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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FourthBear" data-source="post: 4117590" data-attributes="member: 55846">I think that many of the skills such as Profession: Beekeeper and Perform: Dance are better captured in the character description and background than mechanically.  PCs should feel free to pick as many such skills as they think their background calls for (within reason).  If a check is needed, the DM and player can decide exactly if their character is best described as untrained, trained or trained and focused, allowing for a quick mechanical modifier for a difficulty check.  This brings up the next point in mechanically assigning such skills: will there be room in the books for systems that adequately capture these skills in a way that isn't trivial?  I know that people disagree, but I don't consider the Craft, Profession and Perform rules in 3e particularly compelling.  Mechanically, the effect of each skill is largely reduced to how many gp you can earn on a successful skill roll with little else supported by the text in the core rules.  Almost everything else boils down to improvisational rulings by the DM, which can be captured adequately on the fly without forcing PCs to choose between Athletics or Profession: Farmer.Of course, in a particular campaign where a skill that isn't represented on the core rules list *is* important enough that it is expected to have regular, mechanically important checks (such as Sailor checks in a seafaring campaign), then the DM can lay out the skill and what successful skill check means for a character.</blockquote>

Verification