Skills That Should be Handy for an Adventurer...But Aren't in Actual Play.

[frankthedm]

Yeah, there's always the old "pickpocket the key/document/plot element from the guard/noble/Big NPC" but who are we kidding? you know that's a job for our good friend "sneak attack."

In my playgroup, the players will hang the rogue themselves if they find out he murdered a legitimate guard.

 

[shurai]

The real problem is a flaw with skill points

I think the really big problem is the narrowness of D&D characters, which is partly encouraged by culture and partly encouraged by the rules. Not all players have this attitude, but a common opinion is that nothing is worth doing unless you can someday become a stupendous badass at it. This is completely against human nature. I read it in somebody's sig: Specialization is for insects, and it's true. We're primates; we're meant to be versatile.

Now we come to the rules problems: The game is way too linear and way too zero-sum. Characters can't be "awesome" at a thing unless they are also "terrible" at almost everything else. It's the fundamental reason why min-maxing is popular. A better approach is for characters to be "awesome" at a thing and "decent" at a cocktail of other things.

To accomplish this, if I ever run another d20 game again (which is doubtful since I'm almost finished writing my own system that does what I want it to do), I'm going to rewrite the classes' skill points per level awards to give more out, and then I'm going to make high ranks cost more skill points than low ranks. That way all classes will be encouraged to spread their skill selections out some more and pick up on those skills that aren't deemed to be so valuable.

It'd probably be something like, roughly, most classes get +2 or +4 additional skill points per level (or a multiple of the old amounts; I haven't done the math). Then, the first seven ranks of a skill cost as normal, then the next five cost +1 points per rank, followed by +2 points after that. I'd probably not enforce the max ranks = class level + 3 rule, and possibly take away the bonus skill points a first-level character gets. I could see tweaking the cross-class skill cost rule so that it instead alters the levels at which more ranks become more expensive, too. The goal is to make it cheap for people to get to competence, and exensive for people to become true experts.

The exact mechanics might need adjustment but the logic is sound. The important thing is for a min-maxed character to look a lot less attractive, which is really great for the game if you ask me.

For starters, there will be a lot more license for the DM to say to players, "Gee, guess you should've learned that skill, huh?" ; D

 

[frankthedm]

Appraise If NPCs try rip players off on gems and art object, the DM gets viewed as the bad guy.

Craft If the magic item creation rules required the item to be crafted while being enchanted, having allies with this skill would be helpful.

Decipher Script A 1st level spell kills this one dead.

Disguise Magic beats this one at 1st level

Escape Artist The skill is in a race against one’s own BAB

Forgery Could have it’s uses, but most games don’t have the situations where it could.

Handle Animal Really good if maxed out and the party is willing to burn time.

Intimidate Combat used take too long and making folks in town hostileto you and your friends is asking to be screwed by the DM.

Profession A few GP in downtime, big deal.

Speak Language Too many things speak common

Survival Magic beats this way too fast

Use Rope Grappling hooks and tying up prisoners. Meh.

 

[lukelightning]

In my playgroup, the players will hang the rogue themselves if they find out he murdered a legitimate guard.

So knock 'em out, James Bond style. Or what if it's some evil guard in some Evil Temple of Evilness?

 

[Kheti sa-Menik]

So, I keep trying to think of ways to encourage/reward players who invest ranks in skills that seem like they'd be pretty handy for an adventurer to have. Climb and swim, for instance, seem like essential skills for a dungeoneer. But in practice, the lofty precepts of good dungeon design dictates that an adventure not require a certain skill for characters to progress. <snip>

I wholly disagree with this premise. If there are any kind of "precepts of good dungeon design," they are that the dungeon should test the characters - materially, physically, and mentally with obstacles big and small, regardless of the makeup of the party.

