Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Keenath" data-source="post: 4119741" data-attributes="member: 59792">The thing is, I think the opposite for the same reason!&nbsp; All these non-adventuring skills are legitimate uses of your ability, but they can't stand up in a real character creation scenario.&nbsp; You're having to have Craft Beer and Profession: Basket Weaver stand in the same room with Athletics and Stealth, and there's just no comparison.That argues for making them totally separate from &quot;real&quot; skills -- If you have an NPC who is a farmer, he can just HAVE farmer skills.&nbsp; He doesn't need to have it all defined and laid out as far as what that skill does.It's not about rounded versus maximized -- that's verging on the stormwind fallacy (the idea that character optimization and role play ability are inversely proportional).&nbsp; It's about making two things mechanically equal that are clearly not mechanically equal.I like the idea of just giving the +5 Trained bonus to checks related to background skills.&nbsp; If you really want to make it more codified, then give each player 3 slots for &quot;background skills&quot; that don't apply to adventuring.&nbsp; It might be a good RP touchstone, in fact, to have each person figure out three craft, profession, or performance skills that reflect what they were doing before they started adventuring, or what they do in their off time.Just don't put them up against the real skills.This is even more true now than it was in 3.x; you're going to be getting only a few skill selections per character for 'trained' skills, and the rest will be simple ability checks with the same 1/2 level bonus.&nbsp; Picking out three 'non combat' trained skills should be a good way to do what you want to do without making people pick between effectiveness and flavor.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Keenath, post: 4119741, member: 59792"] The thing is, I think the opposite for the same reason! All these non-adventuring skills are legitimate uses of your ability, but they can't stand up in a real character creation scenario. You're having to have Craft Beer and Profession: Basket Weaver stand in the same room with Athletics and Stealth, and there's just no comparison. That argues for making them totally separate from "real" skills -- If you have an NPC who is a farmer, he can just HAVE farmer skills. He doesn't need to have it all defined and laid out as far as what that skill does. It's not about rounded versus maximized -- that's verging on the stormwind fallacy (the idea that character optimization and role play ability are inversely proportional). It's about making two things mechanically equal that are clearly not mechanically equal. I like the idea of just giving the +5 Trained bonus to checks related to background skills. If you really want to make it more codified, then give each player 3 slots for "background skills" that don't apply to adventuring. It might be a good RP touchstone, in fact, to have each person figure out three craft, profession, or performance skills that reflect what they were doing before they started adventuring, or what they do in their off time. Just don't put them up against the real skills. This is even more true now than it was in 3.x; you're going to be getting only a few skill selections per character for 'trained' skills, and the rest will be simple ability checks with the same 1/2 level bonus. Picking out three 'non combat' trained skills should be a good way to do what you want to do without making people pick between effectiveness and flavor. [/QUOTE]

Verification