Skills, do they need to be used?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 88 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

Looking through all the skills, its my opinion, that almost all skills are 'use activated'. You need to say you are using a skill. Perception is the only skill I believe that has an 'automatic' component to it.

Any thoughts?


Most skills are used, yes.

Some are reactive (Perception and Sense Motive most prominently, Acrobatics checks to avoid falling off somewhere when jostled are a physical example), and some simply grant a new ability (Linguistics may actually be the only one here) but most skills are an action of some sort.

Acrobatics requires you to balance (this one may be semi-reactive) or attempt a jump. Jumping doesn't just happen, it's a thing you DO. Climb and Swim are teh same way.

Using Bluff, Diplomacy, and Intimidate are choices depending on how you phrase your words. A person with a high Bluff isn't lying through their teeth at all times (though they can be, and even get away with it), they're just good at it. Likewise someone who can be Intimidating when he wishes too isn't required to loom over everyone all the time (unless he wants to).

Skills in many cases don't make sense as an automatic reaction, since they are actually an action, both in the rules and thematically.

Shadow Lodge

After reading the disription of Sense Motive a couple times its my opinion that you cant get a sense off someone by just passing them on the street, you have to interact with them or see them interact with someone else to get a 'hunch' about them.


Jacob Saltband wrote:
After reading the disription of Sense Motive a couple times its my opinion that you cant get a sense off someone by just passing them on the street, you have to interact with them or see them interact with someone else to get a 'hunch' about them.

Yes, much like Perception can be used to search a specific place (which DOES take an action).

However, the reactive use is as opposed to a Bluff check, which is what I was referring to.

Shadow Lodge

Rynjin wrote:
Jacob Saltband wrote:
After reading the disription of Sense Motive a couple times its my opinion that you cant get a sense off someone by just passing them on the street, you have to interact with them or see them interact with someone else to get a 'hunch' about them.

Yes, much like Perception can be used to search a specific place (which DOES take an action).

However, the reactive use is as opposed to a Bluff check, which is what I was referring to.

Yes, I see. You were saying that if someone is trying to use the bluff skill on you then you get an automatic sense motive roll.

I've seen posts were people said to use sense motive to walk into a tavern and look around and be able to get s check on all he sees.


I'd allow it, though his read would be either vague or "reading the entire crowd for hostility/humor/impending riot/etc." until he focused on specific individuals.

I've also allowed people to use SM to gauge how strong someone is comparatively to them - basically like a Knowledge (whatever) score for classed humanoids and other creatures whose CR isn't set in stone. Watch their body language, their movement style, the little cues that tell you what they're capable of. It's hard to read - higher DC than an equivalent Knowledge check - and if they're good at concealing it (Bluff or other means) you might get a false read.

That's a personal houserule though I believe. I tend to be a bit liberal with skills because I think they should see more use. I also picked up Rite Publishing's "101 New Skill Uses" and make regular use of that.

Shadow Lodge

Noticed my thread title is worng, should be need not needed and 'used' should have quotation marks.

Shadow Lodge

Does having ranks in a skill mean you can now ignore ability penalties?

Example, having ranks in diplomacy now means your low cha can be ignored in social situations?


Jacob Saltband wrote:

Does having ranks in a skill mean you can now ignore ability penalties?

Example, having ranks in diplomacy now means your low cha can be ignored in social situations?

In most cases, no. Unless you have one of the few ways to use another stat in place of Cha for Diplomacy checks, you cannot ignore your low Cha. If you roll a Diplomacy check, you don't get to ignore the penalty to your Diplomacy roll from your low Cha.


Jacob Saltband wrote:

Does having ranks in a skill mean you can now ignore ability penalties?

Example, having ranks in diplomacy now means your low cha can be ignored in social situations?

They're tied together. Your diplomacy ranks and your Cha are added together to get that score, so your not actually 'ignoring' the cha at all.

A person with low chr can still be good at diplomacy. but someone with a good or great chr and the exact same training/speech/perfomance (ranks)will still be better than the low guy.

Shadow Lodge

You have a low cha person and a high cha person, both have the same diplomacy 'score' and they both rolled the same diplomacy roll. How does the person they are trying influence decide between them?

If your low wis character takes ranks in sense motive does it help him/her with common sense issues?


