Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Has the skill list gone in the wrong direction?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5999603" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>@<u><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=7006" target="_blank">DEFCON 1</a></u> , the objection to that, I think, is going to basically be, "we don't want a game where everyone can pick locks." The objections will be very weak to very strong, depending on the group, and the scope will vary, but it will be there.</p><p> </p><p>So perhaps an alternative to the current setup that might work is something like this: Everything is done on ability checks. Everyone can do all skills, using that ability check. The exception is anything called out as requiring specific skill. Then the background "skills" instead of providing a bonus*, allow you to use your normal ability check on that otherwise excluded activity.</p><p> </p><p>* This has some niche problems with people having a bad roll on a trained skill. I'm not sure what it means for a clumsy person to be trained in lockpicking, for example.</p><p> </p><p>So now the list of skills becomes a default for the game as to what requires skill training and what can be done by anyone. Your background gives you three things that require training. However, there should also be a section on changing this list by campaign.</p><p> </p><p>Now, the only thing I can see that this leaves out is this concept of the character that is stupendeous at some particular activity, such as Mr. Ultra Sneaky Guy, beyond what ability scores can provide (assuming a campaign where everyone can "sneak"). That's where I see what you had in that last post coming back to help more broadly, as Mr. Ultra Sneaky Guy probably has a particular context for his sneakiness that doesn't apply to every last stealth check, but does apply to a few things outside of it.</p><p> </p><p> Edit: It also occurs to me that here is a good place to reintroduce that concept from the earlier L&L articles, with different mastery levels of skill. That is, if "lockpicking" is something done only trained, your background starts with "apprentice lockpicker (+0)"--which can then be improved to get those bonuses. Hmm. That's a way for backgrounds to grow over time, too. </p><p> </p><p>Also, if the bonuses are taking out of the starting skills in favor of unlocking "required training"--then we are back to allowing the background itself to allow a bonus where applicable, as discussed in the OP.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5999603, member: 54877"] @[U][URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=7006"]DEFCON 1[/URL][/U] , the objection to that, I think, is going to basically be, "we don't want a game where everyone can pick locks." The objections will be very weak to very strong, depending on the group, and the scope will vary, but it will be there. So perhaps an alternative to the current setup that might work is something like this: Everything is done on ability checks. Everyone can do all skills, using that ability check. The exception is anything called out as requiring specific skill. Then the background "skills" instead of providing a bonus*, allow you to use your normal ability check on that otherwise excluded activity. * This has some niche problems with people having a bad roll on a trained skill. I'm not sure what it means for a clumsy person to be trained in lockpicking, for example. So now the list of skills becomes a default for the game as to what requires skill training and what can be done by anyone. Your background gives you three things that require training. However, there should also be a section on changing this list by campaign. Now, the only thing I can see that this leaves out is this concept of the character that is stupendeous at some particular activity, such as Mr. Ultra Sneaky Guy, beyond what ability scores can provide (assuming a campaign where everyone can "sneak"). That's where I see what you had in that last post coming back to help more broadly, as Mr. Ultra Sneaky Guy probably has a particular context for his sneakiness that doesn't apply to every last stealth check, but does apply to a few things outside of it. Edit: It also occurs to me that here is a good place to reintroduce that concept from the earlier L&L articles, with different mastery levels of skill. That is, if "lockpicking" is something done only trained, your background starts with "apprentice lockpicker (+0)"--which can then be improved to get those bonuses. Hmm. That's a way for backgrounds to grow over time, too. Also, if the bonuses are taking out of the starting skills in favor of unlocking "required training"--then we are back to allowing the background itself to allow a bonus where applicable, as discussed in the OP. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Has the skill list gone in the wrong direction?
Top