I disagree on Sorceror's needing more skill points.
They have magic. It's a built-in incentive NOT to learn stuff - just use magic to solve your problems instead! There are very, very few skills that can't be duplicated with a max investment of 1 skill point and a spell to boost it, or simply replaced outright.
{. . .}Your argument would hold true for an Arcanist, Magus(*), Wizard, or any of the Int-based Psychic spellcasters -- those get lots of skill ranks because they have to have a high Intelligenc, which they then put much of into their spellcasting, reflected in only 2 + IntMod skill ranks per level. For other spellcasters, their spellcasting doesn't come from their Intelligence, leaving it more free to do other things, even though it usually isn't boosted as high in the first place. Remember that spontaneous spellcasters get a much more limited selection of spells, while divine spellcasters usually get less of the problem-solving spells(**) outside of the healing/bad status removal department, so they need to be more creative, which includes use of things other than spells to solve problems.
(*)Except Eldritch Scion archetype of Magus, which in addition to some other bug fixes that we still haven't gotten, also needs more skill ranks per level.
(**)Find the Path is a glaring exception, but that spell should be bumped up a couple of levels and made blockable anyway.
Spellcasters should have low skill points, period. It doesn't matter what stat they use. Spellcasting is an alternative to doing things the hard way. You don't need to use skills when you can use magic to do the same thing faster, easier.
Magic use should be the most skill-intensive, time-consuming 'skill' in the game. Yeah, if you're a supra-genius, you've got synergy, but, come on. There's no actual 'caster benefit' to having dozens of ranks in Knowledge skills. It's just a 'hobby'. The big thing is you KNOW MAGIC.
And it doesn't matter if you know it by Cha, Wis or Int. You know magic, you don't have to work at having skills. The whole time/incentive thing just isn't there. It also doesn't mean it's any less difficult for you to do anything - Spellcraft works off the prime caster stat, not Int, after all. It's equally as difficult for a cleric to get the insight adn inspiration to improve his magic as it is for a sorceror to bestir his bloodline as it is for a wizard to suddenly puzzle out another piece of the cosmos.
The only skill that is important to you is Spellcraft, and you get it automatically with caster levels. There's literally no reason for you to really have any skill other then "really good with magic." Magic does it all.
==Aelryinth
^Not really, unless you are willing to mind-control your way through everything that you can't blast, charm, dominate, tentacle, or otherwise murderhobo and/or tyrranize your way through. And even if you're willing, you're not going to be able to do a very good job of it without skills, because you need to be able to identify what you are up against, and even before that, you need to be able to perceive that something is in your way in the first place. You don't really want to entrust all this stuff to minions, do you? If you need to cast spells to do all of these things every time, you are going to run out of spells really fast
And casting stat does make a big difference, because even with 0 + IntMod skill ranks per level, an Arcanist, Magus, Wizard, or Int-based Psychic spellcaster is guaranteed to have some skill ranks per level, and will be only impaired relative to current rules, whereas non-Int spellcasters would be crippled, and many of them are already running really tight on skill ranks per level. So non-Int spellcasters do need more skill ranks per level than Int-based spellcasters.
Finally, where do the rules say that spellcasters automatically get ranks in Spellcraft? I can't believe I managed to miss something that important! Sure would save me a lot of grief in my builds . . . Also would have saved some players in some PbPs some grief from the rest of their party for not spending skill points on SpellCraft ranks.
Woops! Meant concentration. Casters used to have to pay for that one, too, and now they get it for free.
UAE, you're not getting any sympathy from me for non-Int casters. There's other advantages for not having to use Int for your prime stat in game play. FOr Wis, it's the unlimited spell book and WIll save bonus. For Cha, it's the huge bonuses to social skills and never needing to acquire spells for your book.
Casters get some skills. If they want more, MAKE THEM INVEST IN INT. More likely, they'll just invest in multiple headbands of Intellect + 2. If they consider knowledge skills important, then those are the ones they are going to take. If skill points are tight, then doesn't that make classes who have more skill points more valuable?
And no, I don't believe bards or inquisitors deserve the skill bonuses they get, either.
It's no different then everyone complaining that fighters don't need more skill points, you just need to stick a 14 in their Int Stat and they are fine. Except fighters don't get magic.