For the Diplo question: If their final roll is equal, they're equally influential. Situational bonuses may affect other things, the higher-CHA person might be given an advantageous position, or the GM may just ask for a second roll.

For the SM question: Depends on the issue, I'd say.


Jacob Saltband wrote:

You have a low cha person and a high cha person, both have the same diplomacy 'score' and they both rolled the same diplomacy roll. How does the person they are trying influence decide between them?

If your low wis character takes ranks in sense motive does it help him/her with common sense issues?

Does the npc have to be able to rank everyone in the party in order of 'who likes more?'

If the DM set the DC for 18... and both players hit it, then the target likes them both.

As for Sense motive?

Maybe? Depends on how the group uses it... I can easily see someone shouldn't be in charge of the money actually being pretty good at spotting bluffs and gambling.

He may be useless in the woods and can't hold down a job... and certainly never let him try to heal you.... but knowing when someone's lying to you? Whole different thing. He's been lied to all his life and can spot a liar at 20 paces.

Shadow Lodge

phantom1592 wrote:
Jacob Saltband wrote:

You have a low cha person and a high cha person, both have the same diplomacy 'score' and they both rolled the same diplomacy roll. How does the person they are trying influence decide between them?

If your low wis character takes ranks in sense motive does it help him/her with common sense issues?

Does the npc have to be able to rank everyone in the party in order of 'who likes more?'

If the DM set the DC for 18... and both players hit it, then the target likes them both.

As for Sense motive?

Maybe? Depends on how the group uses it... I can easily see someone shouldn't be in charge of the money actually being pretty good at spotting bluffs and gambling.

He may be useless in the woods and can't hold down a job... and certainly never let him try to heal you.... but knowing when someone's lying to you? Whole different thing. He's been lied to all his life and can spot a liar at 20 paces.

Just to clairify, the diplomacy example is not 2 party members its just 2 people.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jacob Saltband wrote:

Looking through all the skills, its my opinion, that almost all skills are 'use activated'. You need to say you are using a skill. Perception is the only skill I believe that has an 'automatic' component to it.

Any thoughts?

Why don't you be more specific in your question? Not all skills are going to be used in the same manner or the same kind of purpose, so you are going to have item by item variation. What particular corner rule are you trying to navigate by this question?


Judging by the last question I imagine it has something to do with the "Low-(stat) character with lots of ranks in (stat)-based skill" complaint that's come up in the "Forcing characters to roleplay their stats" thread.


I tend to rule that characters are, for the most part, sufficiently trained as to be using relevant and important skills when needed even if the player didn't say so.

I will usually retroactively ask the player if they want to roll for a skill they forgot to mention during, or even after, a particular event takes place, if I consider it would be pretty obvious for the character to have done so.

My reasoning is that the player can sometimes forget to declare a skill use because he's caught up with something else (for instance, there's a debate between the players about a particular course of action, and the rogue forgot to mention he was using Acrobatics to cushion his fall rather than just falling flat on his head. In this case, I would probably say "I assume your character is tumbling on the floor?").

I won't do that for situations that are meant to be challenges in which the players have to properly manage their skills and resources, so I won't be hinting to them what they have to do to solve a problem. But for instances where there is a patently obvious course of action and the character would have to be blindfolded not to act in a certain way, I allow them to roll even if they forgot to say it out loud.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

Most skills need to be activated, yes, but I would consider Perception and Sense Motive having passive components.

There are many cases of course where a GM can ask for a check -- I don't think the player always has to say "I use X skill" -- but it can depend upon the circumstances and what else is going along with the description of the player's actions.

For example, if a player says, "I walk up to the door and open it," then as a GM, what I hear is "I am doing nothing except walking up to the door and opening it."

So then if I say, "You turn the doorknob, and you hear a spring release as a poison needle flies into your hand," and THEN the player says, "No, wait, I was checking for traps!" I don't buy that.

I need to hear, if not "I am rolling Perception to look for traps," at least, "I kneel by the door and examine the frame and the lock to make sure it hasn't been trapped." In the latter case, I am happy to say, "Okay, roll Perception" (and if they describe what they're doing really well, I might even give them a bonus.)

