Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kobold Stew" data-source="post: 6063000" data-attributes="member: 23484">[MENTION=7006]DEFCON 1[/MENTION]: Thanks for the feedback. I agree with almost everything you say, but we draw different conclusions on how to make these general principles fit into the game. I understand your point about ability checks, and want that to be meaningful, and my suggested paring of the list works towards that, preventing silly overlap. I also agree with you on too many people with overlapping skills (and especially with the example of multiple-Religion knowledges), though I disagree with the hyperbolic capitalization that for perception skills this means Greatest Senses in the World -- that's not the question. The question is, how much of his or her total skill investment does a non-elven character have to invest to have comparable elven senses. You say 50%; I say less.&nbsp; Since both skills are given for free to elves, the question becomes how do we make it interesting for non-elven characters ever to invest in them ever at all. Your solution, to me, says we don't, and if that's the case, then we should cut all perception-based skills altogether, and make it a straightforward Wisdom check (and give a bonus to elves, if we must).I want skills to be a meaningful way to distinguish individuals, not an unwieldy list of things that simply aren't going to be chosen. As it is, a typical party of 4 will have 20-24 skills available between them: there are always going to be things left uncovered. You and I don't disagree that this is the right course. But bloating the list with too many skills makes a shopping list that is an obstacle to many players (especially new ones), and leads to arguments about applicability that will slow down play. I really don't think we're that far apart.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kobold Stew, post: 6063000, member: 23484"] [MENTION=7006]DEFCON 1[/MENTION]: Thanks for the feedback. I agree with almost everything you say, but we draw different conclusions on how to make these general principles fit into the game. I understand your point about ability checks, and want that to be meaningful, and my suggested paring of the list works towards that, preventing silly overlap. I also agree with you on too many people with overlapping skills (and especially with the example of multiple-Religion knowledges), though I disagree with the hyperbolic capitalization that for perception skills this means Greatest Senses in the World -- that's not the question. The question is, how much of his or her total skill investment does a non-elven character have to invest to have comparable elven senses. You say 50%; I say less. Since both skills are given for free to elves, the question becomes how do we make it interesting for non-elven characters ever to invest in them ever at all. Your solution, to me, says we don't, and if that's the case, then we should cut all perception-based skills altogether, and make it a straightforward Wisdom check (and give a bonus to elves, if we must). I want skills to be a meaningful way to distinguish individuals, not an unwieldy list of things that simply aren't going to be chosen. As it is, a typical party of 4 will have 20-24 skills available between them: there are always going to be things left uncovered. You and I don't disagree that this is the right course. But bloating the list with too many skills makes a shopping list that is an obstacle to many players (especially new ones), and leads to arguments about applicability that will slow down play. I really don't think we're that far apart. [/QUOTE]

Verification