Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MaskedGuy" data-source="post: 8108569" data-attributes="member: 6916225">I'm mostly responding this to demonstrate how I think:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">That first one is kinda like saying &quot;with good athletics roll I allow you to run faster without needing feat feat to increase movement speech.&quot; And even if you do something like &quot;okay, you can try to climb faster but dc is uh... Let's say higher by five or ten&quot; the feat would still be useful for climbing at faster speed with regular dc or EVEN faster with house ruled higher dc.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Second one is one of those &quot;I don't see how feat's existence makes that impossible since feat just removes flat penalty and says you can hold on with one arm&quot;.&nbsp; Heck you can actually hold on the thing you are climbing with one hand already, the combat climber more permisses you to continue&nbsp; climbing with only one hand.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Third is one of those grey situations. I'm willing to consider &quot;crowd&quot; a single target when doing oratory speech, but when you are trying to convince something like four council representatives, you usually would have to convince them separately yeah.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Fourth is one of those &quot;well gm tells you to roll first impression check&quot; situations where you can't assume as player you can always do so, unless you have the said feat.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Fifth is again one of those &quot;well this isn't feature of the skill but something gm allows me to do in this scene&quot; things.</li>
</ul>Like, I'm not opposed of gm allowing stuff like &quot;Well in this situation you can make impression on character using arcana to impress them with your knowledge!&quot; I'm against someone saying &quot;This feat allows me to do something I was already allowed to do!&quot; when in fact most examples I've seen are kinda like versatile performance for bards in 1e: aka using skill in way you wouldn't use them normally <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> I can say that I'm not normally more friendly to skilled musicians. Like, if you can always for free use performance to make impression and request actions without feat, why would you ever take diplomacy profiency? You wouldn't, just like how I never had skill ranks in skills I had versatile performance for</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MaskedGuy, post: 8108569, member: 6916225"] I'm mostly responding this to demonstrate how I think: [LIST] [*]That first one is kinda like saying "with good athletics roll I allow you to run faster without needing feat feat to increase movement speech." And even if you do something like "okay, you can try to climb faster but dc is uh... Let's say higher by five or ten" the feat would still be useful for climbing at faster speed with regular dc or EVEN faster with house ruled higher dc. [*]Second one is one of those "I don't see how feat's existence makes that impossible since feat just removes flat penalty and says you can hold on with one arm". Heck you can actually hold on the thing you are climbing with one hand already, the combat climber more permisses you to continue climbing with only one hand. [*]Third is one of those grey situations. I'm willing to consider "crowd" a single target when doing oratory speech, but when you are trying to convince something like four council representatives, you usually would have to convince them separately yeah. [*]Fourth is one of those "well gm tells you to roll first impression check" situations where you can't assume as player you can always do so, unless you have the said feat. [*]Fifth is again one of those "well this isn't feature of the skill but something gm allows me to do in this scene" things. [/LIST] Like, I'm not opposed of gm allowing stuff like "Well in this situation you can make impression on character using arcana to impress them with your knowledge!" I'm against someone saying "This feat allows me to do something I was already allowed to do!" when in fact most examples I've seen are kinda like versatile performance for bards in 1e: aka using skill in way you wouldn't use them normally :p I can say that I'm not normally more friendly to skilled musicians. Like, if you can always for free use performance to make impression and request actions without feat, why would you ever take diplomacy profiency? You wouldn't, just like how I never had skill ranks in skills I had versatile performance for [/QUOTE]

Verification