Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MNblockhead" data-source="post: 7147898" data-attributes="member: 6796661">Not sure I understand what you mean by "impact on the campaign."  If you mean does it add to the enjoyment of the game and/or is it meaningful in enough game sessions to make it worth having, then yes. For example, a character with the Entertainer background, or a Bard, can use performance to negotiate free lodging, make some additional coin, and win community support. These are very useful and can make such a character an extremely useful member of a party in Tier One play. Other examples: Creating distractions.  A good performance will captivate an audience, making them less likely to notice other party members sneaking into a building, or the rogue picking their pockets, etc. Winning over the crowd to help bring peer pressure to bear when trying to persuade, deceive, or intimidate. Performance can enhance or be a great backup if you are trying to persuade or deceive someone in front of an audience. Let's say you need to talk your way past a guard and there are important people nearby who can overhear you. Maybe you roll crap on your persuasion or deception but your performance roll is so good that the "crowd" exerts pressure on the guard.  Maybe a high performance roll will give you advantage on your persuade/perception/intimidation roll. Downtime Activity — you performance to help sow rumors or change community opinions and stereotypesThe deranged Sultan who has taken you prisoner requires you to tell a story every day. If it bores him, he kills you. You need to keep him entertained until you can be saved or find your own escape.The Devil Went Down to Georgia: You are "Jonny" the renowned bard. You are challenged to a musical duel — if you win, you get a highly powerful music relic; if not, the devil gets your soul.I still find it useful to allow someone to build a character proficient in feats of strength. Holding a door closed, bending jail-cell bars, lifting very heavy objects, pushing heavy items, pulling heavy items. Yes, you can make a strength check, but you can also say that through a hard life or through disciplined conditioning, you have something more than just your strength. You have technique. You know how to avoid injuring yourself. So you get to add your proficiency bonus. Similarly, someone may be naturally agile, but you should be able to build a character where you can add your proficiency bonus to feats of dexterity. This is all athletics and acrobatics are for. If you take them away, how to you distinguish the conditioned strongman and experience circus performer from just a naturally strong or dexterous person? Sure, but if you want to bring in your proficiency bonus, you still need proficiency in thieves tools for these. In my game, "land vehicle" proficiency is a thing and for something like a chariot, I may consider it a "tool" that you can gain proficiency in. Animal handling may come into play here as well. For complex activity like chariot racing, the DM just has to make a judgement call. I try to find ways for character to bring in their proficiency bonuses if they make a good argument for it. I like that 5e does this with a small number of "skills".  I think the balance is good. That's fine. You can have no proficiency in acrobatics and still try to walk a tightrope. If your dexterity is high enough, you may have a high likelihood of succeeding. Again, any character can try to do anything covered by any skill will just a raw ability check roll. Maybe what would work better for you would be to scrap the proficiency mechanic altogether. Or, keep the proficiency mechanic, but remove skills and just leave it to DM discretion on a case by case basis based on character background whether they can add their proficiency bonus to an ability check. I think that would be confusing to new players and unsatisfying to most players. I'm happy with the skills as is and they have not been an issue for my players.</blockquote>

Verification