Just giving it to them because "Oh, Casters who are NOT geniuses deserve more base skill points then those that ARE geniuses" is the essence of a horrible argument. By that logic, I'm going to torpedo my barb's Int down to 4 and argue he should have a base 8 skill points per level, cause he needs it more then the guy with 13 Int.
==Aelryinth
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
No class in the game should have less then 4+Int skill points.
All martial classes should get perception as a class skill.
Swashbucklers should get dex to damage with there chosen weapon built into the class, no feats needed.
All classes that use armor should get an unarmored option were they use there wis or cha mod to AC like monks.
Sorcerer's should get diplomacy as a class skill.
Weapon finesse shouldn't even be a feat, it should be a flat out option for free.
Kineticist should get energy resistance related to there chosen element(s), and immunity to there energy if they focused on one element.
All martial classes should get one or two free improved combat maneuver options.
I think we should get more stat boost like 1 physical and 1 mental at every even level with a stat max of 20+ 1/2 level(Max 30 at LV20). But get rid of stat boosting equipment so such spells stay useful to level 20.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Definitely like those suggestions. Adding to my list of potential house rules later.
{. . .}
UAE, you're not getting any sympathy from me for non-Int casters. There's other advantages for not having to use Int for your prime stat in game play. FOr Wis, it's the unlimited spell book and WIll save bonus. For Cha, it's the huge bonuses to social skills and never needing to acquire spells for your book.
Unlimited spellbook isn't true for all Wisdom-based casters, and huge bonuses to social skills depends upon your having skill ranks to spend upon those social skills, while you also have to spend skill ranks on Knowledges for threat identification so that you don't just die.
Casters get some skills. If they want more, MAKE THEM INVEST IN INT. More likely, they'll just invest in multiple headbands of Intellect + 2. If they consider knowledge skills important, then those are the ones they are going to take. If skill points are tight, then doesn't that make classes who have more skill points more valuable?
Not so much when you have spellcasting classes running around who HAVE to have high Intelligence anyway.
And no, I don't believe bards or inquisitors deserve the skill bonuses they get, either.
Bards are SUPPOSED to be skill monkeys -- it's part of their schtick. And Inquisitors are an example of Wisdom-based spellcasters that don't get an unlimited spellbook.
It's no different then everyone complaining that fighters don't need more skill points, you just need to stick a 14 in their Int Stat and they are fine. Except fighters don't get magic.
We already agreed that Fighters need more skill points. I wouldn't be greatly opposed to giving them 6 + IntMod skill points per level -- in fact that would be reasonable if you did nothing else to make them better -- but I would like to see their other class features made better, and if it was a choice between doing that right(*) and giving them 4 + IntMod skill points per level, or just giving them 6 + IntMod skill points per level and leaving everything else as is, I would rather go with the former. Of course, archetypes that already get 4 + IntMod skill points per level(**) should go to 6 + IntMod skill points per level if the base Fighter goes to 4 + IntMod skill points per level, or 8 + IntMod points per level if the base Fighter goes to 6 + IntMod skill points per level.
(*)Stamina looks like a shot at that, but also looks not yet ready for prime time -- doesn't get you enough, and you potentially nerf yourself relative to the existing no Stamina situation if you run out.
(**)Lore Warden and Tactician, unless I missed one.
Just giving it to them because "Oh, Casters who are NOT geniuses deserve more base skill points then those that ARE geniuses" is the essence of a horrible argument. By that logic, I'm going to torpedo my barb's Int down to 4 and argue he should have a base 8 skill points per level, cause he needs it more then the guy with 13 Int.
If you DON'T make this change, the non-Int spellcasters are at a disadvantage relative to the Int-based spellcasters, just like the non-spellcasters. (And I'm not opposed to the idea of giving 2 more skill ranks per level to non-spellcasters.) The Pathfinder Unchained Background Skills subsystem (that nobody seems to use yet) would help with this, but remember that it would also help Int-based spellcasters also.
Bards have too many other things they are good at for skills to be their shtick.
'Skills their shtick' is supposed to be the rogues.
Instead, Bards get:
6 skill points a level, that basically double to 12 points a level:
+1/2 to all knowledge skills, by level.
Bardic performance
and full caster level bardic spellcasting.
