Grouping Knowledge skills even further

[Spinner]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

As a reaction to the Knowledge (local) thread, I wanted to post a thought
I'd had a bit ago when contemplating the ostensibly "less useful" Knowledge
skills.

Some of these skills seem both complimentary to another knowledge skill and
a little narrow. Would the game benefit from a little more consolidation as
follows: ?

Group together:

1. Architecture/Engineering + Dungeoneering (with the common thread of
dealing with stone structures [both natural and artificial] as well as
building materials and cave denizens) -- without this compilation,
Architecture's a pretty narrow skill.

2. Geography + History + Local + Nobility and Royalty (call it Knowledge
(civilization), focussed on the civilized world, this covers local,
nobility/royalty, history and only those parts of geography that focus on
civilization; I would bring knowledge of giants and monstrous humanoids into
this skill and out of Nature since they form civilized societies in a way
that animals and fey do not)

3. Geography + Nature (focussing on only the "natural" parts of geography
and with giants/monstrous humanoids removed and perhaps low Int magical
beasts included...?)

4. Arcana (as is) -- perhaps with the removal of low Int magical beasts

5. Religion (as is)

6. Planes (as is)


Some of these lumpings represent very personal preferences (I like, for
example, the idea of low Int magical beasts being like other animals -- it
is a fantasy world after all, what would the people there know of the
difference between a Krenshar and an Elephant)?

But what do you think about the general idea?

Spinner

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

I have found that Knowledge Skills are only as important to a character
as the DM makes them in his cmapaign. If grouping some skills together
makes it easier and/or more aesthetically pleasing, I don't see it as a
game breaker. Use of such modified skills will show your players how
useful they are and could entice some skill ranks in them to round out
their characters.

Gerald Katz

 

[Spinner]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

>I have found that Knowledge Skills are only as important to a character
> as the DM makes them in his cmapaign. If grouping some skills together
> makes it easier and/or more aesthetically pleasing, I don't see it as a
> game breaker. Use of such modified skills will show your players how
> useful they are and could entice some skill ranks in them to round out
> their characters.
>
The design goal is to make it so that they are *not* DM-dependent. That is,
*every* Kn skill has concrete, book-defined uses (most significantly monster
IDing).

Spinner