3.5 Bummer Skill names


General Discussion (Prerelease)


Another thread made me think of this.

Some of the 3.5 skill names are really poor choices. Many of these have been replaced with decent terms in the great skill switch (hooray for Linguistics!) Some skills are being carried over to Pathfinder, and I think they should be replaced with cooler sounding words.

Use Magic Device -> Artifice (as you "fake" class requirements)
Sense Motive -> Apprehension, or Empathy
Disable Device -> Sabotage, except now it's open lock too. Maybe still.
Escape Artist-> is a person, not a noun-skill or a verb. Escapology is the preferred term used by escape artists. Just "escape" wouldn't be so bad. I'm open to suggestions on this or any other.

Of course this is pure opinion, but I really like skill names to be evocative. I feel doofy dealing with a skill called "Move Silently" instead of plain old Stealth. Of course, nothing stopping me from calling them whatever I like... would be nice to see something better in print though.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and this sure ain't reverse compatible, right?


On the subject of poor choices in skill names those are mild compared to one that has been around since 3.0 and is much more confusing and misleading.

Knowledge (Local)

The word "local" has a specific meaning. It refers to a limited geographic location. According to the rules it is a field of study covering legends, personalities, inhabitants, laws, customs, traditions, humanoids. There is no mention of restriction to a specific geographic location. If used as it's name implies, when a character leaves the geographic location (locality) where the knowledge applies/was obtained then all ranks in that skill should become useless as they are no longer applicable to the current locality. As a real world example, Knowledge (local) for someone from London would not be applicable if they are in New York. Some DMs house rule it to work this way with allowing it to be taken multiple time each for a different locality. Unfortunately this is not how the rule was intended as it makes no mention of applying locality except by implication of the word "local" in the name. The topics covered can be grouped under the subject of "Cultures" without the implied geographic limitation. Therefore in the Alpha 3 forums I suggested, and will do so again when the skills chapter is focused on, the following change:

Knowledge (Local) ==> Knowledge (Cultures)


Freesword wrote:

As a real world example, Knowledge (local) for someone from London would not be applicable if they are in New York. Some DMs house rule it to work this way with allowing it to be taken multiple time each for a different locality. Unfortunately this is not how the rule was intended as it makes no mention of applying locality except by implication of the word "local" in the name. The topics covered can be grouped under the subject of "Cultures" without the implied geographic limitation. Therefore in the Alpha 3 forums I suggested, and will do so again when the skills chapter is focused on, the following change:

Knowledge (Local) ==> Knowledge (Cultures)

I don't see what's wrong with having Knowledge (New York) or Knowledge (London). You could even expand it by saying Knowledge (USA) or Knowledge (UK).

Freesword wrote:
Unfortunately this is not how the rule was intended as it makes no mention of applying locality except by implication of the word "local" in the name.

Could you please explain how the rule was intended?


Eryops wrote:
Freesword wrote:

As a real world example, Knowledge (local) for someone from London would not be applicable if they are in New York. Some DMs house rule it to work this way with allowing it to be taken multiple time each for a different locality. Unfortunately this is not how the rule was intended as it makes no mention of applying locality except by implication of the word "local" in the name. The topics covered can be grouped under the subject of "Cultures" without the implied geographic limitation. Therefore in the Alpha 3 forums I suggested, and will do so again when the skills chapter is focused on, the following change:

Knowledge (Local) ==> Knowledge (Cultures)

I don't see what's wrong with having Knowledge (New York) or Knowledge (London). You could even expand it by saying Knowledge (USA) or Knowledge (UK).

Freesword wrote:
Unfortunately this is not how the rule was intended as it makes no mention of applying locality except by implication of the word "local" in the name.
Could you please explain how the rule was intended?

I'd prefer Knowledge (Local) replaced with a Streetwise skill.


Eryops wrote:


I don't see what's wrong with having Knowledge (New York) or Knowledge (London). You could even expand it by saying Knowledge (USA) or Knowledge (UK).

Freesword wrote:
Unfortunately this is not how the rule was intended as it makes no mention of applying locality except by implication of the word "local" in the name.
Could you please explain how the rule was intended?