There's NO WAY bards deserve that much skill buffing AND full casting. Not in the slightest.
as for Int vs other casters: Eh. Don't care. Spellcasting has enough going for it that I really, truly don't care. 2 skill points a level leaves every Caster with at least 2 things they are good at if they want to be, without using magic, and a ton of things they can still be good at, using magic.
Sorcs can buy Int raising stuff the same way wizards can, if they think skill points are important. They can shove a few points into Int for a few more skill points to spread around. They can acquire the same inherent bonuses. The discrepency in points isn't going to be that much if the sorc doesn't want it to be.
If they don't care, then no reason to give them free spell points.
--In earlier editions, the lack of class skills/features/skill points would be 'paid for' by costing more xp points. Rangers getting move silently and hide in shadows, and being harder to surprise, ended up costing them about 25% more xp/level then fighters. Current editions don't have relative levels as a balance factor, so you actually have to balance the classes.
If you simply removed skill points from the Int stat, that would probably be a Good Thing. But then you'd really need to revamp the classes system.
==Aelryinth
Rouges should get improved steal for free.
Power attack should be a combat option instead of a feat.
They should lessen feat requirements, if they don't want people getting it too early just give a level or BA bonus requirement.
It would be nice if evocation spells(or spells labeled as "combat spells") didn't provoke when casting.
Clerics need a 20th level cap ability maybe based on a domain of there choice that they have like the healing domain maximizes there channeling effect.
Crossbows should count as touch attacks at close range just like guns do.
Alternate weapon grouping system would be nice.
Rogues should be proficient with boomerangs, whips, and maybe one other exotic thrown weapon.
An alternate combat maneuver system would be nice.
Your logic isnt getting any better to me Aelry , saying "they should just increase INT" and "they should buy headbands to get extra INT"...
By this logic all martials wouldnt get a single extra skill point either , because "they should just put more in INT (even if it is just for skill points) and they should just buy headbands for extra skill points..."
"Fighters/Barbs/Cavaliers... can buy Int raising stuff the same way wizards can, if they think skill points are important"
What, apparently to me atleast , most here defend is classes not based on INT should get more skill points compared to those that are , so they can avoid having to invest much in INT just so they can have skill points.
Can unchained classes be turned into archetypes? Seems like it IMO.
An unchained fighter would be appreciated, and I see just one feature to add to make better and LESS braindead...
GIVE THEM SPECIAL ATTACKS LIKE MANEUVERS!!!
Instead of a Bonus Feat, give them the option to learn a spell-like ability, such as "Making a Vital Strike-like attack, dealing your weapon times your level". Ok, add "one use equals to 1 + your constitution modifier", explaining that it's a tiring move to use over and over, but still...
The fighter has so many issues right now.
- A fighter will use only 1, 2, maybe 3 weapons at most. 1 melee, 2 ranged and possibly 1 more melee for either backup or TWF. So what's the point of selecting more weapon groups, when you'll technically use only 2?
- Bravery just sucks... make it "add your fighter level as a bonus to Will saves against fear" instead of a puny +1 per/4 levels.
- Make it 4 + Int modifier for skill points, and add Perception to the list.
Another option would be to layer an archetype ON TOP of the regular class, not having the archetype replacing the fighter's features, but getting added as well.
^You probably wouldn't want a spell-like ability, because then Fighters would get nerfed by an Anti-Magic Field or Dead Magic Zone. Fighters need to be based upon Extraordinary Abilities, unless they dip or VMC in something that does otherwise, or take some weird archetype that already does otherwise, or if you are going to do something like 6th Edition D&D does and make Eldritch Knight a Fighter archetype.
* * * * * * * *
{. . .}
Sorcs can buy Int raising stuff the same way wizards can, if they think skill points are important. They can shove a few points into Int for a few more skill points to spread around. They can acquire the same inherent bonuses. The discrepency in points isn't going to be that much if the sorc doesn't want it to be.
{. . .}
No they can't (except for Sage Sorcerer) without turning themselves into all the same type of Sorcerer, because in order to pump Intelligence really high, they have to sacrifice in things other than Intelligence and Charisma, thus depriving themselves of options to differentiate themselves. Intelligence-based spellcasters don't have this problem, although they may have other things that make them MAD.
Your logic isnt getting any better to me Aelry , saying "they should just increase INT" and "they should buy headbands to get extra INT"...
