Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Laurefindel" data-source="post: 8625891" data-attributes="member: 67296">I don't disagree.The two skills are essentially &quot;book smarts&quot; vs &quot;streets smarts&quot; (or off-the-streets smarts?), i.e.: sage knowledge vs field experience. This is very true and relevant today because of our academic and scientific approach to subjects and general disassociation with agriculture, wilderness and animal husbandry but less so in a fantasy world IMO, even the more academically advanced ones such as Eberron. Obviously, I speak of Knowledge Nature in relation to plants and wildlife as described in D&amp;D, not nature as natural science including physics and chemistry and geology etc.So essentially we have a skill that says &quot;you know about nature stuff but can't do anything with it&quot; and another that says &quot;you know how to use nature but don't know anything about it&quot;. Throw in the animal handling skill (and to a lesser extent, land vehicle proficiency) and the herbalist kit proficiency for extra layers of what you're allowed to do with nature which IMO, is needlessly compartmentalized. A skill that says &quot;you know about wildlife and agriculture&quot; and another that says &quot;you know how to train and handle animals&quot; would be sufficient to represent the reality of D&amp;D characters and their experience.And since i consider survival as one of the goals of PCs (rather than a skill), i'd be tempted to fold survival into nature lore (or wilderness lore or knowledge: nature or whatever) rather than the other way around.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Laurefindel, post: 8625891, member: 67296"] I don't disagree. The two skills are essentially "book smarts" vs "streets smarts" (or off-the-streets smarts?), i.e.: sage knowledge vs field experience. This is very true and relevant today because of our academic and scientific approach to subjects and general disassociation with agriculture, wilderness and animal husbandry but less so in a fantasy world IMO, even the more academically advanced ones such as Eberron. Obviously, I speak of Knowledge Nature in relation to plants and wildlife as described in D&D, not nature as natural science including physics and chemistry and geology etc. So essentially we have a skill that says "you know about nature stuff but can't do anything with it" and another that says "you know how to use nature but don't know anything about it". Throw in the animal handling skill (and to a lesser extent, land vehicle proficiency) and the herbalist kit proficiency for extra layers of what you're allowed to do with nature which IMO, is needlessly compartmentalized. A skill that says "you know about wildlife and agriculture" and another that says "you know how to train and handle animals" would be sufficient to represent the reality of D&D characters and their experience. And since i consider survival as one of the goals of PCs (rather than a skill), i'd be tempted to fold survival into nature lore (or wilderness lore or knowledge: nature or whatever) rather than the other way around. [/QUOTE]

Verification