Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5591564" data-attributes="member: 4937">Well obviously you don't need 'skill guy' to do skills, any more than you need 'fighter guy' to do fighting or for that matter 'spell guy' to do spells.  It's not like fighters have no skill points or NWP's.  There is no reason why 'spell guy' should be completely inable to fight or be totally lacking in skill.  He's just relatively lacking in fighting ability and practical skills compared to some others.  The point is that being particularly skillful and knowledgable outside of combat is a different area of class specialization than being skilled in combat. To imagine a simple systemFighter guy is good at combat and brawny things.Spell guy is good with spells and academic things.Skillful guy is good at academic things, brawny things, and practical things.Skill guy can't be easily built by taking a bit of Fighter Guy and a bit of Spell guy.  The result tends to be not someone who is a master of all skills, but rather a student of all skills but a master of none.   The skillful guy must truly be a master of all skills if he is not to have the obvious advantages of breaking things or blowing things up.  If he is however, he has his own particular niche in problem solving besides breaking stuff or blowing them up, provide his niche let's him impose his will on the environment some what.The 'Thief' or later 'Rogue' has always been D&D's flagship class in the category of class that gets useful skills, but D&D has traditionally had a hard time making the class relevant.  Too often spell guy gets absolute skills that quickly leave the skillful guys utility in the dust, and in 1e fighter guy too easily out distanced the Thief in durability and combat ability.</blockquote>

Verification