Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ezo" data-source="post: 9291065" data-attributes="member: 7037866">It isn't a "problem" for most people IMO, but more a matter of character growth. Short of multiclassing or using an ASI/feat, the only way to learn a new skill, language, or tool is through downtime--if the DM works it into the game.[ATTACH=full]351889[/ATTACH]PCs without "proficiency", which represents the focus in that aspect of an ability score, can attempt a task because 5E assumes ability scores include a measure of training and competence:[ATTACH=full]351890[/ATTACH]So, the argument is why doesn't a character improve (at least to some extent) at a skill they perform at least once in a while, often in high-stress situations, especially if there are accomplished members of the party to help them learn the skill so they can do it better?Although most groups use feats and often multiclassing, those are viable options to accomplish the goal, but they come at a high cost. The cost seems a bit extreme for what accounts to at most a +1 to +3 bonus.For example, a Druid does not have Athletics (not even in their class list!), but with STR 12 can still make Strength (Athletics) checks for climbing or swimming, gaining only the +1 bonus from STR. Now, if they got to apply half their bonus, starting at level 5 (for instance), they would be +2 total on Strength (Athletics) checks. At 9th level they would be +3, and finally at 17th level they would be +4 (maximum).Of course, you take a STR 12 PC at 17th level with proficiency, and they are +7, only 3 points better. Which means if the Druid and the other PC were grappling, the Druid would have about a 34% chance of winning a contested check. IMO, for a person with no proficiency, compared to one with proficiency, and both years of adventuring experiences (climbing, swimming, grappling in fights) fairly often, 34% is too high.Also, as has been pointed out, not every PC is going to have the chance to attempt or practice every skill during their adventuring career, so it doesn't make sense for blanket improvement.While I understand the desire to represent character growth, I'm not certain this is the way to do it.</blockquote>

Verification