[4e - Character Creation/Skills] Background Skills

[Sonofaspectre]

I have found that some skills I really enjoyed having around are missing in 4e. Why, I don't really know, but I have a solution.

At character creation, every player may pick a background skill from the list below. They are trained in that skill, gaining a +5 to it and treating it just like a normal skill. Players are not skilled in background skills they have not been trained in.

Background Skills:
Art - Charisma - You have a creative and perspective mind, calling on the aesthetics of the world around you. You may pick a specific form of art you excel at, like Poetry, Scultping, Painting, or Whittling. If you do, you receive an extra +1 to your specific type of art, but are considered untrained in all other forms of art skills, being unable to make any such skill check.

Perform - Charisma - You are naturally good at performance arts, bringing the crowd to their feet or tears to their eyes. You may pick a specific form of performance you excel at, such as Singing, Dancing, playing a particular instrument, or Ventriloquism. If you do, you receive an extra +1 to your specific type of performance, but are considered untrained in all otehr forms of performance skills, being unable to make any such skill check.

Profession - Wisdom - You made a living for yourself in the manufacture and sales of some kind of everyday item. You must pick a specific profession in which you are trained, such as Cobbling, Shoemaking, Tanning, or Blacksmithing. You are not only able to go back to creating your old wares, but are also adept at pricing wares of the same type.

Scribe - Intelligence - You have always been working with books. Whether it be writing former texts, binding leather bound books together, keeping a library, or deciphering ancient texts, you excel at the written word and all forms of work with it. With a success Hard DC Scribe check, you can decipher texts for which you have no prior experience reading.

This should help fill some of the character gaps that the new 4e Skills are missing. It should also add a little more variance to skill challenges. Hopefully, you guys will like this addition to the rules. Tell me what you playgrounders think.

[Daracaex]

I think you, like many others, miss the point. By doing this, you're restricting character creation. What if the character was a farmer who also liked to paint? Why can't people just make characters instead of having to quantify everything by the rules? Just let them do anything they want related to their background and offer some circumstance bonuses for when their background would help with a skill that really matters.

[Rockbird]

But why, then, can i not create a swordmaster, who also casts spells and sneaks around like a shadow in the night? That is, rules-wise? Because the system's not set up so that you can do everything well. If you are to roleplay all non-combat stuff, doesn't that take away the point of having rules at all, namely to prevent:
"so my character's the worlds best smith, right..."
"He is not!"
"Is too!"
"My character stabs your character in the face. He is now blind. Try smithing now, b***h!"
"You did not!"
et cetera.
Rules are there to show what you character can do. Not having them for anything but combat is like saying that, say, Mordheim is an awesome rpg. Because you are of course supposed to roleplay all non-combat stuff...

[Sonofaspectre]

I think you, like many others, miss the point. By doing this, you're restricting character creation. What if the character was a farmer who also liked to paint? Why can't people just make characters instead of having to quantify everything by the rules? Just let them do anything they want related to their background and offer some circumstance bonuses for when their background would help with a skill that really matters.

I'm going to have to say that you, like many others, miss the point. Being a person before being a hero has been a staple of DnD since I started playing during 2nd Edition. Being the Dwarven Warrior who whittled for fun, or the humble farmer drawn into action. These are something that have been a part of Dungeons and Dragons from the beginning.

I love the new Skill Challenge system ... until I realized how limited it was. What if I wanted to have my dwarven ranger earn the trust of another by singing an old dwarven mining song? Well that would be a ... nothing. That's right, it isn't in any of the rules.

What about the Explorer type? An elf, catalogueing the ruins in Eberron. He comes across an ancient script and .... looks at it, because there aren't any rules on how to decipher what it says. You know what it says or you don't.

What about getting the people to revolt? The Dragonborn has to find a way to make the people join his cause, so he starts helping out shoeing horses and assisting the blacksmith. This means he can rolls a ... Endurance? No.

This is a way to be fair, help flesh out character backstories to something useful in game other than just "I was a farmer who liked to paint, but that doesn't matter except in this little paragraph on my character sheet, as it only gives me an insignificant +2 to a skill check and doesn't define who I am mechanically in any way."

[AKA_Bait]

I like it and I may very well use it.

Might I also suggest adding a Cooking skill and Games skill? The latter could function like the perform skill with one or two games being identified as particularly skillful (darts, chess, poker).

[Sonofaspectre]

I would think cooking would be a profession.

