Rogues: No sense motive?

[Vogelens]

Fair enough then! I misread it then possibly. I do agree that social skills should not be for ALL classes, just a specific few. Admittedly, I prefer the pathfinder/5th edition style of skills a bit more even still, but we will have to work with what we have, that being 3.x

[Feronius]

A rogue without Sense Motive as a class skill feels a bit like a barbarian without Intimidate.
It's nothing too game changing or unmissable, but it is a little odd.

[EventHorizon]

I think one of the irksome parts about Bards but not Rogues having Sense Motive is that Bards are VERY niche thematically, but very important role-wise/mechanically, particularly when they are the closest to a "normal person class" (e.g. ranger, rogue, fighter, barbarian, - bard being the "weirdest" of these, with monk being slightly beyond the borderline) and the only one of those with Sense Motive.

In other words, if you want to be someone with a good people-sense, you have to be either a highly restricted cleric, a nigh equally restrictive monk, a highly restricted nature-cleric Druid, a CIVILIAN... or a magical musician. At least, in terms of the skill Sense Motive. I think that's one reason why those who support rogues having Sense Motive would seek to extend the skill to one class that isn't highly fantastical or mechanically useless (in NWN, Civilian).

On a related note, I'd love to explore a great number of character concepts that fit the Bard role mechanically, but which are, unfortunately, limited by the fact that, thematically, Bards sing and play instruments for their power. However, that's not as much an issue with TER implementation as it is an issue of the foundation of DND/FR, so I wouldn't fault TER for that. I do try to downplay the magical nature of any Bards I do play, however.