Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5508984" data-attributes="member: 42582">This is not strictly true. Non-weapon proficiencies included skills like mountaineering (in 1st ed, at least, this gave a non-thief a climb chance), tracking (in 1st ed, at least, this gave a non-ranger a tracking chance) and blind-fighting. I think these would all fall under your definition of "adventuring skill".Of course this doesn't undermine your overall point - it just indicates that AD&D was in some respects closer to 3E than you suggest.I'm not sure I like the notion of "non-adventuring" skills. It's more about the sorts of PC activity that the game is intended to support, and also the way that the character-building rules relate to exploration of character and to the action resolution mechanic.In Rolemaster, for example, played in full RMC2 or RMSS mode, there are dozens if not hundreds of skills. The character sheet is, in effect, a total picture of the PC's capabilities (and hence a very good hint at the PC's personality). This contributes very much to the characterisation of PCs.It also means that the action in the game has a tendency to veer, at least on occasion, into activities for which the PCs have relevant skills, even if that action would not be part of a typical D&D adventure. This is facilitated by an experience system that doesn't reward only combat, meaning that diverting the action onto these other activities doesn't slow down the pace of PC advancement.There are other features of RM that make this feasible. There is a complex system of siloing built around (i) variable costs from class to class for the various skills, and (ii) limits on how many skill ranks can be bought per level in a given skill. There is also a sytem of diminishing returns on bonus per skill rank, which means that DCs don't escalate as they do in D&D - and the low-open-eneded fumble system also means that part of the benefit of high bonuses is the ability to cope with open-ended low rolls, rather than the ability to hit DCs that other PCs can't.I've got nothing against 4e's skill system, including it's (non-)treatment of crafting etc. But the system has to be analysed not only in relation to other character-building options, but in relation to the way that XP are awarded (and hence PC advancement paced), the way action resolution works, and so on. And it also has to be clearly understood by all at the table that the character sheet, for a 4e PC, is nothing like a total picture of that PC's capabilities and personality. (The retraining rules also make sense only under this assumption, I think.)</blockquote>

Verification