Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Praeden" data-source="post: 8449512" data-attributes="member: 26908">Ah, now that's interesting. You and I have interpreted the text differently here - although I am really hoping that you are right. Bold emphahsis is mine.During character creation, for each point of your Intelligence modifier above 0 you can choose a skill specialty in one of the following skills (covered in detail page 408): Arcana, Culture, Engineering, History, Nature, Religion. If you are not proficient in any of these skills you can gain proficiency with one, choose an extra language known, or pick a tool proficiency in one artisan’s tool, gaming kit, instrument, or vehicle.When I read the seond sentence, I took it to mean that the alternatives to a bonus speciality were only available to characters who had none of the listed skills. In other words, a rogue with 14 intelligence who didn't pick up any knowledge skills from heritage, culture or background or class could now gain proficiency in say, Engineering, but having chosen that skill would now have to use their second high intelligence slot for a speciality in engineering.You seem to be saying that our smart thief could take Engineering, and since they are due another pick, they could now select an Engineering speciality, or gain proficiency in Arcana, or take up the lute, or learn Orcish.Or, to take another example, you are saying that a wizard with 18 intelligence who only has Arcana and History from their origins/backstory could become proficient in Culture, Engineering, Nature and Religion by virtue of the their high intelligence.I prefer your interpretation - it allows academic types to acquire more knowledge skill proficiencies. But looking at the RAW, it seems to me that the rules have been carefully worded to prioritise specialities over the other options. If they did intend your interpretation as the correct one, the entire structure of that paragraph seems wrong.</blockquote>

Verification