le Redoutable
Ich bin El Glouglou :)
It might even be close to streetwise
D&D 5E To me, nature lore = survival skill
- Thread starter le Redoutable
- Start date
Ancalagon
Dusty Dragon
Are you talking about the 5e, and saying that the nature knowledge and the survival skills are the same?
With all do respect, absolutely not. You can have a great biologist, who deeply understand nature... and they are going to die if left outside for a day.
Now a fair number of biologists are also skilled woodspersons, but knowing how to survive outside doesn't mean you know how nature works beyond the superficial "what can I eat, what will kill me". Converstly, understanding and knowing about evolution, energy flows, the carbon cycle etc doesn't mean you know how to start a fire or build a shelter.
With all do respect, absolutely not. You can have a great biologist, who deeply understand nature... and they are going to die if left outside for a day.
Now a fair number of biologists are also skilled woodspersons, but knowing how to survive outside doesn't mean you know how nature works beyond the superficial "what can I eat, what will kill me". Converstly, understanding and knowing about evolution, energy flows, the carbon cycle etc doesn't mean you know how to start a fire or build a shelter.
le Redoutable
Ich bin El Glouglou :)
Ah didn't think of that ..
Thanks a lot !
( Still, they could use one same stat along with another like survival ===> Wis + Con and nature lore as being knowledge and as such depending partly on Int ??
Thanks a lot !
( Still, they could use one same stat along with another like survival ===> Wis + Con and nature lore as being knowledge and as such depending partly on Int ??
le Redoutable
Ich bin El Glouglou :)
Purpose here is dnd 5E uses 17 skills, and 17 is close to 15, with 15 being association of 2 stats from six...
le Redoutable
Ich bin El Glouglou :)
Also then, Religion skill would be a lore,and as such would depend on Int + Cha ( written on Cleric = Con + Cha ( and Con being the spellcasting ability ) )
Laurefindel
Legend
I don't disagree.
The two skills are essentially "book smarts" vs "streets smarts" (or off-the-streets smarts?), i.e.: sage knowledge vs field experience. This is very true and relevant today because of our academic and scientific approach to subjects and general disassociation with agriculture, wilderness and animal husbandry but less so in a fantasy world IMO, even the more academically advanced ones such as Eberron. Obviously, I speak of Knowledge Nature in relation to plants and wildlife as described in D&D, not nature as natural science including physics and chemistry and geology etc.
So essentially we have a skill that says "you know about nature stuff but can't do anything with it" and another that says "you know how to use nature but don't know anything about it". Throw in the animal handling skill (and to a lesser extent, land vehicle proficiency) and the herbalist kit proficiency for extra layers of what you're allowed to do with nature which IMO, is needlessly compartmentalized. A skill that says "you know about wildlife and agriculture" and another that says "you know how to train and handle animals" would be sufficient to represent the reality of D&D characters and their experience.
And since i consider survival as one of the goals of PCs (rather than a skill), i'd be tempted to fold survival into nature lore (or wilderness lore or knowledge: nature or whatever) rather than the other way around.
The two skills are essentially "book smarts" vs "streets smarts" (or off-the-streets smarts?), i.e.: sage knowledge vs field experience. This is very true and relevant today because of our academic and scientific approach to subjects and general disassociation with agriculture, wilderness and animal husbandry but less so in a fantasy world IMO, even the more academically advanced ones such as Eberron. Obviously, I speak of Knowledge Nature in relation to plants and wildlife as described in D&D, not nature as natural science including physics and chemistry and geology etc.
So essentially we have a skill that says "you know about nature stuff but can't do anything with it" and another that says "you know how to use nature but don't know anything about it". Throw in the animal handling skill (and to a lesser extent, land vehicle proficiency) and the herbalist kit proficiency for extra layers of what you're allowed to do with nature which IMO, is needlessly compartmentalized. A skill that says "you know about wildlife and agriculture" and another that says "you know how to train and handle animals" would be sufficient to represent the reality of D&D characters and their experience.
And since i consider survival as one of the goals of PCs (rather than a skill), i'd be tempted to fold survival into nature lore (or wilderness lore or knowledge: nature or whatever) rather than the other way around.
Greenstone.Walker
Adventurer
The nature skill, like all INT skills, also involves research. Looking through a dusty library for a knowledge of a particular beast would be an INT\Nature check. I wouldn't allow INT\Survival for this (and certainly not any WIS check).
Ancalagon
Dusty Dragon
I completely agree. That's why I encourage you to come see me, a biologist, next time you are hurt or ill, instead of one of those so call "doctors of medecine" quacks!
(note: because humor is hard on the web, I'm assuming you were being silly, and so am I. If you meant that in seriousness... as a biologist, you are wrong.)
Ancalagon
Dusty Dragon
About this
I know you are a huge fan of symmetry in game design. While it can be aesthetically pleasing, sometimes things having to be symmetrical can lead to bad design decisions.
Similar Threads
