Here's a quick story about my hand in the creation of Pathfinder Second Edition.

There are a lot of backgrounds in the book. Backgrounds give you, among other things, training in a skill and a specific skill feat. These skill feats map to the skills: you might get the Medicine skill and the Battle Medic feat, but the background shouldn't grant a mismatch between a skill and a skill feat. In reviewing the backgrounds, though, I noticed precisely one mismatch: the Barrister background gave you the Deception skill and the Group Impression skill feat (which requires Diplomacy, not Deception).

Okay, I see the trope that lawyers are good liars and often speak to groups (like juries), but the mismatch needed to be fixed. At this point, it was so far along in printing that there was a question as to whether we'd be able to fix it at all. But we could, and we could have gone two ways:

1) Keep the lying, by changing the Group Impression skill feat to some skill feat that required Deception instead (like Lie to Me); or

2) Keep the public speaking, and change Deception to Diplomacy.

I STRONGLY advocated (see what I did there?) for the latter option. Lawyers need to be good at changing minds, I argued, not just uttering lies. Being persuasive while relying on the constraints provided by the law is what they do. So changing Deception to Diplomacy was the right way to go for the Barrister background.

And my argument won! Now, anyone who gets the Core Rulebook sees that barristers are good at Diplomacy as a default. Not Deception. You might say that, due to my own lawyer background, I had enough Diplomacy to effectively make my argument. 

And that's how I redeemed the good name of lawyers everywhere.