Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why Don't Barbarians or Fighters Get Bonus Skills?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6084014" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>Yes, I mentioned this also, but... I know I'm going to say something that will make people object vehemently, but I really think that this overlapping should be discouraged (by DM and guidelines in books, not hard-discouraged by the rules) or at least it should be pointed out that having different PCs good at different things is <em>better</em> for the game dynamics.</p><p></p><p>Two PCs with good Diplomacy scores is going to cause more problems than benefits. The benefits are mechanical (two PCs able to try the same check normally means the party has better chances at winning it) but the problems are social i.e. for gameplay dynamics: you can easily get one player frustrated because he has invested in Diplomacy (or whatever skill) but another PC is even better and gets to use it all the time.</p><p></p><p>The problem is indeed a very high-level cultural problem with players, that most of the time "build" their characters in a vacuum, "optimizing" their PC without thinking about the rest of the party. This is very common in 3ed, and always leads to player thinking they absolutely need this and that or their PC will be too weak, because really they keep thinking as if their PC will have to be capable of defending against everything, as if they were playing <em>alone</em>. It's a general problem, more related to defensive capabilities (getting high AC, HP, immunities/resistances, defensive spells, action points/second winds mechanics, healing, defensive spells and magic items, Initiative, Listen & Spot...) but also affects skills. This tendency of players at approaching PC design as if they should handle anything without the need of the rest of the party, is what makes gamers demand more and more stuff on their character sheet at every edition and at every gaming table... Just notice what happened to healing in D&D! Since 4ed everybody now pretty much demand to be able to heal himself.</p><p></p><p>I still have a different view on the game, that a D&D adventure is played by the <em>party</em> of PCs, and that this is a very major point in playing a <em>role</em>play game, where everybody has a <em>role</em>, and is not "always equally good all the time at everything".</p><p></p><p>Thus going back to skills specifically, this means that IMHO it is a <em>good thing</em> if there is only one PC good at Diplomacy, only one good at Kn:Arcana, only one good at Search, only one good at Survival...</p><p></p><p>Then when you need Survival, there is <em>one</em> PC getting the spotlight, not two sharing it in a way that most of the time means one of them handles it and the other tries only if the first failed.</p><p></p><p>Some skills like Listen & Spot are useful on an individual basis, particularly to avoid being surprised. I have issues with these as well, but unfortunately I haven't found a way to deal with this problem, and it's not even related to multiple PCs having the skill <em>bonus</em> but more fundamentally related to all PCs being <em>able</em> at trying the check. As soon as the players figure out that ALL of them might be entitled to a Listen or Survival or Diplomacy etc check, they will all try (unles there's a penalty for failure)... when you have 4 people rolling, it becomes highly unlikely that all will fail, and this will require the DM to rethink all the DCs in order to reinstate reasonably interested chances for success/failure. Net result? Lots of rolling for basically the same outcome, and less emphasis on the character who actually invested in such skills.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 6084014, member: 1465"] Yes, I mentioned this also, but... I know I'm going to say something that will make people object vehemently, but I really think that this overlapping should be discouraged (by DM and guidelines in books, not hard-discouraged by the rules) or at least it should be pointed out that having different PCs good at different things is [I]better[/I] for the game dynamics. Two PCs with good Diplomacy scores is going to cause more problems than benefits. The benefits are mechanical (two PCs able to try the same check normally means the party has better chances at winning it) but the problems are social i.e. for gameplay dynamics: you can easily get one player frustrated because he has invested in Diplomacy (or whatever skill) but another PC is even better and gets to use it all the time. The problem is indeed a very high-level cultural problem with players, that most of the time "build" their characters in a vacuum, "optimizing" their PC without thinking about the rest of the party. This is very common in 3ed, and always leads to player thinking they absolutely need this and that or their PC will be too weak, because really they keep thinking as if their PC will have to be capable of defending against everything, as if they were playing [I]alone[/I]. It's a general problem, more related to defensive capabilities (getting high AC, HP, immunities/resistances, defensive spells, action points/second winds mechanics, healing, defensive spells and magic items, Initiative, Listen & Spot...) but also affects skills. This tendency of players at approaching PC design as if they should handle anything without the need of the rest of the party, is what makes gamers demand more and more stuff on their character sheet at every edition and at every gaming table... Just notice what happened to healing in D&D! Since 4ed everybody now pretty much demand to be able to heal himself. I still have a different view on the game, that a D&D adventure is played by the [I]party[/I] of PCs, and that this is a very major point in playing a [I]role[/I]play game, where everybody has a [I]role[/I], and is not "always equally good all the time at everything". Thus going back to skills specifically, this means that IMHO it is a [I]good thing[/I] if there is only one PC good at Diplomacy, only one good at Kn:Arcana, only one good at Search, only one good at Survival... Then when you need Survival, there is [I]one[/I] PC getting the spotlight, not two sharing it in a way that most of the time means one of them handles it and the other tries only if the first failed. Some skills like Listen & Spot are useful on an individual basis, particularly to avoid being surprised. I have issues with these as well, but unfortunately I haven't found a way to deal with this problem, and it's not even related to multiple PCs having the skill [I]bonus[/I] but more fundamentally related to all PCs being [I]able[/I] at trying the check. As soon as the players figure out that ALL of them might be entitled to a Listen or Survival or Diplomacy etc check, they will all try (unles there's a penalty for failure)... when you have 4 people rolling, it becomes highly unlikely that all will fail, and this will require the DM to rethink all the DCs in order to reinstate reasonably interested chances for success/failure. Net result? Lots of rolling for basically the same outcome, and less emphasis on the character who actually invested in such skills. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why Don't Barbarians or Fighters Get Bonus Skills?
Top