Unplaytested suggestion: fold Climb and Swim into a single skill, called Athletics, which would be Str-based.
I would further consider folding Jump into this skill, as it was originally Str-based. Then Escape Artist could be folded into Acrobatics, which means each of the new skills would subsume three old skills, which has a nice symmetry to it.
I would also add a feat that would allow a Dex mod to be substituted for the Str in Atheletics.
By folding Handle Animal and Ride together, you get a skill which is very often raised in tandem anyway.
Hmm... You've got a good idea there for Athletics as far as Swim and Climb go. However I think Jump needs to stay in Acrobatics.
As for Ride and Handle Animal that could also work out well, just not sure what to call it though.
By folding Handle Animal and Ride together, you get a skill which is very often raised in tandem anyway.
The problem is that they are very different skills. Ride is physical (how to hold on control the creature). Handle Animal is a social skill. It's about training.
You use Handle Animal to teach a horse to take a rider, as well as perform tasks and tricks.
You use Ride to know how to ride and control that horse. The rider doesn't need to know how the training happened.
Handle Animal can also be used to train falcons, teach dogs to be good guards, domesticate wild wolves, make an otherwise daft as a board dinosaur mind you, rear a young pegasus, etc. etc.
I initially thought this as well, but the skills are truly too different.... the only way that I could see a compromise would be to keep Ride, and merge Handle Animal into a profession skill... beast trainer...
Handle Animal can also be used to train falcons, teach dogs to be good guards, domesticate wild wolves, make an otherwise daft as a board dinosaur mind you, rear a young pegasus, etc. etc.
I initially thought this as well, but the skills are truly too different.... the only way that I could see a compromise would be to keep Ride, and merge Handle Animal into a profession skill... beast trainer...
Well ride often involves getting a mount to do a specific action (run faster, leap, attack, go in a direction indicated by the rider's knees). Handle animal does cover training of animals, but it also covers getting animals to perform tricks they know (attack, come, heel, guard, ...) and can be used to "push" animals to do things they don't know (like for example getting a horse not trained for combat to attack). The differences during combat are not as striking as some may think. A halfling on a riding dog not trained for combat has to make a ride check to get it to stay in combat and another ride check to get it to attack. A halfling not mounted on the dog has to do a handle animal check to push the animal to attack.
Besides which, if you want to train an animal to carry a rider, whether in combat or not, don't you think you should know how to ride and actual practice riding during the training times?
|
I would not favor this change. There is a certain benefit to combining some skills and eliminating redundency. Going too far is also bad. I don't hear anyone suggesting a single skill for everything, but too few skills is bad just like too many can be bad.
Personally, I think that ride and handle animal should be distinct. They cover different aspects of interacting with animals. It is quite possible to raise an animal to perform tricks and not know how to ride that animal (falcon, anyone?).
In addition, you can use the ride skill to get an animal to do something it already knows how to do. If a horse isn't trained to take a rider, you can use the ride skill to stay on, but probably not control the animal. The horse, in this case, will go where it wants to go.
I also don't think that climb and swim should be combined, in part because certain creatures have a climb and/or swim speed. If you have a swim speed of 50 feet, should you have a climb speed as well? A +8 racial bonus to climb checks?
I don't want crazy tree-dwelling porposies in my D&D world.
Besides which, if you want to train an animal to carry a rider, whether in combat or not, don't you think you should know how to ride and actual practice riding during the training times?
Yes. But that doesn't mean the person who finally gets that animal should also know how to train it. Trainers should know how to ride. Riders don't need to know how to train.
|
I do vote to consolidate the skill lists, but there is a line to walk. Handle Animal and Ride are two distinct skills but as for Jump, Climb, and Swim, I can see those as one skill called Athletics. First of all they share all the same stat modifiers and the ACP. Second, a fighter would go through an athletic training course during a period of time to allow him to become stronger and that training course would contain these various elements plus those that could be considered Acrobatics(Balance and Tumble). Handle Animal and Ride are not the same in any case and not trained at the same time. When you ride an animal, you are trained to give it certain commands and to perform certain actions atop the mount. As for handle animal, you are trained in the animals care and shown how to teach the animal some "tricks".
I do vote to consolidate the skill lists, but there is a line to walk. Handle Animal and Ride are two distinct skills but as for Jump, Climb, and Swim, I can see those as one skill called Athletics. First of all they share all the same stat modifiers and the ACP. Second, a fighter would go through an athletic training course during a period of time to allow him to become stronger and that training course would contain these various elements plus those that could be considered Acrobatics(Balance and Tumble).
Before the relative current era of public pools and such most people did not know how to swim. Saying that because you know how to climb and jump, you should know how to swim doesn't make any sense.
Handle Animal and Ride are not the same in any case and not trained at the same time. When you ride an animal, you are trained to give it certain commands and to perform certain actions atop the mount. As for handle animal, you are trained in the animals care and shown how to teach the animal some "tricks".
Ok people here we go ...
Handle Animal
Handle an Animal
This task involves commanding an animal to perform a task or trick that it knows. ...“Push” an Animal
To push an animal means to get it to perform a task or trick that it doesn’t know but is physically capable of performing. ...Attack (DC 20): The animal attacks apparent enemies.
Train an Animal for a Purpose
...
Combat Riding (DC 20): ...
Riding (DC 15): ...Untrained
If you have no ranks in Handle Animal, you can use a Charisma check to handle and push domestic animals, ...
Ride
Fight with Warhorse
If you direct your war-trained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally.Control Mount in Battle
As a move action, you can attempt to control a light horse, pony, heavy horse, or other mount not trained for combat riding while in battle.Check
Typical riding actions don’t require checks.
Controling a mount in battle seems a lot like "pushing" an animal (getting it to do a "trick" it physically can do but is not trained for). Having a mount attack seems pretty similiar to the attack action. Domestic animals can be handled (or rode) without much difficulty, with no ranks even. I don't think it is unreasonable to assume if you are just as capable of teaching a heavy horse how to handle a rider as a hawk to kill a rabbit, then the person should know how to ride in combat and how to control the mount.
Maybe some of the ride skill should be put in handle animal (control a mount, get a warhorse to attack, get more speed, get it to jump) and some other parts (quick mount, soft fall, cover) should be put in with tumbling skills.
Having a mount attack seems pretty similiar to the attack action.
The fact that the Handle Animal guy can get an animal to do something it is trained to do (in this case, attack) doesn't mean the rider can train a mount to do it. The nice thing about Handle Animal is that there are more options, but the guy who is just a rider is probably going to be way better at that specific task. Both can tell a trained mount to attack, but the Handle Animal guy may be useless at staying on his mount in battle.
Domestic animals can be handled (or rode) without much difficulty, with no ranks even. I don't think it is unreasonable to assume if you are just as capable of teaching a heavy horse how to handle a rider as a hawk to kill a rabbit, then the person should know how to ride in combat and how to control the mount.
Knowing how to train a mount probably should give a person the know-how to ride into combat and how to control the mount, which is why Handle Animal gives a synergy bonus for Ride checks.
But the guy who has learned how to ride his well-trained mount shouldn't automatically know how to train one himself.