By this logic all martials wouldnt get a single extra skill point either , because "they should just put more in INT (even if it is just for skill points) and they should just buy headbands for extra skill points..."
"Fighters/Barbs/Cavaliers... can buy Int raising stuff the same way wizards can, if they think skill points are important"
What, apparently to me at least , most here defend is classes not based on INT should get more skill points compared to those that are , so they can avoid having to invest much in INT just so they can have skill points.
Those aren't caster classes. They are physical classes. They learn skills because they don't have as much or any magic to fall back on.
Fighters, barbs and cavaliers can't make Int booster headbands for 2k a pop. Sure, if they want more skill points, they can buy Int boosters as well, to supplement the Wis boosters for their Will saves.
But what can Casters do? "I need Diplomacy today? Headband #2! Crafting tomorrow? Which one, I've got weaponsmith, armor smith, jeweler and woodworker ready to go!" Etc etc. Many skills you only need in specific situations, and you can actually prepare for those ahead of time. Since many out of combat DC's are low, it's quite easy to just assemble a variety of gear that does the job FOR you, without actually needing deep investment.
But unlike Casters, the fighting classes have NO RECOURSE. No alternative methods. No spells, no magic item construction. Their skills are all they get to achieve stuff. Furthermore, many adventuring skills are contested checks - you not only need the score, you need to be the ABSOLUTE BEST at it, unlike many other things, which means maxing out the skills.
And the less recourse you have, the more focused on mundane stuff you'll be. Asking for Wis and Cha casters to be favored with more skill points just because they aren't Int-based is pure bias. I see no reason to give them more skill points for remaining willfully dumb.
They have magic, let them use magic. Leave the skills to those without magic.
==Aelryinth
^I wouldn't object to your wish to make spellcasters more MAD if it applied evenly to all spellcasters (or at least evenly to all that have the same rate of spellcasting progression), but the problem is that because skill ranks per level (even for non-Intelligence skills) depends upon Intelligence, this enforced MAD aspect is NOT even. So Intelligence-based spellcasters are not MAD (unless something else makes them MAD), but other spellcasters are.
And I'd also like to see item crafting done to facilitate non-spellcasters making magic items (Master Craftsman doesn't do a very good job).
On an unrelated note (but still on topic), this thread seems to be indicating a need (or at least a demand) for a Cavalier Unchained. (And I could have sworn to having heard somewhere on these boards that Cavalier would have been the next class Paizo would have Unchained if they had more room.)
^You probably wouldn't want a spell-like ability, because then Fighters would get nerfed by an Anti-Magic Field or Dead Magic Zone. Fighters need to be based upon Extraordinary Abilities, unless they dip or VMC in something that does otherwise, or take some weird archetype that already does otherwise, or if you are going to do something like 6th Edition D&D does and make Eldritch Knight a Fighter archetype.
Ah ah, what I meant was "a maneuver that looks like a spell, without being a spell." :P
"Spell-like" as in that is similar to the spellcasting rules" ^_^
On an unrelated note (but still on topic), this thread seems to be indicating a need (or at least a demand) for a Cavalier Unchained. (And I could have sworn to having heard somewhere on these boards that Cavalier would have been the next class Paizo would have Unchained if they had more room.)
Hah.
There's another thread treading that says about the same. (I feel bad for derailing that one.)
But yes, please. Cavaliers could use it badly. Even what I like about the class feels wonky. Cavalier's Charge should be more spread out for one thing.
^Your idea is not all wrong. We should have some ability score modifier for number of skills gained, but putting it all on IntMod makes exactly the problem you describe. Problem is: The system isn't fine-grained enough for spreading it around to work well.
(That said, I'd like to see a Socialite archetype of Aristocrat that has a class ability Unencumbered by the Thought Process(*), that gets an extra 2 + ChaMod skill ranks that can only be used on social skills.)
(*)Car Talk reference, for those not familiar with this.
^Your idea is not all wrong. We should have some ability score modifier for number of skills gained, but putting it all on IntMod makes exactly the problem you describe. Problem is: The system isn't fine-grained enough for spreading it around to work well.
(That said, I'd like to see a Socialite archetype of Aristocrat that has a class ability Unencumbered by the Thought Process(*), that gets an extra 2 + ChaMod skill ranks that can only be used on social skills.)
