Skills - Playtest Packet 2

[Ferrous]

Of course they willl come up fairly often at the game table at present as being one of the 3 skills a character has they will try to lever them in to any occasion. However something like a Spot check will be made at the start of many if not most encounters, and with the best will in the world that is not going to happen with Heraldric Lore etc.

My solution would be to give all 1st level character a Lore skill like they already do with Clerics and Mages e.g a Fighter might choose from Heraldric, Historical or Local Lore, and give 3 more genericaly useful skills to the Backgrounds.

 

[ferratus]

I can't agree with the notion that ability scores shouldn't matter for skills. Natural gifts have to matter, otherwise it doesn't make sense. You can't have imbeciles good at lore checks, or fat and/or weak men good at running, jumping and climbing.

I also don't like a strict skill system like in 2e's proficiencies system, or 3e's skill system, because you need a wide variety of skills in a campaign, and often their are outliers where not having a certain skill in the party can grind the game to a halt. As well, it makes specialized skills impossible where the entire group needs to do them (such as stealth).

Having ability scores be the default skill resolution allows for you to have a good chance of being able to do a skill, while skill training allows you to be particularly good at one skill. So if you don't have a rogue, the fighter can fill the trapfinding and stealth rolls relatively well, the wizard can handle picking the locks, and the halfling cleric can pick a few pockets. If you need to roll a stealth check, everyone has at least a 50% chance to try, instead of just being impossible.

So I think the current system is a good compromise. I could also live with people just having skills based around what their class, background, and speciality is, without hard-coding specific skills, but I understand that "my character knows this" on a character sheet helps people to envision their characters better.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

And in the advancement table, am I really getting a new skill every other level? thats quite impressive...

Nope. You are getting +1 to one current skill every other level, to a maximum of +7 in a single skill.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

the advancement table clearly says "skill training"

So I am not so sure.

Also I don´t understand, why the pregen wizard and cleric have 4 skills although the class description says:
"...must chose a skill in which they lack training"

 

[Animal]

Obviously this playtest is not about testing skill system, so i'd think this is just a placeholder. It is obvious that skill had comparatively very little attention from the team at this stage.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

the advancement table clearly says "skill training"

So I am not so sure.

Also I don´t understand, why the pregen wizard and cleric have 4 skills although the class description says:
"...must chose a skill in which they lack training"

Look in the skill section itself. How is "getting better with a skill" not "skill training"?

My guess on the pregen bit is that this is directly compatible to what the class stuff says, which simply seems to be that wizard or cleric must pick a skill from that list they do not already have from background. (That's a bit goofy, considering that the class will often be chosen before the background. But there we are.)

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Thanks for the answers!

Ok, maybe this is, how you should read it. (After reading it again, I am sure, that you are right!) Althoug, skill training and improving a skill have different sections in the background section. But this advancement table seems a little bit wonky. Those can´t be the final values. Maybe we got a table to have a lot faster advancement for playtest purposes.

 

[Mallus]

I don't understand what the skill system is supposed to be doing.

I think the idea is a quick-and-dirty task resolution system, nothing more, nothing less, meant to favor play-at-the-table over gearhead charop between sessions.

If you're PC has a good ability score, they've got a decent chance to make the related skill check. Note this skill system sits beside a stat generation method which is designed to produce high-average numbers (4d6 drop lowest & stat bumps for both race and class, but capped at 20).

Is it only for PCs and NPCs who are in conflict with PCs?

Isn't it always?

I don't see why they have a list of DCs if they tell you to ignore them and go with your gut.

It's a list of suggestions, guidelines. I find list like that extremely helpful. In fact, the d20-era product I really wanted was "The Big Book of DCs".

Maybe that's the point - they want the rules to be unclear, so that everyone runs the game differently because they have to fill in the blanks. D&D Lacuna.

That lacuna is the place where realism and verisimilitude live.

 

[Sebastianelgar]

the advancement table clearly says "skill training"

So I am not so sure.

Also I don´t understand, why the pregen wizard and cleric have 4 skills although the class description says:
"...must chose a skill in which they lack training"

I think "skill training" in the advancement table and the description of how to improve skills is a case of non-standardized nomenclature but they are both referring to the same thing.
As for the 4 skills, the background gives 3 skills and then the class adds the 4th that they were not trained in from their background.