And I have actually had the "but don't you just default assume we're always checking for traps?" conversation with a player. No, no I don't, because sometimes people decide to take risks for the benefit of moving through somewhere quickly. (Not a skill, but I have also got, "can't you just assume I'm always casting defensively." To which the response is, "First, no, because sometimes people prefer the risk of provoking the AOO, and second, if you decide you are always casting defensively, you still need to remember to actually roll the die.")

At the same time, if someone says, "Do I remember anything about the war of the roses?" I don't say, "You forgot to roll Knowledge (history)!" I just ask them to make the roll.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jacob Saltband wrote:

Does having ranks in a skill mean you can now ignore ability penalties?

Example, having ranks in diplomacy now means your low cha can be ignored in social situations?

RAW says yes. If you choose to attach additional penalties/benefits based on high/low ability score, then that is something you choose not something that is supported by the rules.

Jacob Saltband wrote:


If your low wis character takes ranks in sense motive does it help him/her with common sense issues?

Common sense issues? No. Detecting peopels motives? Yes.

Shadow Lodge

LazarX wrote:
Jacob Saltband wrote:

Looking through all the skills, its my opinion, that almost all skills are 'use activated'. You need to say you are using a skill. Perception is the only skill I believe that has an 'automatic' component to it.

Any thoughts?

Why don't you be more specific in your question? Not all skills are going to be used in the same manner or the same kind of purpose, so you are going to have item by item variation. What particular corner rule are you trying to navigate by this question?

Why do you needed more information to answer the question quoted? Rynjin answer this question well and was informative on his views of how skills work. Why do you this question has some hidden meaning?

This question is asking how you think skills work, no more.

Shadow Lodge

Profession skills, what do you get for having ranks in a profession?

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Money.

Liberty's Edge

Jacob Saltband wrote:

You have a low cha person and a high cha person, both have the same diplomacy 'score' and they both rolled the same diplomacy roll. How does the person they are trying influence decide between them?

If your low wis character takes ranks in sense motive does it help him/her with common sense issues?

People don't have their ability modifiers tattooed on their foreheads. Two equal diplomacy rolls means the two people are equally persuasive and/or likeable. Based on this one observation an observer would not be able to distinguish which speaker is more naturally charismatic. Deciding between them would be a tough call for the listener. If you needed a mechanical rule I suppose you could do it like initiative and compare modifiers which of course accounts for ability modifier along with their skill ranks.

Taking sense motive ranks only helps with the specific abilities listed in the skill. The common sense issue is a tricky one. Once in a while if a PC is about to do something really dumb I might give them an ability roll to provide some extra info or a warning, but let them make the decision for themselves.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jacob Saltband wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Jacob Saltband wrote:

Looking through all the skills, its my opinion, that almost all skills are 'use activated'. You need to say you are using a skill. Perception is the only skill I believe that has an 'automatic' component to it.

Any thoughts?

Why don't you be more specific in your question? Not all skills are going to be used in the same manner or the same kind of purpose, so you are going to have item by item variation. What particular corner rule are you trying to navigate by this question?

Why do you needed more information to answer the question quoted? Rynjin answer this question well and was informative on his views of how skills work. Why do you this question has some hidden meaning?

This question is asking how you think skills work, no more.

It's been my experience when someone asks a nebulous question to get a wide ranging formula answer without specifying why, they're looking to get a blanket Yes that they can tack to some extreme corner rules manipulation or interpretation. Skills aren't all going to be implemented the same because they're not the same type of skills. Some are active, others passive, some both. And others have a wide variety of implementations. Trying to get one specific answer when you're not setting the parameters is a good opening for confusion and outright error.

Shadow Lodge

The_Hanged_Man wrote:
Jacob Saltband wrote:

You have a low cha person and a high cha person, both have the same diplomacy 'score' and they both rolled the same diplomacy roll. How does the person they are trying influence decide between them?

If your low wis character takes ranks in sense motive does it help him/her with common sense issues?

People don't have their ability modifiers tattooed on their foreheads. Two equal diplomacy rolls means the two people are equally persuasive and/or likeable. Based on this one observation an observer would not be able to distinguish which speaker is more naturally charismatic. Deciding between them would be a tough call for the listener. If you needed a mechanical rule I suppose you could do it like initiative and compare modifiers which of course accounts for ability modifier along with their skill ranks.

