Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 5999632" data-attributes="member: 7006">I can certainly see where you're coming from... but how many of those types of &quot;skills&quot; are there, really?&nbsp; Everyone can try to stealth, everyone can have knowledge about anything, everyone can try to jump, everyone has basic concepts of what happens down in a dungeon.&nbsp; Which ones are &quot;special&quot; that only certain people/classes that have &quot;training&quot; in them can do them?&nbsp; Picking locks?&nbsp; Removing traps?&nbsp; Slow falling / breaking your fall?&nbsp; Seems to me the only skills that people would have issue with are the traditional &quot;thief skills&quot; because of the belief that that's the whole basis of the class... doing those esoteric tasks that no one else can do.But didn't we move away from that idea in the last two editions with the whole concept of adding all these &quot;thief skills&quot; to the generic skill list?&nbsp; And even giving classes beyond the rogue the opportunity to be Trained in &quot;Thievery&quot; (like the Warlock was in 4E)?&nbsp; For my money... there's no reason why someone who owns a set of lock picks can't try and pick a lock.&nbsp; After all... for most characters, you just won't be GOOD at it, because your DEX mod will be low.&nbsp; Those with a higher DEX will be better at it... and those who have the Background in Thief (and thus the additional +3) would be really good at it.Truth be told... I personally would prefer a much more open ability check / Background system and a rule that says a DM can say a specific task is unable to be tried without a Background he feels appropriate for it... than to just create another list of 15 &quot;things&quot; that all PCs can be &quot;trained&quot; in, and thus only those who are trained can attempt the exceedingly small list of &quot;trained-only&quot; tasks the game has.&nbsp; I'm voting for DM agency to make rulings, rather than needing the game to make every ruling in every obscure situation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 5999632, member: 7006"] I can certainly see where you're coming from... but how many of those types of "skills" are there, really? Everyone can try to stealth, everyone can have knowledge about anything, everyone can try to jump, everyone has basic concepts of what happens down in a dungeon. Which ones are "special" that only certain people/classes that have "training" in them can do them? Picking locks? Removing traps? Slow falling / breaking your fall? Seems to me the only skills that people would have issue with are the traditional "thief skills" because of the belief that that's the whole basis of the class... doing those esoteric tasks that no one else can do. But didn't we move away from that idea in the last two editions with the whole concept of adding all these "thief skills" to the generic skill list? And even giving classes beyond the rogue the opportunity to be Trained in "Thievery" (like the Warlock was in 4E)? For my money... there's no reason why someone who owns a set of lock picks can't try and pick a lock. After all... for most characters, you just won't be GOOD at it, because your DEX mod will be low. Those with a higher DEX will be better at it... and those who have the Background in Thief (and thus the additional +3) would be really good at it. Truth be told... I personally would prefer a much more open ability check / Background system and a rule that says a DM can say a specific task is unable to be tried without a Background he feels appropriate for it... than to just create another list of 15 "things" that all PCs can be "trained" in, and thus only those who are trained can attempt the exceedingly small list of "trained-only" tasks the game has. I'm voting for DM agency to make rulings, rather than needing the game to make every ruling in every obscure situation. [/QUOTE]

Verification