Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nemesis Destiny" data-source="post: 6105998" data-attributes="member: 98255">I preferred the skills not being tied to stats in the name of "more than one way to skin a cat." Best example I can think of is Intimidate - it could work in so many ways, and I'd prefer if it were left to the players and DM to adjudicate based on the situation. Rulings Not Rules, right?Plus, it would certainly help the socially gimped classes, like Fighters, if they could put their (typically) "good" stats to use in social situations.That said, I definitely prefer the shorter list of broad skills that 4e used; it was the first edition of the game where I didn't feel the need to houserule extra skills for everyone. Characters felt competent in a sufficient number of situations, though I still houseruled fighters an extra skill, and generally ignored the class lists.I view the Next system as a compromise between that (since most things will be done via ability check) and the overly complicated and limiting system that was used in 3.x. I still find that it leans too far toward narrowly defining what you are good at, but it's a far cry better than having a huge open-ended list that only serves to define what you can't do. That is, however, more a result of bounded accuracy than it is the design of the system itself. On the plus side, at least it doesn't use fiddly skill ranks. Good riddance to that.I'd like to see a 4e-style skill module, but I'm not holding my breath.</blockquote>

Verification