Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Devilbass" data-source="post: 6778047" data-attributes="member: 6686729">A discussion about trained vs untrained in 5e inherently has to do with much more than proficiency bonus though.&nbsp; You can't make fair comparisons between a high stat, non-proficient individual, and low-stat, proficient individual in this game without considering their racial or class-based abilities.&nbsp; Many classes have abilities which modify their capabilities with regard not just to combat, but to ability checks as well, not even counting spells.&nbsp; Such abilities are relevant to the discussion, as they modify what a trained person can accomplish beyond what their proficiency bonus alone determines.Another issue with this discussion though, is that proficiency is a game term; being proficient in something does not mean your character must have been trained in it.&nbsp; Perfect example is an elf's Keen Senses.&nbsp; This ability is meant to represent the natural, inborn perceptive ability of the elf due to superior hearing and eyesight.&nbsp; This is not proficiency due to training, it is proficiency due to natural talent that comes with being an elf.&nbsp; How about a half-orc's proficiency with Intimidate?&nbsp; Does every half-orc practice being intimidating?&nbsp; Probably not - especially those trying to make their way in civilized lands.&nbsp; This proficiency represents not training, but natural talent.&nbsp; Half-orcs are scary because they are physically intimidating, because there is alot of preconceived baggage about their lineage.&nbsp; Really, half-orcs show how proficiency doesn't even need to be about training or talent - it can be circumstantial or cultural.I guess my point is that because of the way D&amp;D is laid out, you can give your character proficiency in a skill and say that he or she never trained in it once.&nbsp; It represents natural talent, because that's what you want your character to be naturally good at.&nbsp; Proficiency doesn't mean &quot;trained&quot; in D&amp;D 5e, it means &quot;good at a thing&quot;.&nbsp;&nbsp; Ticking a box on your character sheet that says your character is proficient doesn't dictate how you describe your character, not even according to the game itself.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Devilbass, post: 6778047, member: 6686729"] A discussion about trained vs untrained in 5e inherently has to do with much more than proficiency bonus though. You can't make fair comparisons between a high stat, non-proficient individual, and low-stat, proficient individual in this game without considering their racial or class-based abilities. Many classes have abilities which modify their capabilities with regard not just to combat, but to ability checks as well, not even counting spells. Such abilities are relevant to the discussion, as they modify what a trained person can accomplish beyond what their proficiency bonus alone determines. Another issue with this discussion though, is that proficiency is a game term; being proficient in something does not mean your character must have been trained in it. Perfect example is an elf's [I]Keen Senses[/I]. This ability is meant to represent the natural, inborn perceptive ability of the elf due to superior hearing and eyesight. This is not proficiency due to training, it is proficiency due to natural talent that comes with being an elf. How about a half-orc's proficiency with [I]Intimidate[/I]? Does every half-orc practice being intimidating? Probably not - especially those trying to make their way in civilized lands. This proficiency represents not training, but natural talent. Half-orcs are scary because they are physically intimidating, because there is alot of preconceived baggage about their lineage. Really, half-orcs show how proficiency doesn't even need to be about training or talent - it can be circumstantial or cultural. I guess my point is that because of the way D&D is laid out, you can give your character proficiency in a skill and say that he or she never trained in it once. It represents natural talent, because that's what you want your character to be naturally good at. Proficiency doesn't mean "trained" in D&D 5e, it means "good at a thing". Ticking a box on your character sheet that says your character is proficient doesn't dictate how you describe your character, not even according to the game itself. [/QUOTE]

Verification