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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="wrecan" data-source="post: 5650491" data-attributes="member: 64825">Okay.  But the game doesn't need to set a default for NPCs.  The DM is going to give the NPCs the skills appropriate for them.  The game only has to concern itself for a default set of skills for PCs.The DM can decide the villagers of the landlocked village with the shallow stream cannot swim, while the townsfolk from the town downstream, when it becomes a river, can swim just fine.  The game doesn't need to dictate which group is the "default".Dog paddling isn't particularly heroic.  So if you toss a hero into a pool you want him to acquit himself somewhat respectably.  The default should be that heroes act heroically.  If the DM or player wants a scenario in which a hero is stuck in a mundane situation where he acts unherocially, that should be the exception not the rule.I don't think that's the issue we're discussing.  We're discussing heroes.  I think you're importing issues from another thread.  D&D is about heroes and always has been.  There hasn't been a single edition of D&D where it was ever implied that the default PCs (ie, those not from a setting with a specific rule) cannot swim.  Even 2e, which had the non-weapon proficiencies that most closely resembles the Skill system Mearls is discussing, the Swim nonweapon proficiency made you a better swimmer; it was not required for being able to swim.If you want a hero who can't swim, then introduce a rule where heroes can choose a nonheroic quality in exchange for some benefit.  But I think the default should be that heroes know how to swim.</blockquote>

Verification