So there should be challenging cliffs to climb and rivers/lakes to swim.
If the PCs don't have one amongst them who has spent points in swim or climb, then they aren't really fit to be adventurers. If the characters come to a small lake they have to swim across, well, calm water is fairly easy to swim across, though the fighter types may have to remove their heavy armor to make it across; same with a wall that needs to be scaled.

You don't have to coddle the PCs and design a dungeon that plays on their strengths and avoids their weaknesses. It's about the PCs overcoming their weaknesses by leveraging their strengths, their skills, using teamwork and cunning.

 

[lukelightning]

Handle Animal Really good if maxed out and the party is willing to burn time.

C'mon guys, another month and I can train this deinonychus as a warbeast! Never mind that i't a DC 20 check so I will probably fail....

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I gotta wonder why Forgery is gettin so many votes...does it really seem like it would be more handy than it actually is?

In my game Forgery gets used a lot. One of the PCs even has Profession (Forger). But then, the adventuring group is an agency, not a dungeoneering party.

Use Rope... Aside from getting enough ranks in it for the synergy bonus to Climb I have never seen it get used. The party carries around manacles and the like for dealing with prisoners.

Nearly every other skill has seen use. Balance comes in to play because I am fond of battles on roof tops. Profession comes into play mostly between adventures, but Profession (Merchant) is used regularly. Decipher Script is useful for both Orgoth writings and for making out the miserable handwriting on some of the player handouts. (Just because the fellow is a villain does not mean that he has neat handwriting. And I have had one or two who use cross writing). I also allow it to be used in breaking cyphers.

Then Again, I am fond of skill heavy games.

The Auld Grump

 

[lukelightning]

The problem with a lot of skills is that magic is far more effective, even at low levels. Climb? Spider climb is better. Swim? Water breathing or water walk instead. Disguise skill?Never mind, disguise self is better (though combined they rock!). Diplomacy? Why bother when you have a sudden maximized meteor swarm?

While you probably don't prepare all these spells, it's simple enought to have them on scrolls for when you need 'em.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Handle Animal Really good if maxed out and the party is willing to burn time.

But you've got to have time. Don't people just buy trained animals? I hardly ever see regular animals (eg not animal companions) because they're too fragile, and if you buy a horse, it's assumed someone taught it how to carry a rider. If you buy a warhorse, it's assume it's trained in war (eg not panic too much, how to attack, etc).

Intimidate Combat used take too long and making folks in town hostileto you and your friends is asking to be screwed by the DM.

And, of course, making the GM angry because you scared away the NPCs he was hoping to fight in this really cool scenario he designed isn't a great thing. In fact, it may anger the other players too.

Profession A few GP in downtime, big deal.

It's useful in a few situations. I don't care about the $, it's navigating a riverboat without having to rely on crew that's kind of neat. I thought you could use the skill to answer questions about a profession and do stuff. It's not like in Modern, where there's no Profession subskills and the sole purpose is to make money (and it's overpowered at that).

To make it useful though, GMs have to design adventures to take that into account, and that's not easy. Pre-written adventures will probably ignore it, or at least the author won't know what specific Profession skills your PCs have taken.

 

[DestroyYouAlot]

I'd say "define adventure". Do you need one for solving a murder case? Tackling gangs? How are they going to know you're going into that old dungeon over there - is there a guard standing there? "Oh, I'm off saving the world, why do I need a special piece of paper for this? "I just don't see how this could be enforced.

Well, in the setting, it's pretty much a license to congregate in groups of four or more with weapons, or to go about with weapons that aren't peace-bonded. It pretty much equates to a carry permit. It's enforceable by imprisonment or exile, but (as the nation's badly in need of adventurers, where the year before the weren't) I pretty much just use it as an excuse for the Purple Dragons (local soldiery) to harrass the PCs unless they have one. (Or forge one.)

It might be different in D20 Modern, but the skill doesn't actually detect lies. It detects trustworthiness. But yes, I find the skill very useful.

Eh, detect BS, same difference. As an opposed check to Bluff, it's the other side of the coin.