Knowledge (Local) has no special rules outside of the other knowledge skills. There is nothing about it referring to specific areas except by the implication of the word "local". There is no mention of Knowledge ([Insert Name of Location Here]), there is only the generic Knowledge (local). There is also the fact that it is the knowledge skill for information about the various subtypes of Humanoids, much as the other knowledge skills cover the various creature types. Taken as written and not applying the geographic limitations implied by the word local, it becomes the knowledge of Humanoid societies and cultures.

As for what is wrong with Knowledge (New York) and Knowledge (London), you could have 100 ranks in Knowledge (London) but none in Knowledge (New York) and it would be impossible to make a Knowledge check to know who the Mayor of New York is. In fact, if you are not in London, your points spent in Knowledge (London) are completely USELESS.

It seems there has been a change in the Pathfinder Beta that I had overlooked where in Table 5-6 on page 67 DCs are given for Knowledge (Local) checks which cover information that would be location specific.

The fact that it is taken to refer to both location specific and non-location specific information makes absolutely no sense.


I'm fairly certain the Forgotten Realms 3rd and 3.5 products assumed that the Knowledge (Local) skill would be taken for a given region (divided up along the same lines as the regions in the geography section), and I'm pretty sure I've seen NPCs made up with Knowledge (Local) listing specific regions as well.


Chris Perkins 88 wrote:

I'd prefer Knowledge (Local) replaced with a Streetwise skill.

A Streetwise skill covering the "local" aspects of Knowledge (Local) would effectively duplicate the Gather Information skill that was rolled into Diplomacy.


Plus I really hate that all of the "Streetwise" knowledge check examples seem to be an excuse to use pseudo-colloquial comments that seem to be just an alternate amount of information that the other checks should provide as well in the 4th edition material.

Oh, and I really don't want to look like too much in Pathfinder is going to mimic 4th edition, no matter how much I would actually like sense motive to be intuition (since its a better description of what the skill is used for).


KnightErrantJR wrote:
I'm fairly certain the Forgotten Realms 3rd and 3.5 products assumed that the Knowledge (Local) skill would be taken for a given region (divided up along the same lines as the regions in the geography section), and I'm pretty sure I've seen NPCs made up with Knowledge (Local) listing specific regions as well.

The 3.0 Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book specifically mentions local variations of knowledge skills (Using a Knowledge (history) example) but refers to it in terms of a variant from the rules specific to the way the Forgotten Realms regions are handled in the rules.


Freesword wrote:
Knowledge (Local) has no special rules outside of the other knowledge skills. There is nothing about it referring to specific areas except by the implication of the word "local". There is no mention of Knowledge ([Insert Name of Location Here]), there is only the generic Knowledge (local). There is also the fact that it is the knowledge skill for information about the various subtypes of Humanoids, much as the other knowledge skills cover the various creature types. Taken as written and not applying the geographic limitations implied by the word local, it becomes the knowledge of Humanoid societies and cultures.

I see your point on this. And now I see why you prefer the Knowledge (Culture) skill. It makes more sense.

Freesword wrote:
As for what is wrong with Knowledge (New York) and Knowledge (London), you could have 100 ranks in Knowledge (London) but none in Knowledge (New York) and it would be impossible to make a Knowledge check to know who the Mayor of New York is. In fact, if you are not in London, your points spent in Knowledge (London) are completely USELESS.

I understand your point on this, but think that the New York-London analogy works just fine. IRL, say I have a Knowledge (Seattle) rank of 30. I know who the mayor is, I know major employers, I know how to get around, etc. Drop me in Chicago, and I have a Knowledge (Chicago) of effectively zero. I couldn't close my eyes and will the name of the mayor of Chicago into my head, as well as many other aspects of the city. My Knowledge (Seattle) is utterly useless.

EDIT: But I *am* in the same kingdom (USA) so I know a lot about the culture, how people act, how not to insult them, etc. so a Knowledge (Culture-USA) would be a much better skill to have than localized to a city.

I understand the frustration of spending points in areas that have very narrow uses. I guess in my mind, that's part of a character's make up and not that big a deal. Generalizing this would seem a more effective way to go, or else allow the GM to award skill points towards Knowledge skills as the story grows.

