I always felt the usage/technical knowledge divide in most rpg's made sense. Does being exquisitely good at firing a pistol really give you that much of an edge at building one yourself?*
Well, that depends.
I'd guess that for example in a fantasy or other low-tech setting where crafting is not really an exact science swinging a sword in actual combat would prove invaluable to understanding what makes a good and well balanced weapon. Especially to a character who is an adventurer rather than full blown artisan. Same with other weapons - innovations and improvements would rather be made by a person who has firsthand experience with problems they are supposed to tackle.
In such case we would have weapon or other equipment type related skill governing making a good weapon and either a separate crafting skill governing material use and smithing techniques, or int check governing how well a character can translate his experience at chopping people in the face into weapon design, with material and techniques being implicitly handled by int, explicit knowledge monitoring (having read, heard or otherwise learned the relevant information during gameplay - may be guarded by int check as well) or wholly abstracted away.
In a high tech setting separation would make sense because more weapon workings would be blackboxed inside and require extensive machine shop, blueprints, and technical knowledge, with stuff like ergonomics and good handling being pretty much codified over centuries.
I also think an int check would be superfluous in the case of dedicated crafting skill(s)
That's why it would be used in lieu of crafting skill if it was absent from the system altogether.
"Increased effectiveness" is already kind of straying into arbitrary bonus territory, don't you think?
Well, no. Charismatic leaders tend to motivate their followers. Sure, morale is the proper way of doing that, but high morale should confer effectiveness bonuses as well.
You'd think that the grunts stick by their lieutenant in extreme circumstances not just because he has a domineering presence, but also because of his actions and commands in past engagements.
True, but that's harder to monitor and may also rely on charisma to a certain degree.
Particularly fans that seems to obsess over the idea that the old gen RPG's were near perfect to begin with and that new RPG's, as shitty as they are in the most important areas, can bring nothing of value whatsoever to the genre.
You have no idea.
On the codex alone we frequently have "2D is perfect 3D is shit!!!1", "omg RT blobber with combat dance fapfapfap", "RT is shiiit even for a single character!!1" and "movement grids huehuehuehua", not to mention some completely inane comparisons of particular new and old games relying entirely on rose-coloured perception of the past.
