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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest 7037866" data-source="post: 9393554">I think you might like one direction we're moving with skill "groups". It is, in many ways, similar to 5E but more distinctive in what you can do. For example: our Survival encompasses everything listed below. The idea is that you don't often learn a single skill (just as fire-building) without gaining exposure to other "related" or relavent skills. A PC with "Survival" would have a good chance of being familiar if not actually trained in everything in the list.[ATTACH=full]370576[/ATTACH]As far as low-level adventurers get in 5E, I think part of that is a carry over in "incorrect thinking" from prior adventures. I commonly like to use Athletics as an example. First, I'll begin by saying "Proficiency" is a HORRIBLE term for 5E!!! You are NOT proficient, you have additional/focus training in said skill.[ATTACH=full]370579[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]370580[/ATTACH]As you can see, Strength already measures athletic training, so "proficiency" in Athletics is a focus on something that is already there.We commonly don't think of the ability scores alread including training in the aspects of it, but they do.So, low-level adventurers already having training in a lot of things. "Proficiency" is a greater focus on something they are already trained in. That training is represented by the corresponding ability score and is why (partially) you get to add your ability score to ability checks.I'm not, personally, a fan of this aspect of 5E skills. Ability scores IMO should only encompass raw talent, etc. and not any part of training. That is what proficiency SHOULD Be---training.It's weird.</blockquote>

Verification