(*)Car Talk reference, for those not familiar with this.
Imagine if there was a Fighter archetype that gave 2 + Con instead of 2 + Int...
^You probably want 2 + StrMod for Strength-based skills and 2 + DexMod for Desterity-based skills. Problem is that full StrMod, DexMod, etc. Are probably too much, even with the limitations imposed by MAD, so you would need some kind of fractional bonus system. (Pathfinder got rid of the last Constitution-based skill from D&D 3.5, which was Concentration, of all the weird things.)
^You probably want 2 + StrMod for Strength-based skills and 2 + DexMod for Desterity-based skills. Problem is that full StrMod, DexMod, etc. Are probably too much, even with the limitations imposed by MAD, so you would need some kind of fractional bonus system. (Pathfinder got rid of the last Constitution-based skill from D&D 3.5, which was Concentration, of all the weird things.)
I think that would be going way too far. Int. represents your ability to pick up and learn new things. I can see Con. taking on a simular role for "bootcamp," but even then I think Int. makes more sense for an adventurer. Gaining bootcamp skills would need a bit of a refluff.
Str. and Dex. would make for very unusual skill points. I'm not sure how those could be fluffed at all. Bending over backwards and hitting really hard don't make you spend the time repeating an action to get good at it.
It's called being a physical genius. You know how to use your body in the right manner to get maximum effect out of it. Other people might mistake it for high coordination or Dex, but you're just naturally good at physical control, execution, and leverage. It's kind of the same way some people have a talent for fighting, and others do not.
Or, to put it another way, as Rain Man pointed out, you don't need to be genius to be really smart at something. It's called Savancy.
As for feats that allow Int to social skills - Int casters will pay a price to use those feats, a price that Cha casters don't have to pay, and can use that feat to do other things. It's really not all that different then taking Skill Focus for a skill, in the scheme of things, and so rarely considered an optimal use of a feat. But if they want to...more power to them!
Every single character can get +11 to any ability score (magic item + inherents) and Casters have the easiest time of all doing this. If a Cha caster wants more skill points, use magic, get smarter. You have the class abilities to do it, so use your magic and do it. Don't just expect me to throw 2 skill points at you because Wizards use Int, and you think you should get some Cha skills for free because of it.
==Aelryinth
Sorry, I need to clarify, I meant to say heavy crossbows to get touch attacks at close range, not crossbows.
I think Crossbows getting Str ratings to damage would solve a LOT of problems with crossbows. I don't really see the justification for making them equal to ballista.
A variant you might consider if you want H Crossbows to be more dangerous is to give them a Strength Rating, and that affects both TH and DMG, to represent the armor punching potential. Simply have it take an extra move action to draw back and reload for every point of Str you are low.
==Aelryinth
It's called being a physical genius. You know how to use your body in the right manner to get maximum effect out of it. Other people might mistake it for high coordination or Dex, but you're just naturally good at physical control, execution, and leverage. It's kind of the same way some people have a talent for fighting, and others do not.
What you are describing is more like an arguement for an Int. to Dex. feat. :p
I can see the reasoning behind high Dex. meaning you should natually be talented at something Dex. related. But that's what the ability mod to skills and some feats represent. There is still a discipline to becoming trained at something.
Naturally talented has nothing to do with Dex. It means you learn something easily. Do you think Rain Man was a genius?
It's called savancy. Int has nothing to do with it. There's more then one kind of 'genius', and they aren't all Int based.
As for discipline...that's buying skill ranks.If something is easy for you to learn, that's savancy. If you're better at it then other people, that's high Stats or burning feats for 'extra time' spent mastering a skill. Different things.
==Aelryinth
I think heavy crossbow should have a property that makes it gain an extra 50% damage from Deadly Aim, like a two handed weapon gets from power attack.
Seriously, if you want to discriminate against Int-based casters like that, just up the 'real cost' of being an Int caster.
Maximum caster level cannot exceed Ranks in Spellcraft.
Cannot learn spells in certain schools tied to Ranks in certain Skills. Maybe you have to have Embalmer or Heal Ranks to master Necromancy (1 rank/spell level). Knowledge (the planes) ranks to learn Conjuration spells.
