Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Eirikrautha" data-source="post: 6361310" data-attributes="member: 6777843">Yeah, I am saying it is problematic. My assertion isn't even controversial; it's EXPLICITLY STATED right in the 2e PHB:(2e PHB, page 54 - Nonweapon Proficiencies)First, nonweapon proficiencies are rigid.  Being so defined, they limit the options of both the player and the DM.That's why non-weapon proficiencies were both optional and only one of three suggestions of how to handle these issues.  For some DMs and players, the limits of the approach were outweighed by the concreteness of the limits.  Skills and feats are just the logical extension of this idea... except no longer limited to non-combat activities.Secondly, skills and feats add NOTHING to the rules that is not available without them.  What you describe as your example could easily fit any action in 3e just like 2e, just with Abilities replaced by Skills or Feats.  Name the skill or feat in 3e that directly addresses your carriage example (Jump, Balance, Ride?).  A DM could easily decide to make you roll multiple skills for that in 3e as well.  What you've described is a DM that doesn't follow the "rule of cool," which happens equally in every edition.What isn't equal, however, is the deleterious effects of skill bonuses and feats.  As soon as I create a skill or feat for some particular action, I now have to differentiate what is possible for someone with lots of ranks in the skill (or who has the feat) and those who don't.  Otherwise, the feat or skill is useless.  So now I have to make my challenges take into account those who might have maxed the skill, locking out all of those who haven't taken it.  What my character without a skill might have been able to try is no longer possible for him, otherwise I have invalidated all of those folks who invested in high skill ranks.The crime isn't skills or feats, it's the way skills and feat created a wide gap between the haves and have nots, which ultimately limits your character dramatically.  5e has taken a much better approach (with bounded accuracy and fewer feats... especially the ones that just give skill bonuses), which lessens (though not eliminates) the restricting quality of skills and feats.I don't even think this is arguable... it's that obvious.  Sit down for a game of Pathfinder (i.e. D&D 3.75...where your character "build" is the be-all and end-all of your capabilities... to the point where characters not optimized around grappling or tripping don't even bother to try because the effectiveness gap is so large) to see the result of that approach.  Some people enjoy that kind of game.  More power to them.  But it's definitely NOT the flavor of the original D&D that many of us played (individual experiences may vary).  Which makes 5e a BIG step in the right direction for us...</blockquote>

Verification