Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 7227960" data-attributes="member: 6778044">OK, as an update, since we've had some time to discuss it, this is the new idea as it currently stands. I've left the original post below:Untrained = Ability modifier, with a maximum of +1Proficiency = The higher of proficiency bonus or ability modifierExpertise = Proficiency bonus + ability modifierVariation: Untrained = Ability modifier, a maximum of Proficiency modifier -1.The idea is that this covers all proficiency and expertise. Skills, combat, armor, and saving throws.For saving throws, if you want all saving throws to scale with level, I would recommend that all characters have proficiency in all saving throws, and expertise in the two that their class gives them.The biggest challenge, however, is armor. The easiest fix is to set a max proficiency bonus and max DEX bonus for each armor type so it doesn't alter it at all. But it also gives you the opportunity to have AC scale a bit with level should you want that.It does, though, give you a different approach to unarmored AC. Allowing you to create proficiency and expertise (probably a feat) Unarmored Defense, so you can use your skill (proficiency) to increase your unarmored AC.The existing class abilities can be rewritten as: Add your proficiency bonus and the ability modifier of your choice (Constitution for barbarian, etc.).This approach works really, really well in my campaign, because although armor provides less AC protection, it also provides resistance against one or more damage types. So you can have a better AC while being unarmored, but you don't get the benefit of armor itself.--Original post:So, doing my usual tweaking, and stuck at one particular point.I have a love/hate relationship with the way skills are tied to an ability.Sure, most of them it makes perfect sense that a given ability will be the primary one for a given skill. In many cases there's a second, or maybe a third, that makes sense. But because they are so tied to abilities, it has the effect of often limiting or pigeon-holing certain classes to certain skills (beyond the selections they get at first level).Our group is not an optimizing group, but I see plenty of complaints online that a certain combination is "unplayable" because their bonus is on the wrong ability, or whatever. And comments like, "there's no point in a fighter with a Wisdom score higher than their Strength because the cleric will still be better at Perception and always find things first.The other issue I've had is the really wide range of skill somebody can have. Ignore negative scores, you still go from +0 with no proficiency or modifiers, up to a potential +17 with expertise at 17th level and a +5 modifier.Combat ability, on the other hand, is limited to a potential +11 (no expertise option), with some exceptions that grant an additional +1 or +2, and maybe some of those stack. So maybe it's not that different.Anyway, those are some of the thoughts. Then something came to mind:Having a natural talent (high ability score) doesn't generally make you better at something, it really makes it easier for you to learn something. Now since training and learning aren't really a thing in the game, that aspect doesn't come into play, but it could, perhaps, in the downtime portion of the game. More importantly, we can also alter the way skills function at the same time, making it less important to focus on your best abilities.Radical Change: An ability check = d20 + your ability modifier or your proficiency bonus.Does this make sense? Well, let's say you want to learn to play a song on piano or guitar. You might have a high ability score, making it possible to learn it faster or easier than somebody else. But once you both know how to play it, you just play it. That is, proficiency by learning isn't really any different than proficiency by talent.In other words, you might have a +2 bonus to Intelligence, but a person who purchases that +2 bonus through education and training has the same +2 bonus. Yes, adding the two would be like the person with the higher intelligence learning more, but the game caps learning at proficiency unless you have a special ability that allows you to gain expertise. This is just setting a different cap.First, this reigns in the upper level of abilities to a maximum of +12. But more importantly, it means that the character in the party with a 10 Wisdom can choose to purchase Perception and be as good as the character with a 15 Wisdom that doesn't have proficiency.Is this fair? Well, it means that the person with the 15 Wisdom has a proficiency open that they don't have to spend on Perception and can get an extra skill. I'm sure there are a lot of folks that won't like this approach, but I think it opens up a lot of options that are gone as a result of the current ability/skill connection, that even allowing alternate abilities doesn't entirely resolve.It also means that in terms of skill, a character with a +3 ability modifier has the same amount of skill as a 5th level character with proficiency. A +4 equals a 9th level character with proficiency, and a +5 equals a 13th level character with proficiency. Currently, a person with a +3 modifier at 1st level is the equivalent as a 13th level character with proficiency, and if you have expertise, you are better than a 20th level character with expertise (assuming no modifiers for the 20th level character).I think it also increases the value of expertise while reigning it in at the same time, since a rogue can choose expertise in Perception, for example, and be the equivalent as a character with an 18 Wisdom or a 9th level character with proficiency. Now, a character with a 16 Wisdom and proficiency is still 1 point ahead of the character with expertise until 5th level, and that's assuming that the character doesn't increase their Wisdom.</blockquote>

Verification