Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 9027370" data-attributes="member: 7006">If a DM thought they had a viable distinction in mind for their game world when using DEX (Athletics) versus DEX (Acrobatics), I'd agree with you.&nbsp; Especially for those DMs who are looking for even more granularity in their skill system, they might be able to and want to distinguish between those actions that would be DEX (Athletics) versus those that would fall under DEX (Acrobatics).&nbsp; I do not disagree.Me personally though... I don't see Athletics/Acrobatics rolled nearly enough at my tables to warrant having two separate skills, because I don't like having some skills that are greatly overused compared to others.&nbsp; I prefer as much equity between skills as possible so that no players feels like they &quot;wasted&quot; a proficiency on a skill that never shows up (while the players who took proficiency in Perception for example see that skill get used all the time.)&nbsp; That's why I only have the one proficiency on grand physical movement (Athletics) and then you can apply in the ability score that makes the most sense for the action you are undertaking.The same could be said for something like Intimidation-- currently in the game it is CHA (Intimidation), but the DMG talks about the variant rule that says you could use STR (Intimidation) if the methodology for intimidating the person made more sense if the PC used their strength.&nbsp; But I know there are other DMs out there (and we see them in these kinds of threads all the time) that would rather actually have an entirely different skill and proficiency that was essentially STR (Intimidation), rather than the one proficiency that you could apply either ability score to.&nbsp; Neither way is necessarily better or worse... it all comes down to individual DM preference and what their table would get the most use out of.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 9027370, member: 7006"] If a DM thought they had a viable distinction in mind for their game world when using DEX (Athletics) versus DEX (Acrobatics), I'd agree with you. Especially for those DMs who are looking for even more granularity in their skill system, they might be able to and want to distinguish between those actions that would be DEX (Athletics) versus those that would fall under DEX (Acrobatics). I do not disagree. Me personally though... I don't see Athletics/Acrobatics rolled nearly enough at my tables to warrant having two separate skills, because I don't like having some skills that are greatly overused compared to others. I prefer as much equity between skills as possible so that no players feels like they "wasted" a proficiency on a skill that never shows up (while the players who took proficiency in Perception for example see that skill get used all the time.) That's why I only have the one proficiency on grand physical movement (Athletics) and then you can apply in the ability score that makes the most sense for the action you are undertaking. The same could be said for something like Intimidation-- currently in the game it is CHA (Intimidation), but the DMG talks about the variant rule that says you could use STR (Intimidation) if the methodology for intimidating the person made more sense if the PC used their strength. But I know there are other DMs out there (and we see them in these kinds of threads all the time) that would rather actually have an entirely [I]different[/I] skill and proficiency that was essentially STR (Intimidation), rather than the one proficiency that you could apply either ability score to. Neither way is necessarily better or worse... it all comes down to individual DM preference and what their table would get the most use out of. [/QUOTE]

Verification