I recognize that DnD is fantasy extracted from reality. I’m happy you play multiple instruments even if it leaves me confused why you you don’t see the need to keep the mechanical differences between instruments but that is my problem not yours - no need to try to explain- I just can’t see having only one skill: play instrument, I could maybe accept grouping them. - horns, percussion, woodwinds, strings with bows, strings without bows, or something similar but to me that’s like lumping French, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese into a single “ Romance languages” group and saying if you can speak one then you can speak all of them.
Well there is an actual mechanical difference betweem languages. Different languages determine determines who you can and cant communicate with just like in real life. Language barriers if people dont speak the same language, or means to communicate without others understanding if only a couple of you know one of the languages.
There isnt one for instruments. All of them provide you the same advantage/proficiency in the same action.
I would argue that they do have mechanical differences especially in terms sounds they produce and how those sounds would interact with voice and gestures in the casting of magic. You don’t generate the same ?emotion? From a flute as from a trumpet as from a violin even when playing the same note. Those differences could well have major impacts when casting spells ( you generally don’t think of horns helping someone go to sleep but a violin or flute might, etc.)
I would argue that they do have mechanical differences especially in terms sounds they produce and how those sounds would interact with voice and gestures in the casting of magic. You don’t generate the same ?emotion? From a flute as from a trumpet as from a violin even when playing the same note. Those differences could well have major impacts when casting spells ( you generally don’t think of horns helping someone go to sleep but a violin or flute might, etc.)
Except there isn't. By the rules any instrument can cast any spell as a bard. Also as a horn/brass player myself, you can play soft and relaxing with a horn. There isn't a mechanical difference between instruments in DnD.
I really kinda hate that everybody assumes Acrobatics and Athletics are interchangeable. They're very different skills with very different functions. Yes, you can use different base stats with them, but that doesn't mean they're not different skills. The game is worse when everybody assumes Acro isn just the Dexy version of Athletics and lets people get away with dumb shit because they want to dump Strength without paying for it.
Then again, one could argue that swimming, alpinism, running a marathon, and powerlifting are very different skills. Yet here they are, all within athletics. Even more, both athletics and acrobatics stuff, excluding powerlifting, fall under "light athletics" category IRL. Frankly, just making checks with athletics+adequate attribute for the task is enough to me. Strength if you need to climb a tough rock, dex if you need to keep your balance, and con if you need to run a marathon or swim across a wide river.
I thought of a different stat system, where a single "physique" main attribute would describe your character's general fitness, and things like strength (powerlifting), athletics (movement), toughness (resist external damage), and health (resist internal damage) could be treated like skill proficiencies. But this is idea for a whole different edition.
I recognize that DnD is fantasy extracted from reality. I’m happy you play multiple instruments even if it leaves me confused why you you don’t see the need to keep the mechanical differences between instruments but that is my problem not yours - no need to try to explain- I just can’t see having only one skill: play instrument, I could maybe accept grouping them. - horns, percussion, woodwinds, strings with bows, strings without bows, or something similar but to me that’s like lumping French, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese into a single “ Romance languages” group and saying if you can speak one then you can speak all of them.
Then again, there is some general stuff that unites close skills. When an accomplished swordsman take the spear for the first time, he's still a much better fighter than an newbie with a spear, because he's going to know a lot about how footwork, balance, and other things work.
Ok so to bring it back to the glossary a bit. I am not entirely opposed to Athletics and Acrobatics being different skills, but I want more DIFFERENT uses for each of them. The fact that a lot of the stuff that the rules bring up for them is "Your character can use Athletics or acrobatics to x" really ends up making the skills not feel distinct enough. The biggest issue for me in the rules glossary is the Climb and the Swim Rules.
Climb and Swim: You can use your Speed to climb or swim. Some creatures also have a Climb Speed or a Swim Speed. If you use your Speed to climb or swim, each foot of movement costs 1 extra foot. For example, if you swim or climb 5 feet, you must spend 10 feet of movement to do so with your Speed. If you’re swimming or climbing through Difficult Terrain, that 5 feet of movement costs 15 feet!
This means there is NO SKILL CHECK for climbing or swimming in DIFFICULT TERRAIN even if you do not have a climb or swim speed. This is aweful. Climbing or swimming normally not needing a check is fine for me. You are heroic adventurers sure you know how to climb normal stuff and swim in calm waters why not. But as soon as it becomes difficult terrain, rushing water, high winds or far spread hand holds while climbing and you DON'T have a climb or swim speed you better bet I would want to make you roll athletics for swimming and acrobatics for climbing (Yes I know that second one just upset a lot of people I will explain that one in a bit) and if you succeeded THEN you can move using 3 feet of movement for 1 foot.