Freesword wrote:

It seems there has been a change in the Pathfinder Beta that I had overlooked where in Table 5-6 on page 67 DCs are given for Knowledge (Local) checks which cover information that would be location specific.

The fact that it is taken to refer to both location specific and non-location specific information makes absolutely no sense.

Yeah, the listed DCs of what info you can get from a 'local' check are pretty disparate. Local encompasses anything from a kingdom (laws) to secret organizations (undercity). Off the top of my head, I can't think of a way to change this - it's one of the instances where a gather information doesn't quite fit into diplomacy. It may be an instance where it's best to leave it to the GMs discretion.


My problem with the name Knowledge (Local) does focus primarily on the one single broad general skill interpretation of it's use. In that aspect it would be more of a study of sociology, but since that is such a modern term I feel calling it cultures is more thematically appropriate.

With regard to it as Knowledge ([insert name of location here]), I have no problem with the general concept, but the narrowness of the field makes it less than desirable unless the character only puts minimal points in it or spend their entire career in the same locality. The only fix to this is to add mechanics that expand the use of this skill as Forgotten Realms did, but that is more a Campaign Setting specific thing and not a good fit for setting neutral core rules. Granted there is also the question of defining how large of a region can be considered "local" (village?, city? province?, nation?, continent?, planet?), but again this is more appropriate to discuss in reference to a specific campaign setting.

Unless there is some other outstanding point regarding Knowledge (Local) that has been not been covered I would like to thank those who helped me refine my position for when the skills section is Jason's focus and will step down from my soap box.


That being done, let's swing things back to the skills toyrobts originally mentioned.

Use Magic Device -> Artifice (as you "fake" class requirements)

I see where you are going with this (I admit I had to look up Artifice in a dictionary), but the Artificer class makes me thing of item creation instead of trickery so I see this as as being more confusing and I prefer to err on the side of clarity. Still, the name could be more elegant but I fear I lack an appropriate term. (note: must increase my vocabulary)

Sense Motive -> Apprehension, or Empathy

While I consider this one perfectly acceptable as is, if I were to suggest a change I would go with Intuition. Apprehension implies negativity to me and Empathy seems too touchy feely emotional for my tastes.

Disable Device -> Sabotage, except now it's open lock too. Maybe still

Again I consider the existing name acceptable and appreciate it's clarity. Sabotage would be workable, but with open locks rolled in becomes possibly less clear.

Escape Artist-> is a person, not a noun-skill or a verb. Escapology is the preferred term used by escape artists. Just "escape" wouldn't be so bad. I'm open to suggestions on this or any other.

I completely agree with you on this one. While it has a certain clarity, Escapology is the correct term for the skill. The nearest similar suggestion I could come up with is Contortion, but that is less clear and sound more like it should be rolled into Acrobatics.


Well, let me state how the names were handled here in Brazil.

The Use Magic Device was translated as "Usar Instrumento Mágico". This is simply literal translation, word-by-word, and I never thought about it.

Disable Devide was translated as "Operar Mecanismo". This is a better approach than the original name, since it would be translated word-by-word as "Operate Device".

This one is incredible: Move Silently was translated as "Furtividade", wich would be "Stealth" in English. Perfect for me when I converted to PF!

Tumble was translated as "Acrobacia", wich would be "Acrobatics" in english. A much better name, I think.

Wilderness Lore was translated as "Sobrevivência", that, of course, would be "Survival", the art of survive in non-friendly to hostile terrain.

Then, it comes to the greatest one, I think. "Escape Artist", who is a person, was translated as "Arte da Fuga", that would become "Art of Escape" in English. I really love the term "Art" on the Brazilian translation, since, c'mon, it IS something some artists use to make money.

There is no other skill that was translated in a way that was not word-by-word, however.

The Exchange

In terms of Knowledge (local), I actually allow players to buy "extra" ranks based on the focus of their knowledge.

e.g. A country might be a 1 rank per 1 point purchase, while knowledge of a moderate geographical region (say, Northeastern USA) would be 2 rank per 1 point and Knowledge (Chicago) would be 3 ranks per 1 point.