Make it so all those extra skill points from Int actually have to be USED, so that when people say you need to be a genius to be a mage, it actually means something! I mean, if it actually REQUIRED 5 skill points/level to function as a full out mage, there's really no advantage in skill points to an INt caster...and it's one more thing non-Int casters don't have to worry about!
==Aelryinth
Naturally talented has nothing to do with Dex. It means you learn something easily. Do you think Rain Man was a genius?
It's called savancy. Int has nothing to do with it. There's more then one kind of 'genius', and they aren't all Int based.
As for discipline...that's buying skill ranks.If something is easy for you to learn, that's savancy. If you're better at it then other people, that's high Stats or burning feats for 'extra time' spent mastering a skill. Different things.
==Aelryinth
The reference is lost on me. That still sound more like a skill feat like Stealthy's description than it does a core mechanic. Yes, buying skill ranks indicates discipline. That discipline is very much Int. based though. I think thematically there can be an argument for a Con. modifier to skill points as say a soldier. But 2 + Dex. would be weird.
Put it another way. Tom is thin and fit. He pumps his physical prowellness up. His natural Dex. is high, and as a result he has +5 to acrobatics.
Jill on the other hand, she is a lazy bum. She is curled up on her phone with Braum's next to her and I might be decribing exactly myself with a name change, BUT LET'S IGNORE THAT. Anyways, she has a much lower Dex., but has studied physical movement and practices extensively. She knows exactly how much to turn the wheel in a car to go sidewides, how to vroom over a jump, and exactly how much pressure a rock will take before giving out under her. She sees the physics of it all because she has spent mental effort learning it. Or just picked it up from the 2 everyone gets. Regardless, she has a lot of Ranks in Driving and Acrobatics so she is better at it. Ton is almost as good though because he has the ability score for it.
Then you make an alteration to what the ability to gain skill points means.
Physical Genius: You may use Str or Dex instead of Int to determine the number of skill points per level you gain. You may only use these points to purchase skills with a Str, Dex or Con modifier to them.
--Which, if you think about it, is probably exactly what a Rogue is...someone who masters Dex skills exceedingly easily.
==Aelryinth
Those aren't caster classes. They are physical classes. They learn skills because they don't have as much or any magic to fall back on.
Fighters, barbs and cavaliers can't make Int booster headbands for 2k a pop. Sure, if they want more skill points, they can buy Int boosters as well, to supplement the Wis boosters for their Will saves.
But what can Casters do? "I need Diplomacy today? Headband #2! Crafting tomorrow? Which one, I've got weaponsmith, armor smith, jeweler and woodworker ready to go!" Etc etc. Many skills you only need in specific situations, and you can actually prepare for those ahead of time. Since many out of combat DC's are low, it's quite easy to just assemble a variety of gear that does the job FOR you, without actually needing deep investment.
But unlike Casters, the fighting classes have NO RECOURSE. No alternative methods. No spells, no magic item construction. Their skills are all they get to achieve stuff. Furthermore, many adventuring skills are contested checks - you not only need the score, you need to be the ABSOLUTE BEST at it, unlike many other things, which means maxing out the skills.
And the less recourse you have, the more focused on mundane stuff you'll be. Asking for Wis and Cha casters to be favored with more skill points just because they aren't Int-based is pure bias. I see no reason to give them more skill points for remaining willfully dumb.
They have magic, let them use magic. Leave the skills to those without magic.
==Aelryinth
As soon as paizo makes a level 0 spell that gives you , increasing with the level of the caster ofc , skill points on a set of skills and that with these spells casters can completely cover all skills , i agree they dont need to invest in skill points and can cover their bases with magic.
Until then , all you are doing is making wizards even better than the other casters lols. Since they can get the skill points AND be good at social skills with traits.
Personally i would house rule in favor of classes not based on INT gaining extra skill points , but unless the game starts at level 10+ , martials and casters both will be getting it.
The logic that other casters should just invest in INT anyway and learn certain spells wont do it for me.
Seriously, if you want to discriminate against Int-based casters like that, just up the 'real cost' of being an Int caster.
Maximum caster level cannot exceed Ranks in Spellcraft.
Cannot learn spells in certain schools tied to Ranks in certain Skills. Maybe you have to have Embalmer or Heal Ranks to master Necromancy (1 rank/spell level). Knowledge (the planes) ranks to learn Conjuration spells.
