Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6575806" data-attributes="member: 82106">I just don't see where a skill fits into it. Reasoning about things is INT. Now, we can argue that INT itself is a 'skill' that can be taught, and I wouldn't disagree that there are certainly ways to increase your reasoning ability. 4e specifically (and 5e for that matter) have ability score increases to reflect that sort of development. We could of course also think about all the various forms of 'skill' that 4e doesn't specifically model, again 5e is similar. No provision exists for a character to learn 'accounting' for instance, although its certainly feasible to consider it to be part of a background element and 4e would allow for you to get a bonus to say an INT check to work out some accounting problems as in this example. 5e has some other different options, but also has backgrounds which could play a part too.I still just don't know why I would, as a 5e GM, ever call for an Investigation roll, unless the situation was highly abstracted such that the whole investigation was maybe a skill used in a much larger SC or something (but then SCs don't exist in 5e...). In fact this is another reason why 4e has no reason for Investigation, you can simply run an SC with INT and Perception checks, etc as required to reach the conclusion. I just don't see where this sort of 'passive utilization' pattern fits well at all into a skill system.</blockquote>