So why I use Acrobatics for climbing. Remember again Climbing normally is not a check, climbing is only a check for me if you are climbing in difficult terrain. What is difficult terrain for climbing. Far away hand holds that you have to swing yourself too, winds that you have to keep your balance under so that you aren't blown from the cliff. Acrobatics is used to lower the damage from a fall. Why? because if you are climbing a lot you are going to need to know how to fall. Think of each of the things that EXPERT climbers do to make it up something all the tricks that they have, think of our "urban climbers" with parkour. They are doing all the things that we think of as acrobatics, swinging themselves, contorting their bodies, keeping their balance. Climbing would still be strength, but I use acrobatics.
To me this is just one more way to codify a difference between them. Finally for the track and field argument. Look at the Olympic track and field events. Climbing is not a competition in those events, but I promise you it is a premier skill for acrobats at cirque du sole and Barnum and bailey circus.
As far as Jumping goes, I understand it being both. Athletes jump, and so do acrobats. I actually think it needs to be either an Action or at the very least a BONUS action. The problem with the current jumping rules is you need to use some movement to get a running start AND still have enough movement to make it over the gap. This is particularly problematic with things like the Jump spell. Great you made it so the barbarian with 15 strength can jump triple the normal distance.... except he can't because it uses his movement speed and he only has 20 feet of movement left. It is just all around very awkward. By having it be an action you can decouple it from movement and make it a skill check. By making it an action you actually open up more possibilities later. Like maybe monk's step of the wind will now be you can use your bonus action to take the dash, disengage or JUMP action as a bonus action doubling your jumping distance. This would be awesome. maybe a feat that lets you jump as a bonus action and do something else. Heck lets roll it into Athlete, instead of gaining advantage on your jump check allow them to jump as a bonus action, or better yet WHY NOT BOTH.
Point is athletics and acrobatics being separate isn't a problem if you actually codify them being different and give them distinct uses and differences between them.
There is a distinct difference between persuasion and deception. Heck for me there is even enough of a difference between intimidation and persuasion because of how social attitudes work. For me the search and study actions do more than enough to codify the difference between each of the mental skills. But for most things that let you use athletics, they also let you use acrobatics and vice versa. Either combining them into one, or making acrobatics for climbing and contorting and athletics for swimming, lifting and throwing would go a long way to fixing that, in my opinion.
Edit: to move even further back to the rules glossary. I also hate the new inspiration rules. It feels very punishing to rogues and halflings and it makes a 1 better than a 2. In both cases, a 1 or a 2, you are likely going to fail, but now a 1 gives you a form of super advantage on a later check, so if you are going to fail anyway you are HOPING for a nat 1. Heck a 1 is now better than a 9 if there wasn't degrees of failure and a 9 would still fail. This doesn't feel good.
This said I ALSO didn't like it on a nat 20 because of the snow ball effect. Inspiration was rarely used as it was, and games were still fine without it. I am perfectly fine having it be a feat/ human/ Gm discretion thing only. Heck I could see it being "GM can decide to give inspiration for great role play, alternatively if a nat 1 or a nat 20 is rolled during a moment the GM determines is critical he can also award inspiration". It will probably still get forgotten, but any time the player rolls a nat 1 or 20 they can ask "Do I get inspiration from that" like people do with the wild magic tables to at least remind the DM and the other players that inspiration exists.
An important nuance from another thread that not everyone seems to have read the same way:
Spellcasting (Bard and Ranger): "Whenever you finish a Long Rest, you can practice your bardic arts and replace any Spellyou have prepared for this Class with another Arcane Spell of the same level, abiding by the school restriction above". The nuance here is that the current wording of spellcasting feature for classes that prepare spells says, "you can change your list of prepared spells when you finish a long rest". I believe it means that bard and ranger can switch only one spell on a long rest, which makes sense for classes that used to have fixed lists of spells learned, which they could only change - one spell at a time - on a levelup. Now they can do it (change one spell) on each long rest instead. I suppose that druid, cleric, and wizard will still have the benefit of changing their entire list of prepared spells on a long rest, while warlocks and sorcerers will probably be able to change only one.
Gonna add this to the first post for the newcomers.
