I'm clarifying and jotting down some rules mechanics notes and was thinking about skills, attributes and difficulties.

I think an average person should be able to do average things, most of the time...
...And a lot of games handle that by succeeding at a skill or attribute roll, with no modifiers.

But what's average ??
What can you actually do with an average skill or average attribute ??
Should skill descriptions have examples of what's possible at that level ??

And then, as people improve their skills and attributes, does "average" change ??

SLA Industries has it that if your skill is a certain degree above the difficulty of a task, you don't need to succeed at a skill or attribute roll - you just succeed.

Many systems now use the Target Number method to determine difficulty, which means you can match skill or attribute to an action...
...But should that TN# be the same for everyone ??

Anyways...
...Thoughts and comments appreciated.

I think that "average" physical skills or stats could easily depend heavily on if we're talking modern day or medieval.

There's also the question of whether you're talking about the average guy on the street or the average guy skilled in that field.

Well, to be honest, average is average...
...So that would be the average person on the street.

Almost by definition "skilled in that field" is not average, he's above average.

Mechanics wise, I looked at [[stat +/- modifier] or less on 2d10]...
...Which is good, but I felt that 13-3 = 10- on 2d10 wasn't enough chance for success, even though it's statistically correct [I mean, only being able to successfully drive 50% of the time, doesn't reflect most people being able to drive with little problem most of the time].

Also, it still doesn't indicate what an average task is.


Instead, I 'm looking at [[2d10 + modifier] vs difficulty]...
...Which gives a slightly higher change of success and allows me to maintain all the current modifiers, degrees of success, etc.
Also, it seems easier to set a difficulty level, if no difficulty level already exists.
And it allows me to maintain my standardisation of the system [1/3/6/10/15].

It's something I abandoned before, but think being able to standardise easy/average/hard makes it a winner.
I'm not really concerned with "originality", but I am after speed and ease of use and flexibility.

If you think of your definition, that means any acquired skills are not part of the "average joe's" skillset. Anything after high school is off the table. That basically means Average Joe cannot really succeed at anything worth rolling for. He can jog just a bit, talk, write. Basically, he can default everything to his attributes and probably succeed at tasks with no difficulty level at all.

I believe, as was pointed out, you should ask yourself what a person in an average field can do. What can an average programmer do? What can an average accountant do? What can an average painter do?

Which then leads to the fact that this means "average joe" on the street has his average joe skillset, as well as an average professionnal skillset. Which means there is no average joe, above the common denominator of the up-to-high school education. And if you come to this conclusion, you'd be correct.

Or indeed the average stockbroker versus the average coal miner.

The average person doesn't necessarily exist.

Let me give you an example to explain this.

Lets say that Bob, Dan, Jane, and Mumford take IQ tests.

Bob's IQ is 90. Dan's IQ is 90. Janes's IQ is 90. And Mumfor's IQ is 290.

The Average IQ of this group is is 140. The average person in this group has an IQ of 140. Except none of the people in this group has an IQ of 140.


My thoughts are simple. Have a character pick an occupation and hobbies. Any standard actions that one would be expected to perform in this occupation or hobby can be done without skill. And all things that an untrained person should be able to do without difficulty also don't require a roll.

For example, no rolls to take someone's temperature with an ear thermometer, but possibly one for using a classic mercury thermometer, unless the character practiced medicine when they were prevalent.

Thank for the comments, so far.

Looking at them, it looks like I wasn't very clear what I mean by "average"

In real terms, I think I mean "what a person can do with an average level of competency in their chosen role"...
...So, what can an average doctor accomplish, etc.

Trying to translate average person success attempts to a dice roll is hard, because it seems that most of the average people would probably fail much of the time...
...And the people who do succeed a majority of the time are not averagely skilled [their experience has "raised" their skill].


I'm thinking about what people can do, without modifiers and most of the time...
...A doctor can diagnose common complaints
...a soldier can hit a target with a rifle, at medium range
...an electrician can wire up plugs and fit cabling to a house
...a thief can pick a normal doorlock
...a commuter can drive their car from 'a' to 'b'
...a policeman can recite common laws and reguations

I suppose that's the sort of thing I'm thinking about.

hi guys i think the wod/term to think of would be "typical" as opposed to average then in the affore mentioned iq test most would agree the typical person's IQ is 90 and then say that someone with 90 IQ can drive sainely and shop for groceries and work and anything else you might say an "average" person can