Player's Option: Sub-skills

[Halivar]

Many RP aspects of a player’s past life, such as vocational skills, are not currently represented in the 4E skill system. I think the intention was that players would weave implicit vocational skills into their background, and the DM narrate in light of the players having that skill. But often times, if an ability is not represented in game, it does not exist cognitively. Either the player forgets that background story element, or the DM requires checks in the standard 17 skills (which fail to cover many RP scenarios).

So I present my idea for handling “mundane” tasks that may impact how PC’s go about driving the story outside of combat.

Below is a list of sub-skills. Each sub-skill is tied to one of the 17 standard skills. When making a sub-skill check, you roll its associated standard skill. Being trained in a sub-skill means you are treated as being trained in its associated standard skill for the purposes of whatever that sub-skill covers. If you are already trained in the associated standard skill, you get a +2 to such checks.

At character creation, each player chooses 3 sub-skills from the list below. Characters may trade in a standard skill choice for 3 more sub-skills.

Here are some guiding principals for sub-skills to keep them from becoming onerous for players:

1) They are for players. Sub-skill checks are only initiated by the player. The DM never requires a sub-skill check (especially in a skill encounter), but are encouraged to allow their use at a player’s request. Example: A party is preparing for a tense meeting at an inn that will require a diplomacy-centered skill challenge, and Bob the Barbarian is afraid his checks are going to flub it. He’s very good at singing and playing the flute, however, so he elects to take to the corner and set the right mood for negotiations, and so makes Singing and Play Instrument checks instead during the skill challenge. The DM may rule that these checks do not count as successes, but do add a significant bonus to party-mates’ skill checks.

2) They are optional. Players should not have to choose sub-skills, and their lack of participation should never negatively impact the game (especially in skill challenges).

Here’s the list, organized by general category. There are a lot of skills not listed here because they are solidly covered by a standard skill, such as navigation or foraging.

Clerical
Administration - Diplomacy
Accounting - Perception
Appraisal - Thievery
Calligraphy - Religion
Law - History
Recordkeeping - History
Research - Insight

Military
Command - Intimidate
Tactics - Insight

Exploration
Cartography - Perception
Sailing - Acrobatics

Leisure
Gambling - Bluff
Play Instrument (choose one) - Acrobatics
Singing - Diplomacy

Agriculture
Animal Husbandry - Nature
Farming - Nature

Crafting
Blacksmithing - Athletics
Brewing - Religion
Carpentry - Athletics
Construction - Dungeoneering
Cooking - Nature
Dancing - Acrobatics
Engineering - Dungeoneering
Jewelry - Thievery
Leatherworking - Nature
Shipwrighting - Endurance
Tailoring - Acrobatics
Weaving - Acrobatics
Wine-making - Religion

Comments? Ideas? Did I miss anything?

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Rather than a hard list, I would prefer to use the list as examples and have the playe elect/make up his 'sub skill' categories and tie them to a normal skill.

Otherwise you will have peopel asking why cartography is tied to perception instead of nature or {for cave maps} dungeoneering.


Otherwize I like the idea.

Sent from my SPH-M900 using Tapatalk

 

[the Jester]

So basically pcs get three extra +2s in parts of some skills at first level?

I know that doesn't sound like much, but if a system that you describe as just for roleplaying includes mechanical power creep, you might want to rethink it.

Yes, I recognize that taking a sub-skill only gets that +2 bonus in a skill you're trained in; that just means that most players will ensure that they always take subskills that they have training in the associated skill.

So yeah, not for me.

 

[Halivar]

I was trying to create incentive to take sub-skills with associated skills they are already trained in (after all, why take a sub-skill if you got it for free with the standard skill?)

Would it be better to say... hrmm... the alternative of saying "if you're not trained in a sub-skill, you can't roll the associated standard skill for it" seems too harsh.

I need to rethink.

 

[the Jester]

Don't backgrounds pretty well fill the same role?

(Speaking as someone who doesn't use backgrounds in his campaign, because they are power creep...)

 

[S'mon]

I like this list just as examples of flexible ways the regular skills can be applied - Intimidate for command, Insight for tactics, that sort of thing. I think the 4e system really requires flexible & imaginative use of the skills.

 

[Shadus]

I like the idea, But I think this would be better if they went off ability modifiers instead of skills already made. Plus some of these don't make sense, like how Appraisal (Ones ability too know the price of an object) goes off off Thievery (Nimbleness of fingers and ect.)

 

[Halivar]

how Appraisal (Ones ability too know the price of an object) goes off off Thievery (Nimbleness of fingers and ect.)

I was thinking of Theivery in the broad sense... but yes, going off INT or WIS makes more sense for that than CHA.