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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rechan" data-source="post: 4499260" data-attributes="member: 54846">Perhaps I wasn't being clear when I made the point. But I was trying to make the point that one does not need to take mechanical things (feats, skills, traits, whatever) to reflect their character's background or personality.So yes, skills and feats are different, just like apples and oranges, but when the topic is "Fruit is tasty", you can bring them both up. The point I was trying to make was that I don't need to take "Feat: Orphan" to play my character as an orphan, any more than I need Craft: Underwater Basketweaving to play my character as a college slouch (that was a joke, for reference).The point is, since he's "The greatest swordsman in the world", you don't have to calculate his craft skill. You don't even know it. You just handwave and say "He takes ten".How is that different than saying "He's the greatest craftsman in the world. So he just does it."You are making my argument for me here, with this little sentence:What is essential about rolling craft at all? Just say "You do it." Tada.And I have never seen a story where a craft or profession roll was ever integral to overcoming the resolution. Really, I'm for the less mechanics, the fewer fiddly bits, the better. I don't track ammunition, or rations, or - if I didn't have to, I wouldn't bother with gold accounting. If there was a game that involved cards with "Succeed" Or "Fail" and you handed them in when you felt appropriate to the story, and the object is to just use them in a strategic fashion, I'd be sold. After all, to me the goal of a DM - as someone else put it here - is the art of letting the players win without allowing them to realize that's what you're doing. You didn't say "You only like Monty Haul Hack'n'slash", but I get the insinuation you are making from these:If you didn't get it from me, then from whence came the concept that "The only vector that PCs should be using to solve their problems is combat"? The only person that brought that up is you. I can accept that it's your opinion. But I do not accept it being a majoritive one, and thus I do not accept that it should be in core. As I stated above, that wasn't silliness. Feat: Orphan, or Trait: Orphan, exists. And it exists as a mechanical representation of background, which isn't necessary.But no, I'm being hyperbolic for two reasons. One, to get the gist of my point, and two, for this little statement here:Get that? That's how to me it feels. Or do you not accept that someone can feel a distaste or utter befuddlement with the necessity, let alone the desire, for certain mechanics? Just like you feel pleasure when putting your skill points to background fluff, the above scenario goes through my head when I see those same skills.</blockquote>

Verification