This is based on pre-Pathfinder skill points and I generally have used them in in Eberron (Khorvaire vs. Breland vs. Sharn, to those who follow me).


Intuition is the best word for it. Hands down.


Yeah, I guess making Knowledge (local) in a specific area really makes it hard to justify a character putting ranks into that skill, unless you're doing a campaign where you pretty much stay in one spot. I think expanding knowledge (local) to knowledge (cultures) is a good idea, representing a general knowledge of all cultures/peoples etc. After all, you aren't forced to take other knowledge skills in the same way....

Imagine: Knowledge Nature (desert), Knowledge Nature (aquatic), Knowledge Nature (forest).... Knowledge Religion (Sarenrae), Knowledge Religon (Lamashtu), etc, etc, etc....


Oh yeah, on my games, I try to make the knowledge better choices, so I do the following:

Knowledge (all of them): When I ask the player a specific knowledge roll, everyone gets to ask if they can make other rolls. For example, I ask for a (planar) check, one player has it. The other asks if he can make a (religion) check. Since the information is about demons I say "yes, but with -5". The other asks for a knowledge local, and I say "heck, no", and while other asks for a (martial). Since the check is about Grazzt, who is a great swordsman besides being a demon lord, I say "yes, but with -10".

-The rule on this is: If they want to make other knowledge, let them if it makes sense to you, but with a minimum of -5 (different fields that MAY cross), or the great -10 (really different fields that might one day cross).

Now, to (Local) I do the following: You must chose your region of the skill. You can make checks about the region without problem. However, other regions are at -5, and really foreign ones at -10. At the region (or at a reasonable place) you can spend one week to "make yourself at home", negating the -5 or -10 to that region. With that the chaacters can learn about other places and all. Of course, if the character goes far from his chosen region and spends too much time without getting back, he may have to chose another region.

It is simple, and the players tend to like spending one week to know names, families, gossip and everything, and works wonders with the Gather Information fused with the Diplomacy skill.


Freesword wrote:


Use Magic Device -> Artifice (as you "fake" class requirements)

I see where you are going with this (I admit I had to look up Artifice in a dictionary), but the Artificer class makes me thing of item creation instead of trickery so I see this as as being more confusing and I prefer to err on the side of clarity. Still, the name could be more elegant but I fear I lack an appropriate term. (note: must increase my vocabulary)

I favor Artifice precisely because of the "artificer", meaning the word, not the non-OGL class. What we have is a skill involving "fakery" as it pertains to a magical items. I think Artifice is a great word for the combination of the two.

Artifice itself is the root word of "artificial."


toyrobots wrote:
Intuition is the best word for it. Hands down.

Intuition makes a lot more sense than sense motive, but I hate using too many 4e terms. "Gut Feeling" doesn't quite sound right for a skill, does it? ;)

The Exchange

KnightErrantJR wrote:
toyrobots wrote:
Intuition is the best word for it. Hands down.
Intuition makes a lot more sense than sense motive, but I hate using too many 4e terms. "Gut Feeling" doesn't quite sound right for a skill, does it? ;)

The 4e skill is actually called Insight. Not quite as good as Intuition in my opinion, but it makes sense. I don't see anything wrong with "Intuition" personally, as the skill already covers getting a "hunch" about a situation. :)


Awesome . . . I had forgotten that, its been so long since I played 4e! Seriously, I'll start up a campaign to get sense motive changed to intuition right now . . . it just sounds a thousand times better than the very limited "sense motive," and I think getting a "hunch" or a "gut feeling" is something a lot of DMs could expand on for campaigns (I know, you can already get an amorphous "hunch" on a DC 20, but its so nebulous as it is now).

Scarab Sages

But how do you train in "Intuition"?

Sense Motive I can believe - you learn to read the mannerisms and speech patterns of people.

The more I think about it, the more I think that Sense Motive could be rolled into Linguistics.

The Exchange

Jal Dorak wrote:

But how do you train in "Intuition"?

Sense Motive I can believe - you learn to read the mannerisms and speech patterns of people.

The more I think about it, the more I think that Sense Motive could be rolled into Linguistics.

