NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5711418" data-attributes="member: 82106">I think the issue is really a presentational issue, and in defense of the 4e devs one that emerged out of the design in a rather non-obvious way.The 4e skills really aren't exactly 'skill' in the way that most people mean that term. They don't really represent 'talent at doing something' at all, except indirectly. What they DO measure is a character's propensity to do certain things. If a character has a propensity to lie then the player acquires a good Bluff bonus to represent that. This is an 'M.O.' that character uses. It isn't that he's specifically good at fabrications or verbal misdirection, or physical misdirection, etc. It is that he deceives, he is deceptive. It is a part of his nature, and maybe he typically does it in certain ways that suite his other resources, so perhaps he typically tells tall tales, or maybe he distracts people with idiotic blather, or sings songs that manipulate them or whatever (and he probably can fall back on a couple of techniques and can probably extemporize well using other techniques, given his predilections).With a physical skill like Athletics you have a character that takes on physically challenging tasks, that's his predilection. With a skill like History he likes to use information to figure out problems. With Stealth he's sneaky, and with Thievery he gets into things. Again, he may use various techniques and resources and may have typical ways that he uses these predilections, but it is mostly about who he is, not so much about what he knows or specific knowledge that he has. The character may know or understand any number of things outside what the 4e skills list, they are really only very loosely any kind of system for gaging knowledge or acquired talent. The assumption really is that if a character is typically approaching problems in a given way then he's going to be familiar with that type of problem, and have general understanding and techniques he can use to apply to it. Maybe a character hasn't ever swum before, but he takes on physical challenges in a deft way and he's clearly motivated, so it doesn't really matter that much. You can then use your other character development resources to provide specifics. The character was a blacksmith, so he goes at things with perseverance and dogged determination because that works for him. He also knows how to apply that quite effectively to a specific type of work and has the knowledge that goes along with that. His 'M.O.' is being doggedly determined, not "I pound everything into a sword with my hammer and anvil" so 'blacksmithing' isn't a thing that is in the same category as Endurance. They both exist though.I don't think the real implications of the short skill list were clear to the people who wrote it. They wouldn't have used the term 'skill' if it were, and they might have created a bit different list as well. The list is a bit eclectic actually, given how it should really be used. They also obviously didn't present this concept in any way to the readers. It has simply become more and more clear to me in using the system. Skills are actually a bit more like 'alignment' in a sense than they are like 'weapon proficiency' or something. A mechanical measurement of character personality more than anything else. Thought of in that way, the 4e skill system is really quite effective because it lets me think about things in terms of intermediate goals. I want to deceive the King because I'm good at deception and I can plot out a way that deception can achieve my ends. So intermediate goal is deception, my M.O. and maybe I achieve it by baking him a treat that looks like it came from his mistress and slipping it to him. It isn't about baking the treat. It is about the PLAN and my deceptive nature lets me carry it out. My Bluff check is more about how deceptive of a guy I am and have I thus got all the angles right to make a good deception come off well. Now, if my character's background is 'baker' then well, clearly I make a good treat, but it hardly even matters because if the DM doesn't supply me with the fixings for that plan, then I'll just have to come up with another, buy you can be sure it will be deceptive too!</blockquote>

Verification