An important nuance from another thread that not everyone seems to have read the same way:
Spellcasting (Bard and Ranger): "Whenever you finish a Long Rest, you can practice your bardic arts and replace any Spellyou have prepared for this Class with another Arcane Spell of the same level, abiding by the school restriction above". The nuance here is that the current wording of spellcasting feature for classes that prepare spells says, "you can change your list of prepared spells when you finish a long rest". I believe it means that bard and ranger can switch only one spell on a long rest, which makes sense for classes that used to have fixed lists of spells learned, which they could only change - one spell at a time - on a levelup. Now they can do it (change one spell) on each long rest instead. I suppose that druid, cleric, and wizard will still have the benefit of changing their entire list of prepared spells on a long rest, while warlocks and sorcerers will probably be able to change only one.
Gonna add this to the first post for the newcomers.
The any in the highlighted section indicates the plural as did the video with Crawford.
Spell casting (rangers and bards) - As Bran said , but also - had they wanted it to be a single spell they would not have left any doubt “ you may change any one spell on a long rest”. The fact that they didn’t shows that the any is referring to all the spells prepared.
Jump - athletics vs acrobatics To me differences in when to use each is fairly clear. If you are trying to get across a gap and where you land doesn’t matter (pit trap in a cleare flat hall) you use athletics, especially if your at near your max jump distance. On the other hand if you have to jump to a specific spot ( land on the foot wide ledge or slide down the cliff) you use acrobatics. swimming should be athletics all the way. Climbing, like jumping is both since you need both to climb effectively and it’s going to be a DM call which in each different scenario - which is why it’s listed as both.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Well there is an actual mechanical difference betweem languages. Different languages determine determines who you can and cant communicate with just like in real life. Language barriers if people dont speak the same language, or means to communicate without others understanding if only a couple of you know one of the languages.
There isnt one for instruments. All of them provide you the same advantage/proficiency in the same action.
I would argue that they do have mechanical differences especially in terms sounds they produce and how those sounds would interact with voice and gestures in the casting of magic. You don’t generate the same ?emotion? From a flute as from a trumpet as from a violin even when playing the same note. Those differences could well have major impacts when casting spells ( you generally don’t think of horns helping someone go to sleep but a violin or flute might, etc.)
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Except there isn't. By the rules any instrument can cast any spell as a bard. Also as a horn/brass player myself, you can play soft and relaxing with a horn. There isn't a mechanical difference between instruments in DnD.
Then again, one could argue that swimming, alpinism, running a marathon, and powerlifting are very different skills. Yet here they are, all within athletics. Even more, both athletics and acrobatics stuff, excluding powerlifting, fall under "light athletics" category IRL. Frankly, just making checks with athletics+adequate attribute for the task is enough to me. Strength if you need to climb a tough rock, dex if you need to keep your balance, and con if you need to run a marathon or swim across a wide river.
I thought of a different stat system, where a single "physique" main attribute would describe your character's general fitness, and things like strength (powerlifting), athletics (movement), toughness (resist external damage), and health (resist internal damage) could be treated like skill proficiencies. But this is idea for a whole different edition.
Then again, there is some general stuff that unites close skills. When an accomplished swordsman take the spear for the first time, he's still a much better fighter than an newbie with a spear, because he's going to know a lot about how footwork, balance, and other things work.
Ok so to bring it back to the glossary a bit. I am not entirely opposed to Athletics and Acrobatics being different skills, but I want more DIFFERENT uses for each of them. The fact that a lot of the stuff that the rules bring up for them is "Your character can use Athletics or acrobatics to x" really ends up making the skills not feel distinct enough. The biggest issue for me in the rules glossary is the Climb and the Swim Rules.
Climb and Swim:
You can use your Speed to climb or swim. Some creatures also have a Climb Speed or a Swim Speed. If you use your Speed to climb or swim, each foot of movement costs 1 extra foot. For example, if you swim or climb 5 feet, you must spend 10 feet of movement to do so with your Speed. If you’re swimming or climbing through Difficult Terrain, that 5 feet of movement costs 15 feet!
This means there is NO SKILL CHECK for climbing or swimming in DIFFICULT TERRAIN even if you do not have a climb or swim speed. This is aweful. Climbing or swimming normally not needing a check is fine for me. You are heroic adventurers sure you know how to climb normal stuff and swim in calm waters why not. But as soon as it becomes difficult terrain, rushing water, high winds or far spread hand holds while climbing and you DON'T have a climb or swim speed you better bet I would want to make you roll athletics for swimming and acrobatics for climbing (Yes I know that second one just upset a lot of people I will explain that one in a bit) and if you succeeded THEN you can move using 3 feet of movement for 1 foot.
