I disagree with the OP.
Since I often say the game should stick closer to DnD rules, I am happy about every field where they do this.
Each class has several "class skills", that means it is plausible that a member of this class might know something about this topic and they CAN (not must, not get it automatically) become profient with it.
Being profient with a skill means you have trained this or you are very interested in it.
But a dumb (low int) ranger will not be good in remembering facts about nature and a dumb warlock does not know much about magic, even though their class is related to that topic.
I see no reason to change things.
From a role playing perspective its OK when your char is not good in everything, even if it is a class skill of his class.
The wise but not super intelligent cleric in a small village does not know how the holy symbol of a god from a different continent looks when a traveller with this symbol travels through this village.
The surface ranger did not read a book about plants of the underdark, so he does not know them when he suddenly has to travel through there.
Last edited by Madscientist; 17/03/21 08:19 PM.
Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist
World leading expert of artificial stupidity.
Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already