Taking sense motive ranks only helps with the specific abilities listed in the skill. The common sense issue is a tricky one. Once in a while if a PC is about to do something really dumb I might give them an ability roll to provide some extra info or a warning, but let them make the decision for themselves.

Ok I see what your saying, but the 2 people are interacting with the target of the diplomacy check long enough to get a roll to influence them in some way, how long does it take to get an idea of what a persons personality, personal magnetism, etc. Is?

Digital Products Assistant

Removed some posts. Let's keep this on topic. Flag and move on, please.


Jacob Saltband wrote:
The_Hanged_Man wrote:
Jacob Saltband wrote:

You have a low cha person and a high cha person, both have the same diplomacy 'score' and they both rolled the same diplomacy roll. How does the person they are trying influence decide between them?

If your low wis character takes ranks in sense motive does it help him/her with common sense issues?

People don't have their ability modifiers tattooed on their foreheads. Two equal diplomacy rolls means the two people are equally persuasive and/or likeable. Based on this one observation an observer would not be able to distinguish which speaker is more naturally charismatic. Deciding between them would be a tough call for the listener. If you needed a mechanical rule I suppose you could do it like initiative and compare modifiers which of course accounts for ability modifier along with their skill ranks.

Taking sense motive ranks only helps with the specific abilities listed in the skill. The common sense issue is a tricky one. Once in a while if a PC is about to do something really dumb I might give them an ability roll to provide some extra info or a warning, but let them make the decision for themselves.

Ok I see what your saying, but the 2 people are interacting with the target of the diplomacy check long enough to get a roll to influence them in some way, how long does it take to get an idea of what a persons personality, personal magnetism, etc. Is?

Do they?

Half of diplomacy is putting on an act. If one is naturally that charming, and the other is only acting that charming and really is a no good lout at home...

Would you know after only a couple minutes interaction?

Most politcians and salesmen are not really your friend, but after just a few moments people don't know what they're 'really like'

Honestly, I have no objection to using the base score as a 'tie breaker' if it's REALLY important that one wins and the other loses...

We do that with Dex if Initatives tie, and Wisdom if the Dex are tied....

But in a diplomacy? I would probably say that the target is still undecided who he likes better, and make them roll again for a 'longer' debate.


Jacob Saltband wrote:
Profession skills, what do you get for having ranks in a profession?

THAT depends on the DM... it's either a crappy skill to bother with, or an awesome OP one.

Basically, if it falls into your 'profession' you can probably roll that instead of the 'other' skill.

I've seen mining profession be very useful in our kingmaker one... I've got a guy with Acting' as a skill, that is going to try to subsitute it for bluffing and sense motive when he's fortune telling...

That's one that is written very vague and 'money' is probably the only RAW answer.

It's one that I like the idea of... but wish it had been fleshed out a bit better.

Sovereign Court

This disucssion is reminding me of a thread I read earlier this week about hard work vs. talent. The discussion was about what was better or if it was possible fo a hard worker to overcome the advantage of talent. A good point was brought up that talented people can be lazy or uninterested and so they dont hone the skill as fine as they could. A hard worker may not be a natural but if they really put in the effort they can equal or beat a talented person.

With that said there is no guideline for giving a low/high ability score further modification other than the stat mod. Anything you choose to add/subtract is purely on you and not RAW. Persoanlly, I think a low stat that invested heavily in a skill matches that of a high stat that didnt. That might not sit well with folks who look down on dumping but what can you do?

Sovereign Court

phantom1592 wrote:
Jacob Saltband wrote:
Profession skills, what do you get for having ranks in a profession?

THAT depends on the DM... it's either a crappy skill to bother with, or an awesome OP one.

Basically, if it falls into your 'profession' you can probably roll that instead of the 'other' skill.

I've seen mining profession be very useful in our kingmaker one... I've got a guy with Acting' as a skill, that is going to try to subsitute it for bluffing and sense motive when he's fortune telling...

That's one that is written very vague and 'money' is probably the only RAW answer.

It's one that I like the idea of... but wish it had been fleshed out a bit better.

