Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6730623" data-attributes="member: 1465">I think it looks pretty good!The only change I would make is in the line of Sacred Flame, instead of just &quot;save&quot; put the value of the DC there e.g. Wis(11)!I think this is exactly how it should work. The DM asks for an INT check, and tell the player to add Prof bonus IF they are proficient in Arcana. The players sees she's not proficient so she just rolls INT.My XP has been the opposite of yours: if you have a full list of skills, players will see the total bonus and not understand if they are proficient or not, so you will also need to put an extra column to signal proficiency. I prefer to see a list of only proficient skills, saves, weapons etc. rather than a full 'checklist' which IMXP it makes the whole character sheet more complicated and confusing than it needs to be.Overall, it depends if the DM wants to deliver a feel that the game is 'open-ended' or 'close-ended'. If you give complete lists, then the players tend to assume they always have to stick with what's on the list, for good or bad. I prefer players to focus on what they're good at i.e. look first and foremost to use what they are proficient with, and let others do what they aren't proficient with themselves, emphasizing the roles of each PC. The game rules are still the same, but the player's attitudes differ as a result of how things are presented. It's a matter of playstyles at the end, and mine differs from the majority.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 6730623, member: 1465"] I think it looks pretty good! The only change I would make is in the line of [I]Sacred Flame[/I], instead of just "save" put the value of the DC there e.g. Wis(11)! I think this is exactly how it should work. The DM asks for an INT check, and tell the player to add Prof bonus IF they are proficient in Arcana. The players sees she's not proficient so she just rolls INT. My XP has been the opposite of yours: if you have a full list of skills, players will see the total bonus and not understand if they are proficient or not, so you will [I]also[/I] need to put an extra column to signal proficiency. I prefer to see a list of [I]only[/I] proficient skills, saves, weapons etc. rather than a full 'checklist' which IMXP it makes the whole character sheet more complicated and confusing than it needs to be. Overall, it depends if the DM wants to deliver a [I]feel[/I] that the game is 'open-ended' or 'close-ended'. If you give complete lists, then the players tend to assume they always have to stick with what's on the list, for good or bad. I prefer players to [I]focus[/I] on what they're good at i.e. look first and foremost to use what they are proficient with, and let others do what they aren't proficient with themselves, emphasizing the roles of each PC. The game rules are still the same, but the player's attitudes differ as a result of how things are presented. It's a matter of playstyles at the end, and mine differs from the majority. [/QUOTE]

Verification