Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kobold Stew" data-source="post: 6281087" data-attributes="member: 23484">The current rules on tool proficiencies are a problem, and it's one you and I discussed when the pack first came out (<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?342268-New-D-amp-D-Next-Playtest-package-is-up-(19-9-2013)-merged-threads/page31&p=6188277&viewfull=1#post6188277" target="_blank">me</a>, <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?342268-New-D-amp-D-Next-Playtest-package-is-up-(19-9-2013)-merged-threads/page31&p=6188277&viewfull=1#post6188277" target="_blank">you</a>, <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?342268-New-D-amp-D-Next-Playtest-package-is-up-(19-9-2013)-merged-threads/page32&p=6188382&viewfull=1#post6188382" target="_blank">me</a>). Since then, play has confirmed most of these problems. Tools attempt to do too much: granting abilities (e.g. herbalism, riding, thieves' tools), giving flavour without clear implementation (e.g. musical instruments, gaming kits), giving bonuses to ability checks already covered with skills (e.g. disguise, instruments probably), and duplicate the effect of magical implements, which are not labelled tools (<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?342268-New-D-amp-D-Next-Playtest-package-is-up-(19-9-2013)-merged-threads/page15&p=6186011&viewfull=1#post6186011" target="_blank">leading to other inconsistencies</a>). I hope there will be changes: I really like the ideas behind tools and skills as they are using them, but the last test pack introduced too many bonuses, too many die roll adjustments. This leads to three specific problems:1. it's too clumsy -- a lot of advantage flies around, removing the ability to enhance a roll through teamwork, advantageous circumstances, etc.2. it's too common -- characters have too many proficiencies, so that there is very little sense of niche specialization, or even difficult choices in character creation.3. some rules on implementation are missing.I do expect changes, but I do not expect a return to the more streamlined implementation of tools, which is what I'd prefer.</blockquote>

Verification