I'm a linguist, but I'm not an expert at telling when someone is being insincere. I like to leave that to the psychologists. ;)

As for your question (that is, how can intuition be trained?), it seems slightly irrelevant as Sense Motive already covers "getting a hunch" under 3.5 rules, and in my opinion getting a hunch definitely falls under the umbrella of intuition.

The problem with a name like Sense Motive is that it is counter-intuitive and only implies one use of a skill: sensing someone's motive/motives. The name should be general over specific, since the skill already has quite a number of uses that go beyond simply figuring out why the butler murdered his lord. The skill is used for catching someone in a lie (reading body-language and speech), getting a hunch in a given situation (effectively just getting a bad feeling about a situation) and avoiding getting tricked in combat whether it's someone trying to pull off a feint or creating a distraction to hide (again, reading body-language but this time it's probably less subtle and more overt).

Simply because of this I'd rename the skill Intuition, because that name seems to cover general social savvyness and being able to read other's actions and motives.


These aesthetic changes are unlikely to make it into the final, because of backwards-compatibility. Someone within Paizo would have to take this up as a pet issue to make this happen.

That said, there was a clause in the 3.5 PHB that basically gave players a carte blanche to name skills whatever they like (such as Lidda's ever-so-imaginative "footpaddin'"). So I think we've done good work for the linguaphiles here.

  • Some more issues: ANIMAL HANDLING! What can be done about this clumsy term?
  • "Fly" could probably be changed to the "Flight" skill, to disambiguate with the spell of the same name.
  • Heal is extremely boring, but more inventive terms such as "leechcraft" would probably cost more in parsimony than they pay in atmosphere.
  • Is Dungeoneering a word? It's made up, sounds too much like Engineering, and takes up too much room (longest skill name on the sheet). Alternatives?
  • Sleight of Hand isn't bad, really, but it seems like we're trying to get everything down to one, perfect word.
  • I won't comment on Spellcraft since I think more than the name needs to change there.
  • Likewise, Bluff is useful, disguise is rarely taken, and they could be merged into "Deception." The case could be made for adding sleight of hand there, since all three skills require bluffing and a degree of mettle. But skill merging gets out of hand quick, and soon we'll end up with only one skill called "skill" and where's the fun in that? I should stick to renaming the ones we've got.

    So compiling the best suggestions so far, our revised skill list (name changes only, no merging) would read:

    Spoiler:

    Acrobatics
    Appraise
    Artifice
    Bluff
    Climb
    Craft
    Diplomacy
    Disguise
    Escape
    Flight
    Handle Animal
    Heal
    Intuition
    Intimidate
    (Arcana)
    (Dungeoneering)
    (Engineering)
    (Geography)
    (History)
    (Local)
    (Nature)
    (Nobility)
    (Planes)
    (Religion)
    Linguistics
    Perception
    Perform
    Profession
    Ride
    Sabotage
    Sleight of Hand
    Spellcraft
    Stealth
    Survival
    Swim

    ...And just for me, the same list, with Bluff and Disguise and Sleight of Hand rolled into Deception— Concentration restored to it's former glory, and spellcraft rolled into Knowledge Arcana! :

    Spoiler:

    Acrobatics
    Appraise
    Artifice
    Climb
    Concentration
    Craft
    Deception
    Diplomacy
    Escape
    Flight
    Handle Animal
    Heal
    Intimidate
    Intuition
    (Arcana) (+Spellcraft)
    (Dungeoneering)
    (Engineering)
    (Geography)
    (History)
    (Local)
    (Nature)
    (Nobility)
    (Planes)
    (Religion)
    Linguistics
    Perception
    Perform
    Profession
    Ride
    Sabotage
    Stealth
    Survival
    Swim

    And here's a third list for those of you who really like skill merging:

    Spoiler:

    Skill

    Now that is a damned efficient skill list, if I might say so.

    Does anyone with more refined grammar knowledge wish to weigh in on unifying parts of speech here? Consistancy is best. I'd like to get the verbs out of the list— noun forms only?

  • Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / General Discussion (Prerelease) / 3.5 Bummer Skill names All Messageboards
    Recent threads in General Discussion (Prerelease)
    Druid / Monk?