So why I use Acrobatics for climbing. Remember again Climbing normally is not a check, climbing is only a check for me if you are climbing in difficult terrain. What is difficult terrain for climbing. Far away hand holds that you have to swing yourself too, winds that you have to keep your balance under so that you aren't blown from the cliff. Acrobatics is used to lower the damage from a fall. Why? because if you are climbing a lot you are going to need to know how to fall. Think of each of the things that EXPERT climbers do to make it up something all the tricks that they have, think of our "urban climbers" with parkour. They are doing all the things that we think of as acrobatics, swinging themselves, contorting their bodies, keeping their balance. Climbing would still be strength, but I use acrobatics.
To me this is just one more way to codify a difference between them. Finally for the track and field argument. Look at the Olympic track and field events. Climbing is not a competition in those events, but I promise you it is a premier skill for acrobats at cirque du sole and Barnum and bailey circus.
As far as Jumping goes, I understand it being both. Athletes jump, and so do acrobats. I actually think it needs to be either an Action or at the very least a BONUS action. The problem with the current jumping rules is you need to use some movement to get a running start AND still have enough movement to make it over the gap. This is particularly problematic with things like the Jump spell. Great you made it so the barbarian with 15 strength can jump triple the normal distance.... except he can't because it uses his movement speed and he only has 20 feet of movement left. It is just all around very awkward. By having it be an action you can decouple it from movement and make it a skill check. By making it an action you actually open up more possibilities later. Like maybe monk's step of the wind will now be you can use your bonus action to take the dash, disengage or JUMP action as a bonus action doubling your jumping distance. This would be awesome. maybe a feat that lets you jump as a bonus action and do something else. Heck lets roll it into Athlete, instead of gaining advantage on your jump check allow them to jump as a bonus action, or better yet WHY NOT BOTH.
Point is athletics and acrobatics being separate isn't a problem if you actually codify them being different and give them distinct uses and differences between them.
There is a distinct difference between persuasion and deception. Heck for me there is even enough of a difference between intimidation and persuasion because of how social attitudes work. For me the search and study actions do more than enough to codify the difference between each of the mental skills. But for most things that let you use athletics, they also let you use acrobatics and vice versa. Either combining them into one, or making acrobatics for climbing and contorting and athletics for swimming, lifting and throwing would go a long way to fixing that, in my opinion.
Edit: to move even further back to the rules glossary. I also hate the new inspiration rules. It feels very punishing to rogues and halflings and it makes a 1 better than a 2. In both cases, a 1 or a 2, you are likely going to fail, but now a 1 gives you a form of super advantage on a later check, so if you are going to fail anyway you are HOPING for a nat 1. Heck a 1 is now better than a 9 if there wasn't degrees of failure and a 9 would still fail. This doesn't feel good.
This said I ALSO didn't like it on a nat 20 because of the snow ball effect. Inspiration was rarely used as it was, and games were still fine without it. I am perfectly fine having it be a feat/ human/ Gm discretion thing only. Heck I could see it being "GM can decide to give inspiration for great role play, alternatively if a nat 1 or a nat 20 is rolled during a moment the GM determines is critical he can also award inspiration". It will probably still get forgotten, but any time the player rolls a nat 1 or 20 they can ask "Do I get inspiration from that" like people do with the wild magic tables to at least remind the DM and the other players that inspiration exists.
Small thing nobody mentioned yet in the glossary:
DASH [ACTION]
Taking the Dash Action allows you to make a
bonus Move during the current turn.
So Dash lets you move now, instead of increasing your movement speed.
Small change but might have further consequences. Intersting.
It might be there to interact with the change to using different movement types.
An important nuance from another thread that not everyone seems to have read the same way:
Gonna add this to the first post for the newcomers.
The any in the highlighted section indicates the plural as did the video with Crawford.
Spell casting (rangers and bards) - As Bran said , but also - had they wanted it to be a single spell they would not have left any doubt “ you may change any one spell on a long rest”. The fact that they didn’t shows that the any is referring to all the spells prepared.
Jump - athletics vs acrobatics To me differences in when to use each is fairly clear. If you are trying to get across a gap and where you land doesn’t matter (pit trap in a cleare flat hall) you use athletics, especially if your at near your max jump distance. On the other hand if you have to jump to a specific spot ( land on the foot wide ledge or slide down the cliff) you use acrobatics.
swimming should be athletics all the way. Climbing, like jumping is both since you need both to climb effectively and it’s going to be a DM call which in each different scenario - which is why it’s listed as both.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.