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

[Wolv0rine]

So Decypher Script isn't worth having as a skill because Comprehend Languages can get the job done. Does that mean any armor less than chainmail isn't worth having on the equipment list because Shield and/or Armor gets the job done? Why have cold weather clothes when there's Endure Elements? So many weapons rendered moot by Magic Missile, Chill Touch, and others?

Maybe, just maybe, it's because not every character is a wizard or sorcerer. If you weigh everything against what spells exist, not much has a point.

 

[Tessarael]

Disguise Magic beats this one at 1st level

Not in my experience and I am playing a character that is a high level Spymaster. The Disguise Self, Alter Self, etc. spells give +10 to Diguise - that's a nice bonus, but on its own is not enough for a disguise to hold up for long. Keep in mind the disguise penalties: -2 for difference race, -2 for different gender, and -2 for different age. The viewer's Spot check also gets bonuses to see through your disguise if they are familiar with who you're trying to disguise youself as, ranging from +4 if they recognise them on sight to +10 if they are intimate with them.

So even versus someone unskilled in Spot, you probably want a Disguise score around 30 to pull off disguising yourself as someone else. +10 bonus from Disguise Self helps, say you roll a 10 on averagem you still want say 6 ranks in Disguise even if you have Charisma 18. Versus opponents with higher Spot score, you want a disguise score in the 40+ range.

Having a character that good at disguise is very helpful. We killed a Drow, and then sent my character in as a replacement to scout around, and managed to figure out the layout (including guards) of about 30% of their fortress without combat or the disguise being discovered. With that knowledge, we then captured another Drow and using dominate found out the layout of the rest of their fortress.

Without diguise, we would not have known where there was a lone Drow to capture and dominate, nor how to ensure that the capture of that Drow did not alert the rest of the fortress (we put up Wall of Force etc. to block noise).

 

[Kelleris]

So Decypher Script isn't worth having as a skill because Comprehend Languages can get the job done. Does that mean any armor less than chainmail isn't worth having on the equipment list because Shield and/or Armor gets the job done? Why have cold weather clothes when there's Endure Elements? So many weapons rendered moot by Magic Missile, Chill Touch, and others?

Maybe, just maybe, it's because not every character is a wizard or sorcerer. If you weigh everything against what spells exist, not much has a point.

The difference is that everyone needs a good AC all the time, everyone in harsh weather needs the protection, and everyone needs to be able to deal out the beats in battle. And for many characters, mundane equipment is a much more efficient way to cover those universal bases than spells.

Decipher script, on the other hand, if you only use it for deciphering languages, requires only one person to be able to use comprehend languages, and it hardly ever needs to be a constant ability. In fact, most of the time you can afford to wait until the next day for the wizard to prep comprehend languages, so you don't even need to have the capability to possibly acquire the ability all the time. There's a huge difference there between Decipher Script and regular combat abilities or survival abilities that only help if everyone has them.

 

[pawsplay]

Listen - sounds like the equivilant of Spot (which is by FAR the most used skill in the games I'mn in and the game I run), but it comes up so much less. I had to ask a DM out of game to occasionally have sound clues in one campaign where I specifically took listen (when both Listen and Spot were class skills) just to be different.

My group actually uses Listen a lot, at -10, to wake up to the sounds of battle.

 

[Hussar]

My game uses Appraise all the time, but that's because we use the variant from the WOTC site where you can determine magical items by appraise. Our group doesn't have a wizzie, and no access to one either, so identify is impossible. Thus, appraise to the rescue.

 

[Feldspar]

Slight of Hand: Never ever see it in play. By changing the name, players of rogues seem to have forgotten this is what they Pick Pockets with and thus rogues rarely ever seem to be picking pockets, or anything else involved with the broadened skill.

Are you sure its the name change so much as the broadening of the class? Rogue does not equal Thief. Personally, I've yet to make a 3e Rogue who fit into the more cookie cutter mold of a 1e/2e Thief - I expect a lot of players would prefer not to play someone with a criminal background.

The one time I did put ranks in Sleight of Hand was for a rakish character who was a professional gambler - I figured he'd know and have some ability with the various ways to manipulate games to his advantage (also had high ranks in Bluff and Sense Motive). That said, I don't think I ever got a chance to use any of those skills

 

[Feldspar]

As a DM, I would never allow a character to bluff his way past one of my NPCs on a die-roll, he needs to come up with a good story! I, on the other hand, might be rolling to see how gullible the NPC is, if the quality of the story is not readily apparent.

But players and characters are different - should it matter how good of a story I can come up with if my character is smarter than me, more charismatic than me and a tremendously accomplished lier (+10 ranks in Bluff)? I could never think as quickly on my feet and dissemble with the ease that such a character could. If a player has allocated his characters resources to be good at something - why should you stand in their way just because the player is not good at that?

Lets contrast that with some barely literate half-orc barbarian with penalties in Cha, Int and Wis and no ranks in social skills, but is played by a slick, quick thinking player. Should that character be better at bluffing than the statted out faceman because his player comes up with better approaches?

To me, roleplaying isn't just talking in a funny accent - its making decisions based on the viewpoint, motivations, knowledge and background of your character. Its the decisions that should be roleplayed. After that decision is made, whether it was to fight or to lie through your teeth, its time for the d20's to fly and decide your fate.

I do understand that for many people, interacting in character is a large part of the fun. But I disagree when that becomes the statement that resolving the conflict with a d20 instead of talking in character isn't roleplaying.

What I recommend is making the opposed roll (not disclosing the result) *before* acting out the scene. Allow for a small range of circumstance bonus (maybe a limit of +/- 2 or maybe even up to +/- 5) depending on the quality the player brings. So if the player won the roll handily, you (the NPC) swallow everything they say no matter how implausible. If the NPC won handily, then everything they say, no matter how clever it might have been, somehow digs the hole for them a little deeper: "The head butler sent you just now, you say. That's funny, not half an hour ago he choked to death on a chicken bone and I helped carry his body out." If the rolls are close, within the range you've allowed for circumstance bonus, then acting out the scene gives an opportunity to change the outcome depending on slickness or clumsiness of the player's approach.

 

[Kwitchit]

It's OK (if your players are reasonably intelligent) to have a cliff that needs climbing even if only one party member has climb. That party member can climb it with a rope either in his teeth or tied around his waist, which the other party members can then use to climb the cliff. Also, it can be used to winch up heavy packs, armour, etc. to make the climb easier for encumbered characters.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Slight of Hand: Never ever see it in play. By changing the name, ... broadened (the) skill.

Are you sure its the name change so much as the broadening of the class?

Um...

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Um...

It makes sense to me. I hated the skill system for thieves in 2e. (I also hated the name "thief", but that's another story.) You had to be a good climber, and you couldn't max out a few skills, either. The skill list was so short that whether you wanted to or not, you ended up with %-age in Pick Pocket. (Oh yeah, the skill was a PitA to use, especially the rules for someone spotting your handiwork.)

I don't want to play a pick pocket. Most of the time, picking pockets is stupid. Kender have simply made the skill seem worse.

The 3.x rogue lets you avoid taking the skill, and most PC rogues I've seen avoid the skill because it's rarely useful and most uses of the skill require your character to be stupid.