D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 Perform, Diplomacy

[Shard O'Glase]

bad choice on the perform skill IMO.

I see the perform skill as the skill to entertain and put on a good show. The instruments etc. were just the tools you used to reach that end. Using the already used craft analagy I'd see it more as breaking down craft carpentry into craft saw, craft hammer, craft lathe.

Now I could acceot that maybe a 1 for 1 ration was too much, but making each one a separate skill is an over-reaction. Maybe 1 new method of expression for every 4 skill points or something.

I'd be happy if they even put technical skill in aninstrument as a separate PS, which would add maybe a synergy with perfrom.

 

[the Jester]

Maybe institue a house rule that gives you a synergy bonus to perform checks if you have 5 or more ranks in perform?

 

[Felix]

It seems to me that the Perform skill is a measurement of how experienced the bard is at entertaining the crowd (kind of like a stage presence measurement mechanic) more so than a measurement of a bard's aptitude at various types of performance.

Sure, it very simplified. But to continue this trend of making skills specific shall we do this:

Divide Rope Use into tying knots, lassoing, hogtieing...?

Divide Climb into rapelling, tree climbing, wall climbing, rock climbing, piton use, free climbing...?

Re-divide Survival into tracking, hunting, trapping, snaring, fishing, skinning, cleaning, fire-setting, plant recognition... Intuit Direction?

Goodness knows that the Knowledge skills arn't specific enough. Know (arcane) seems a bit like a Master's degree in History. Nice and all, but whose history are we talking about? Not all History degrees are the same.

Hide can become both camoflage and ducking.

Bluff. Like that doesn't have 50 different applications in game.

Intimidate. Split that sucker into "using physical force" and "using frightening language".

Gather Info turns into bribing, wining & dining, pumping, threatening, whittling, among others.

Perform needs to be different skills? The description of Perform is for flavor purposes. The skill merely creates a mechanic to power the Bard's abilities. That and show that even Dnd monks can rehearse their kata.

Feh.

 

[Will]

There's always a point where you have to decide 'this is enough detail, that is too much.'

And it's a subjective one.

Thinking about it... I dunno. One problem I have is that ultimately Perform being a bunch of skills seems to unduly penalize people who are going for what is ultimately an esthetic decision.

Maybe treat it like Language... Perform is how well you Perform, but you can take one Artistic Familiarity per skill point to cover all the things you happen to know.

Yes, it'd be more 'accurate' if Perform Play and Perform Jig were different values, but at that point I'd demand that such skills have a different price per level.

And if I was going to bother with that, I'd stick to BESM.

 

[Shaele]

I dislike it mechanically.

A bard that wants to actually acquire and use some of the musical instruments floating around around will now need to raise ranks in each appropriate instrument. If he wants to use those instruments for bardic abilities as well, he'll have to keep them maxxed (since songs have rank requirements).

So, now he needs max ranks in potentially
- pipes (pipes of the sewer, pain, ghost)
- lute and/or mandolin (any "classic" bard stringed inst.)
- harp (any FR harp, there are lots)
- singing (so that he can chant songs in battle)

This means that the new skill points that bards gained in 3.5 will need to be dumped in perform. Frustrating, since most bards will now have /fewer/ skill points left to spread around.

 

[ForceUser]

Frustrating, since most bards will now have /fewer/ skill points left to spread around.

Only if they want to be able to use Bardic Music with more than one performance style. The 3.5 Bard will pick a style - say, singing - and keep that one maxed for Bardic Music purposes. If he wants to be a swell dancer or poet he can dump fewer ranks in those. I don't see this as an issue, and the reason I say that is simple: how many bards do you know who whip out a mandolin to use Bardic Music? Me, I know none; they all just sing so they can have their hands free for battle. The only reason this would be an issue is if a bard picks up a magical instrument he's not spend ranks in, in which case it might seem a little unfair that a fighter can know all martial weapons for one proficiency but a bard can't know all instruments for the same.

 

[BVB]

... blah blah blah can't play all instruments blah blah blah ...

blah blah blah fewer skill points to spread among skills blah blah blah ...

It's not that much different from a character picking up a new weapon that he's never used before. Just because you can use a dagger doesn't mean you know how to swing a broadsword; brass instruments are quite a bit different than stringed instruments.

DM: "A majestic harp sits in the corner of the dragon's cavern, with a dwarven war axe propped against it."
Player: "Darn! My character never thought to gain proficiency in axes or harps! Oh well, I guess I'll pick up that flute and crossbow instead."

It's about specialization. Tough choices. Focus. Character concept. Roleplaying. If you want an omni-bard who can play anything anytime, "Power Up!" with computer programs instead.

"Blue Gladiator has just found FOOD. Health increased 75 points! Green Thief has just found POTION. Power increased 50 points! Red Bard has just found INSTRUMENT. Music increased 3,000 points!" ... Sheesh.

As for the skill point conundrum, well, that's just silly, too. A bard's general effectiveness isn't decreased by the new skills division.

 

[Technik4]

Even a 3.5 bard maxing 2 performance styles has more skill points than a 3.0 bard maxing perform (and thus gaining a new "art" every level).

3.0: 4 skill points - 1 Perform max = 3/level
3.5: 6 skill points - 2 Perform max = 4/level

Hooray for bards!

Technik

 

[drnuncheon]

It's not that much different from a character picking up a new weapon that he's never used before. Just because you can use a dagger doesn't mean you know how to swing a broadsword

Unless you're a fighter, of course.

If you're going to talk about how ridiculous it is for a bard to 'suddenly' become a master of dance when he puts a new rank in perform, why not talk about how ridiculous it is for fighters, rangers, barbarians, and paladins to 'suddenly' become masters of weapons they've never used once before in the campaign?

If you're willing to accept the abstraction that fighting-types can be pretty much equally good with all weapons, then why can't performing-types be pretty much equally good with all performances?

J

 

[Staffan]

If you're going to talk about how ridiculous it is for a bard to 'suddenly' become a master of dance when he puts a new rank in perform, why not talk about how ridiculous it is for fighters, rangers, barbarians, and paladins to 'suddenly' become masters of weapons they've never used once before in the campaign?

Only they don't become instant masters. In order to be considered to master a weapon, you'd probably be considered to spend five feats on it: Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, GWF, GWS, and Improved Crit. That's not something that happens instantly and for "free" when improving skill in another weapon.