Profession is set up to give small amounts of gold for working. Its a pitance because if it was really worth it the game would turn into simeconomy instead of being about adventure. Now occasionally my players like the skill for RP reasons and a popular houserule is to give a free profession skill point per level. You can tie in plots and adventure lines with profession skill. However, anything beyond making a pittance is up tot he GM and not really supported otherwise by the CRB.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pan wrote:
However, anything beyond making a pittance is up to the GM and not really supported otherwise by the CRB.

True, however Profession (Sailor) is often used in adventures as the right skill to use for sailing ships and related matters, so there is some precedent.

Shadow Lodge

phantom1592 wrote:


Half of diplomacy is putting on an act.

I thought Bluff dealt with acting or perform:acting.

So skills overlap more then I thought.


Jacob Saltband wrote:
phantom1592 wrote:


Half of diplomacy is putting on an act.

I thought Bluff dealt with acting or perform:acting.

So skills overlap more then I thought.

Yep! there is overlap of skills.

By RAW, Survival or Perception can be used to find tracks or clues, but it would take Survival to follow the tracks.

Shadow Lodge

phantom1592 wrote:
Jacob Saltband wrote:
phantom1592 wrote:


Half of diplomacy is putting on an act.

I thought Bluff dealt with acting or perform:acting.

So skills overlap more then I thought.

Yep! there is overlap of skills.

By RAW, Survival or Perception can be used to find tracks or clues, but it would take Survival to follow the tracks.

Usually skill overlap is in the discription of the skill/skills with overlap.

Reviewing the diplomscy skill, it doesnt mention anything about 'acting', if it did, the discription would point out that 'acting' while using diplomacy would require a sense motive roll from the target.


Jacob Saltband wrote:


Usually skill overlap is in the discription of the skill/skills with overlap.

Reviewing the diplomscy skill, it doesnt mention anything about 'acting', if it did, the discription would point out that 'acting' while using diplomacy would require a sense motive roll from the target.

Flavor text on my part. I was talking more about 'diplomacy' in the grand definition of the word in real life, less about the skill itself. How politicians can debate for hours and gain lots of votes, but never actually talk about the issues...

I recently had a character describe diplomacy as the art of figuring out what someone wants to hear or who that person wants to talk to and someone being that person and telling him what he needs to hear.

Using Diplomacy (the skill) is anything from picking up rumors at a bar to signing peace treaties in foreign nations...

The way I see it is this. If a person has no training in Diplmacy, he needs to roll based on just what he himself actually is (Charisma). If he IS trained... then somehow all those ranks are giving advantages that someone with just his person alone would not have. Call it a prepared speech, a great argument, flirting in just the right way to the right person... Or putting on an act.

It's all part of how the player wants to describe how/what he's doing with the roll.

I see acting as a PART of diplomacy, but I would never let a player use 'perform acting' in PLACE of diplomacy.

Bluff? Maybe... depending on the situation at hand.


Jonathon Vining wrote:
Pan wrote:
However, anything beyond making a pittance is up to the GM and not really supported otherwise by the CRB.
True, however Profession (Sailor) is often used in adventures as the right skill to use for sailing ships and related matters, so there is some precedent.

Yeah, there is more to it then just the cash... but it's vague.

CRB wrote:

You can earn half your Profession check result in

gold pieces per week of dedicated work. You know how to
use the tools of your trade, how to perform the profession’s
daily tasks, how to supervise helpers, and how to handle
common problems. You can also answer questions about your
Profession. Basic questions are DC 10, while more complex
questions are DC 15 or higher.

Cash is only used in the first sentence.

The fact that you can answer questions using this skill gives it some overlap with the knowledge rolls. I think they phrase it as "a broader range of less specific knowledge." I think one of my friends has used it to simulate a bit of geography, history, and engineering when it came to some mines we were exploring one time.

Frankly I wish they gave us a few more examples of professions. the common ones they picked kind of suck with their miniscule usefulness.

Shadow Lodge

phantom1592 wrote:
Jacob Saltband wrote:


Usually skill overlap is in the discription of the skill/skills with overlap.

Reviewing the diplomscy skill, it doesnt mention anything about 'acting', if it did, the discription would point out that 'acting' while using diplomacy would require a sense motive roll from the target.

Flavor text on my part. I was talking more about 'diplomacy' in the grand definition of the word in real life, less about the skill itself. How politicians can debate for hours and gain lots of votes, but never actually talk about the issues...

