDaddyNo. 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.

FUDGE doesn't seem to spell out (for example) when tracking someone requires a Superb effort and when it only requires a Good one.

Quote from: Age of FableFUDGE doesn't seem to spell out (for example) when tracking someone requires a Superb effort and when it only requires a Good one.

Sure does. If the Ranger you are trying to track has Good hiding skills, you will need to roll better than good to even spot him (barring any other mods, such as for delay in tracking and prevailing weather).

Quote from: GameDaddySure does. If the Ranger you are trying to track has Good hiding skills, you will need to roll better than good to even spot him (barring any other mods, such as for delay in tracking and prevailing weather).

That's the simple case of the opposed skill check.

When it comes to simple skill check, FUDGE isn't very detailed. It's not that type of game.

That wasn't a criticism by the way. My impression of FUDGE was that it's intended to be a 'system for making an RPG' more than an RPG.

Quote from: KrakaJakUmmmm... Vampire?

I had a quick look at the old version, it seemed like it kind of did...as an example, how would a character forge a document (assuming that that's the kind of thing that characters are meant to be doing)?

From a specific example in Interlock/Mekton Z-

Say for Technical Skills..

Basic Repair allows you to repair subsequently more complicated devices the higher your level in the skill is.

At a +3, you can fix minor car problems..
At a +6 or better you can repair stereos..
At +9 or better, you can build a computer from scratch and maintain most industrial machinery..etc.

And many of the skills have this sort of breakdown by proficiency.

Quote from: ClaudiusI always had the impression that D&D3 finally got what other games already had since a long time ago, like a decent skill system.

With any luck, by 5e or so, they may "catch up" even further by axing classes in favor of a decent skill-based system.. But I doubt it.

Quote from: LancerWith any luck, by 5e or so, they may "catch up" even further by axing classes in favor of a decent skill-based system.. But I doubt it.

You see, what you guys are calling "catch up" is really "using proven methods".

Classes are a proven method.

Your taste to the contrary doesn't make D&D "behind" in this regard.