Make it so all those extra skill points from Int actually have to be USED, so that when people say you need to be a genius to be a mage, it actually means something! I mean, if it actually REQUIRED 5 skill points/level to function as a full out mage, there's really no advantage in skill points to an INt caster...and it's one more thing non-Int casters don't have to worry about!
Something like that could work, but it's more complicated than just giving classes that are not Int-based spellcasters more skill ranks per level, and would make it more difficult to check character sheets for errors.
But now you're discriminating in the other direction. What's so special about their class that they actually deserve more skill points then a wizard?
Especially when you tack on cleric/druid armor and weapon profs/BAB, sorceror 'i don't need to work at magic' attitude, and suchlike? It's a have your cake and eat it, too, scenario - there's no 'cost', there's no give and take, it's 'I get it all.'
No, you shouldn't get it all. if you have magic, you should definitely be lacking in mundane skills.
==Aelryinth
Sorcerers are already less powerful versions of wizards with more interesting flavor I might add.
They get there spells later(2nd lv magic and higher) then wizards.
They are not Int based casters so a lot less skill points. Don't get me wrong I like them as Cha casters.
They are supposed to be used to living on there own, in the wild, or always on there guard if they live in populated areas. Yet they lack class skills such as diplomacy, survival, perception, sense motive, climb, swim, and most knowledge skills.
There are so many stories of sorcerers who's new found powers led to them being banished or chased off of there home. Yet they lack the skills and most spells to survive.
The odds of someone taking endure elements is not very likely and create food/water and purify food/drink are not sorcerer spells.
Then you have sorcerers who live in populated areas but lack the class skills that would be very helpful such as diplomacy, sense motive, and knowledge(local).
Bluff is a survival skill. Works just as well as Diplomacy, except you aren't restricted to telling the truth.
Being able to shoot your prey with magic is a survival skill. bzzrt! who needs a bow?
Anyone can take any skill, so the only thing 'missing' is the +3 modifier.
And you have unlimited cantrips usable that can definitely ease the survival problem. Plus the amount of time and effort that Prestidigitation alone can save you...
If you're hell bent on living out in the wilds, you'll take Endure Elements. But that way of living is hard work!
More likely you'll fast talk your way into favoritism with someone in power and use your magic to up your lifestyle considerably. Usually while someone else pays for it. And work on getting your magic stronger so you can up the amount of gold coming your way, by one means or another.
==Aelryinth
But now you're discriminating in the other direction. What's so special about their class that they actually deserve more skill points then a wizard?
Especially when you tack on cleric/druid armor and weapon profs/BAB, sorceror 'i don't need to work at magic' attitude, and suchlike? It's a have your cake and eat it, too, scenario - there's no 'cost', there's no give and take, it's 'I get it all.'
No, you shouldn't get it all. if you have magic, you should definitely be lacking in mundane skills.
{. . .}
But you are letting the Int-based casters get it all. I'm not even saying that the average number of actual skill ranks of non-Int-based casters and Int-based casters have to be tweaked until the ranges are perfectly centered, but the current disparity is too much, like it is for Fighter compared to other martials. Besides, since Sorcerers don't have to work at magic, this frees up some of whatever brain power they have to work on skills -- shouldn't be a huge number, but should be 4 + IntMod skill points per level (unless somebody figures out a workable way to make use of other ability score modifiers simultaneously) (this adjustment also excluding Sage Sorcerers).
Likewise, within martials, give Fighter 4 + IntMod skill points per level (except 6 + IntMod for those archetypes that already get that much), and improve class features. If class features are not improved from the current condition, then 6 + IntMod skill points would be the next best thing, but this combined with the lack of improvement of class features I think would create a less satisfactory overall improvement; on the other hand, if one were doing a remix of Fighter, Ranger, and Slayer into a archetypes of a more broadly-encompassing Fighter class, this might be a reasonable start. Bonus points if you could somehow get Barbarian/Bloodrager and Cavalier/Samurai(*) into the remix, although that might make the class table(s) and conditional statements in the descriptive text just too unwieldy.
(*)Cavalier (and by extension Samurai) could use an Unchained version too, and reportedly one of the Paizo people said that Cavalier would have been next on the list if they had more space in Pathfinder Unchained. Arguably Cavalier needed it worse than Barbarian.