Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 1909039" data-attributes="member: 7240">Fair enough. But given how small the point of intersection is between what our characters know and what we know, how best do we realistically anticipate their actions? If we assume that our characters are basically like humans in present-day society, we can infer that the main things that affect their decision making are going to be past experience and training, not latent skill. Of course, if there existed a "Battle Tactics" skill, we would obviously utilize it. But lacking such a skill, we can take one of two positions on this issue:(A) D&D does not quanitfy past experiences and training in areas not represented by skill ranks(B) as you suggest, class, level and experience points are the ways that D&D quantifies past experiences and training in areas not represented by skill ranks Even if we accepted mental attributes as expressing knowledge of battle tactics, I see no evidence that Intelligence would be the most appropriate attribute to utilize. Pack animals, who know hunt in groups, are typically represented in the rules as having Intelligence scores of 1 or 2 and Wisdom scores of 10-16. Therefore, based on my reading of the rules, if one were to take the dubious step of correlating tactical competence with a mental attribute, Wisdom would obviously be a better choice than Intelligence.However, I am more inclined to go with option A. I see a deliberateness to the decision not to represent any cognitive skills in the skills list. It seems to me more than a simple coincidence that skills that involve pure cognition and analysis are consistently absent from this listing. It suggest to me that such things should be employed by players unmediated by the game system.</blockquote>

Verification