Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 5491601" data-attributes="member: 58197">Getting rid of the skill point system was a total win for me. I never found that skill points added anything to verisimilitude; skill points and skill training are both highly artificial mechanics, as are pretty much all the mechanics involved in chargen and leveling up.The removal of non-adventuring-related skills... I'm of two minds about that one. I approve of getting rid of the need to choose between &quot;background skills&quot; and &quot;skills you're actually likely to use in play.&quot; And there's a lot to be said for the idea that you don't have to have a skill for every little thing your PC knows how to do. On the other hand, not having any mechanic to portray those background talents does often result in PCs who never think about or use such talents.Perhaps something along the lines of AD&amp;D's Secondary Skill mechanic would do the job. You choose a profession/background, like Hunter, or Aristocrat, or Blacksmith. Any time you want to do something plausibly related to that profession, if it's not covered by a standard skill, you make an appropriate ability check with a +5 bonus (where you would otherwise make a flat ability check).In fact, that'd be a nice replacement for the existing background mechanic. Hmm... maybe I need to work that into my next campaign.I think the main thing is that in 4E, you lose nothing by taking a zigzag diagonal path instead of walking straight ahead. In certain cases, this can lead to weird results as you zip around obstacles that ought properly to slow you up. I have not found it to be a big deal in actual play, but I guess experiences vary.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dausuul, post: 5491601, member: 58197"] Getting rid of the skill point system was a total win for me. I never found that skill points added anything to verisimilitude; skill points and skill training are both highly artificial mechanics, as are pretty much all the mechanics involved in chargen and leveling up. The removal of non-adventuring-related skills... I'm of two minds about that one. I approve of getting rid of the need to choose between "background skills" and "skills you're actually likely to use in play." And there's a lot to be said for the idea that you don't have to have a skill for every little thing your PC knows how to do. On the other hand, not having [i]any[/i] mechanic to portray those background talents does often result in PCs who never think about or use such talents. Perhaps something along the lines of AD&D's Secondary Skill mechanic would do the job. You choose a profession/background, like Hunter, or Aristocrat, or Blacksmith. Any time you want to do something plausibly related to that profession, if it's not covered by a standard skill, you make an appropriate ability check with a +5 bonus (where you would otherwise make a flat ability check). In fact, that'd be a nice replacement for the existing background mechanic. Hmm... maybe I need to work that into my next campaign. I think the main thing is that in 4E, you lose nothing by taking a zigzag diagonal path instead of walking straight ahead. In certain cases, this can lead to weird results as you zip around obstacles that ought properly to slow you up. I have not found it to be a big deal in actual play, but I guess experiences vary. [/QUOTE]

Verification