Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sammael" data-source="post: 5612779" data-attributes="member: 4475">Re: passive learning - I agree, but I also think that the number of instances where passive learning is applicable far outnumbers the number of instances where it isn't, which is why I'm in favor of passive learning in general.As a quick sidenote, 3.x had passive learning as well, in the form of BAB - which was - really - nothing more than another skill with slightly wonky rules.As for the skill level cap and "equal opportunity" skills, again, I agree - in a class-based system, not all classes should have the opportunity to advance all skills equally, and the "cap" should differ. I'll step out of system neutrality here for a sec - under my system, a 20th level mage would likely have a +17 bonus on the Arcana skill (10 ranks, +5 base bonus, +2 competence), whereas a 20th level fighter would only have the +5 base bonus (to reflect passive learning - after all, having seen the motions used to cast fireball so many times, the fighter was bound to learn to recognize them by then; it doesn't mean that he can cast spells). If you add abilities to skills, the difference becomes even greater. But the 20th level fighter will likely be able to recognize a magic mouth for what it is...</blockquote>