I recently had a character describe diplomacy as the art of figuring out what someone wants to hear or who that person wants to talk to and someone being that person and telling him what he needs to hear.

Using Diplomacy (the skill) is anything from picking up rumors at a bar to signing peace treaties in foreign nations...

The way I see it is this. If a person has no training in Diplmacy, he needs to roll based on just what he himself actually is (Charisma). If he IS trained... then somehow all those ranks are giving advantages that someone with just his person alone would not have. Call it a prepared speech, a great argument, flirting in just the right way to the right person... Or putting on an act.

It's all part of how the player wants to describe how/what he's doing with the roll.

I see acting as a PART of diplomacy, but I would never let a player use 'perform acting' in PLACE of diplomacy.

Bluff? Maybe... depending on the situation at hand.

My opinion if you say your acting when using diplomacy I'd give a sense motive check.

Maybe its just me but I dont see diplomacy as modern day politicing otherwise it would have that as a discription in the skill.


Jacob Saltband wrote:


Maybe its just me but I dont see diplomacy as modern day politicing otherwise it would have that as a discription in the skill.

I'm curious then. How do you see diplomacy as a skill then? Honestly, I hear 'diplomacy' my first thought is 'diplomat' which leads to Politics...

I'm in a kingmaker game where between my paladin trying to 'redeem' everyone, and set up treaties... There are a LOT of politics being tossed around, and the Diplomacy is used a lot.

Admittedly, the paladin king doesn't 'put on an act'. He is JUST as honorable and good as he wants them to THINK he is ^__^

Though he has made a few specific 'manipulative' choices in his diplomacy. For example 'where' he talks to people. If he wants to be a friend, it's at the fireplace with the cozy chairs, if he wants to exert some dominance over the situation, it's either at his office desk or the throne room with him sitting 'a little' higher then the person he's talking at...

What do you use the skill for? or what would you use for a politician or used car horse salesman?

Shadow Lodge

Pretty much what the skill says is how I look at it. Change attitude, gather info, make requests, resolve differences, and negotiate conflicts.

If your puttung on an act to do these things, my opinion, your using the bluff skill not diplomacy.


A lot of people don't want to hear this, but everything someone tells you is a lie to some degree or another. Diplomacy is just a more subtle use of the lying than Bluff is.

Shadow Lodge

Fraust wrote:
A lot of people don't want to hear this, but everything someone tells you is a lie to some degree or another. Diplomacy is just a more subtle use of the lying than Bluff is.

Cynical. If I say some days the sky has blue tint to it, am I lying.


Jacob Saltband wrote:
Fraust wrote:
A lot of people don't want to hear this, but everything someone tells you is a lie to some degree or another. Diplomacy is just a more subtle use of the lying than Bluff is.
Cynical. If I say some days the sky has blue tint to it, am I lying.

Technically, yes, though it is not an intentional lie.

The sky isn't actually blue; it's actually all colors at once. The reason why we see it as the color blue (though, being night where I am, it is actually black right now) is because blue light is simply what gets scattered most strongly. The gases that make up the atmosphere actually do not have a tint, though.

Shadow Lodge

MagusJanus wrote:
Jacob Saltband wrote:
Fraust wrote:
A lot of people don't want to hear this, but everything someone tells you is a lie to some degree or another. Diplomacy is just a more subtle use of the lying than Bluff is.
Cynical. If I say some days the sky has blue tint to it, am I lying.

Technically, yes, though it is not an intentional lie.

The sky isn't actually blue; it's actually all colors at once. The reason why we see it as the color blue (though, being night where I am, it is actually black right now) is because blue light is simply what gets scattered most strongly. The gases that make up the atmosphere actually do not have a tint, though.

Some days, to our (human) eyes, we see the sky with a blue tint.


Not cynical, just real. Language is a horribly flawed construct used to take thoughts from one person's head and put them in another's. No, you're not lying, but by saying what you said you're purposely ignoring data to try and make what I said not true. You're also being very vague, to the point where your statement has almost no weight or meaning. You told me I was wrong. You didn't come out and say it, and without context what you said had nothing to do with that subject, but the implication was there. You lied. Diplomatically

1 to 50 of 88 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Skills, do they need to be used? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.