Rage against the Charisma.

Diplomacy seems alright. Intimidation/bluff I like. Leadership..eh, maybe. I dunno, sometimes I just don't like Cha skills. It always bothers me when mechanics can substitute for good roleplaying. Also, what if another character tries some real impressive intimidation through roleplaying. Are you going to make him roll a non-proficient Intimidation check? Just doing a charisma check instead is lame, because makes a low level intimidation skill worse than no skill at all. (That's why I don't include intellect, agility, or endurance checks)

I am really thinking about reversing my Cha decision. Although having Cha skills says "It's not all hack and slash", I think it might actually discourage good roleplaying. We had good roleplaying in 1st Ed without Cha skills. Why should we quantify personality? If we can encourage roleplaying without Cha skills, I think the game would be better for it. Remember, this is just a skeleton. -I believe that in flushing the rulebook out, we can make the roleplaying element more obvious.

Also, assume that there is going to be a GM's section with discussions on how to treat armor repair, spellcraft etc. Those descriptions are just for the players.

Rope use is silly, but I guess some characters want to be silly. It should be in.

I am changing Healing to a proficiency. -It belongs there. I think perception and awareness overlap too much. I've already got one.

Let's finish off this Cha stuff so we can move on to magic. Also, opinions on the subdivision of skill points? Stay Focused, please!