If you want to add games, go for it. These are just the four I'm setting up for my players. If you have other ideas, totally add them! :smallbiggrin:

[Daracaex]

But why, then, can i not create a swordmaster, who also casts spells and sneaks around like a shadow in the night? That is, rules-wise?
You can. Wait a couple months for the Swordmage and take that, then multiclass to Rogue. Or if you want that now, you can just make a fighter multiclass with wizard or warlock and train in the sneak skill.


Because the system's not set up so that you can do everything well.
Guess what? Life isn't set up so that you can do everything well. It's not possible for someone to master all aspects of life, or even just combat.


If you are to roleplay all non-combat stuff, doesn't that take away the point of having rules at all, namely to prevent:
"so my character's the worlds best smith, right..."
"He is not!"
"Is too!"
"My character stabs your character in the face. He is now blind. Try smithing now, b***h!"
"You did not!"
et cetera.

No, it doesn't. I do believe a craft skill should be added so that there are rules for creating certain objects, but that's all that's needed. You shouldn't need the system to tell you that your character was a good farmer. And ridiculous claims like your example should be avoided in backstories anyway unless the characters are high level.



Rules are there to show what you character can do. Not having them for anything but combat is like saying that, say, Mordheim is an awesome rpg. Because you are of course supposed to roleplay all non-combat stuff...
Skills with uses outside of combat:
Acrobatics
Arcana
Athletics
Bluff
Diplomacy
Dungeoneering
Endurance
Heal
History
Insight
Intimidate
Nature
Perception
Religion
Stealth
Streetwise
Thievery
Wait a second, that's the whole list![/sarcasm]



I'm going to have to say that you, like many others, miss the point. Being a person before being a hero has been a staple of DnD since I started playing during 2nd Edition. Being the Dwarven Warrior who whittled for fun, or the humble farmer drawn into action. These are something that have been a part of Dungeons and Dragons from the beginning.
And they still are. They've gone nowhere.


I love the new Skill Challenge system ... until I realized how limited it was. What if I wanted to have my dwarven ranger earn the trust of another by singing an old dwarven mining song? Well that would be a ... nothing. That's right, it isn't in any of the rules.
If the character's backstory says that he used to be a miner, then give him a few points circumstance bonus on the diplomacy check.


What about the Explorer type? An elf, cataloging the ruins in Eberron. He comes across an ancient script and .... looks at it, because there aren't any rules on how to decipher what it says. You know what it says or you don't.
Arcana check, if it is magical in nature. If not, why on earth is this elf cataloging ruins with ancient scripts if he doesn't know how to decipher the language there? Or maybe he doesn't know the language and wants to learn it based on his findings from the ruins (taking the linguist feat as his understanding increases). You can roleplay everything in between.


What about getting the people to revolt? The Dragonborn has to find a way to make the people join his cause, so he starts helping out shoeing horses and assisting the blacksmith. This means he can rolls a ... Endurance? No.
Diplomacy check, but give a substantial circumstance bonus based on the time he takes to learn their ways, including blacksmithing if he never knew before. Maybe an intelligence check to see how well he learned the craft as well.


This is a way to be fair, help flesh out character backstories to something useful in game other than just "I was a farmer who liked to paint, but that doesn't matter except in this little paragraph on my character sheet, as it only gives me an insignificant +2 to a skill check and doesn't define who I am mechanically in any way."

You're contradicting yourself. That "insignificant +2 to a skill check" is a mechanical benefit. Not only that, but it's also just +3 away from the +5 to random skills that aren't needed and will hardly be used that you proposed in the first place.

Listen, I'm not saying that you should just say, "This happens because I say it does." Work with your DM a little to flesh out your character's backstory and work with him/her to define when it affects you in adventuring. When did people lose the ability to do their own thing, outside the rules? If the rulebooks told you to do exactly what I am, would this even be an issue?

[Sonofaspectre]

Firstly, I'm the DM for my group. That's the only reason I'm homebrewing.

Secondly, thank you for your opinion. You do not have to use my homebrew idea.

[Ceiling009]

I still don't see any real reason to actually categorize background skills... To me, since the skills are pretty simple, I would just say to any player that you're automatically trained in whatever skill that fits into their back story, ie craft, farming, etc; not the 14 skills in the current handbook. It's not like it's going to make or break a game, since in the end, even the crafting rules in 3.5 made more or the less the same as buying a weapon. So anything like for some reason you have a player roll Cooking or something, there's a list of DC's of what should be reasonably in the DMG.