Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nyeshet" data-source="post: 2822561" data-attributes="member: 18363">You do realize we would be talking about permanent penalties to multiple skills over multiple levels, right? That would become a small headache for player and DM alike, keeping track of all of those penalties - especially as they would predominantly be in areas that are infrequently used - if ever. I see this as a true loss of skill, something that - were they to attempt to qualify for a PrC or feat later on, they could not take it due to lack of skill. With a penalty they could - in theory - qualify for such, as the requirements do not - by the RAW - take penalties into consideration. If it did, it would also have to take into consideration bonuses - such as by Alertness or Skill Focus. I think most will admit that both situations - qualifying for a PrC or feat when the PC has the ranks but has a penalty in excess of their ranks or qualifying for a PrC or feat when the PC lacks the ranks but has the Skill Focus, +2/+2 feat to make up for the lack - are untenable. The former would lack any realism or rational reasoning, while the latter would make such feats overpowering. Also, I think it would be harder to keep track of all the negative skill ranks that would build up if a penalty were involved in skills rarely used, whereas simply subtracting a skill ranks would negate any need to keep track after the fact. Furthermore, the bonus skill ranks would easily allow one to make up the loss if they really wish to do so. So, I hope you do not mind, but I do not think the penalty idea is the best way to represent this idea.</blockquote>

Verification