This is the one criticsm I disagree with quite strongly. A lot of people seem to focus on the outlying case (a.k.a 20th level Athasian fighter better at swimming/crafting than a 1st level islander basketweaver) but I prefer to look at the general case (namely, the REST of the skills).
AllisterH said:
The SWSE skill system IMO captures not only "realistic" skill acquisition but it works better for the game as well.
People learning how to do literally everything, regardless of their choices, preferences and experiences is far from realistic. Some people do become jacks of all trades, but they do so by their own choice and such is far from the norm. Most people learn only what they must or what they really want to. And don't try to tell me that adventuring gives experience with everything. Running around in dungeons killing things and taking their stuff is hardly some great academic exercise.
AllisterH said:
Looking at the 3.5 list, the ONLY skills I think a "normal adventurer" (a.k.a one that doesn't adventure in a non-standard D&D world, say an Athasian PC) doesn't get better at naturally would be the Craft/Profession skills.
I totally disagree. My Wizard with levitate, fly, etc has no reason whatsoever to learn how to climb or jump. Heck, even before I had those spells, I would just have the fighter carry me up slopes. Which brings up another big issue I have with this skill system. One of the more defining things about characters isn't what they're good at, it's what they aren't. It encourages teamwork. It makes people cooperate to balance each other's shortcomings. But in a system like this one, where everyone will excel at every endeavor, that becomes much less important.
AllisterH said:
Look at the skills.
Appraise - You've been stealing/confiscating how many gems/paintings/diamonds since 1st level? Hell, IIRC, in one of the latter Conan novels, pre-King Conan, Conan tries to fence a gem from his latest adventure and the fencer tries to stiff Conan. Conan laughs in his face and simply points out all the characteristics and flaws of the ruby and it makes sense given HOW many gems/precious objects have passed through his hands. Even Conan at the end was knowledge about spellcraft.
Well, since you brought up Conan, I should point out that Conan was a ROGUE. And later he was a PIRATE. Both are classes that should have appraise as a class skill. That said, having a history of looting things does not make you an expert of evaluating them. People in real life even often pay to have things appraised. Looting a bunch of gems doesn't give you a jewelcrafter's eye. Watch any movie about thieves and no matter how experienced the thief, he always, always has contacts that he must refer to for specialized information or resources, often to appraise things that he steals.
AllisterH said:
Use Rope - You mean to tell me that a wizard at 20th level who has been hogtied/camped/been adventuring/tying up people for 20 levels now is NOT naturally going to be better at Use Rope than he was at 1st level?
No, your wizard would obviously have a reason to put points into Use Rope, since he uses it so much. My level 14 Wizard has never, not once used the Use Rope skill. We always had our rogue tie people up, since he's the one who has trained in it and is good at it. There's simply no reason for me to automatically learn how to do something that I never use and have no reason to learn.
AllisterH said:
The examples I listed were for non-class skills and even moreso WITH class skills (Paladin that doesn't know jack about the planes etc).
Actually, I can very easily picture a Paladin that doesn't know about the planes. He may not have had much experience or inclination to learn about demons. Maybe he's more interested in fighting undead, or maybe he's an inquisitor, focused on hunting down non-believers. Even a Paladin who does fight demons may not have much book knowledge about them. He could just refer to a scholar that does.
