Back to 4 Skill Ranks at 1st level...

Hey everyone.

I am currently pondering about the idea to revert the skill rank system back to its 3.5 version.
(with some modifications of course)

Why?
While at first the new rule was nice and simple it still lacks in character versatility/outflashyness/whatever.

How?

1) Max skill rank for class skills is 3+level, cross-class is half that level.
(multiclass characters have to calculate seperately and add them together in the end)

2) All skills cost 1 skill point per rank

3) Characters receive 15-20 (?) free skill points at 1st level + the normal amount of skill points for their class for advancing one level.
(This is easier than the whole x4 at 1st level thing considering multi-classing)

4) Re-Add 3 ranks to all feat/prestige requirements

5) something I forgot...

What do you guys think?

Hey everyone.

I am currently pondering about the idea to revert the skill rank system back to its 3.5 version.
(with some modifications of course)

Why?
While at first the new rule was nice and simple it still lacks in character versatility/outflashyness/whatever.

Versatility I understand, but "outflashyness"? Could you explain what that means.

Whats the real benefit of this 3+level max in stead of the PF max rank=level but you get +3 on class skills?

3) I see that as a stealthy rogue nerf if everyone gets a ton full of skill points for free.
The whole reason for the x4 was that it retains the balance through skillpoints/level. Something you overthrow.

It's the same reason I see additional free feats as a fighter nerf.

@ Valandil: Sorry, me no english native, me german. :P
What I meant was: I am missing the ability to have more skills at first level, but with only 1 or 2 skill ranks just to flash out character concept/background/whatever.

@ Umbranus:
True dat.
Another idea was to reuse the "x4" and make the Multi-classing a bit more complicated in that:

"If your new class receives more skill points per level than EVERY of your previous classes, you receive a number of additional skill points equal to your new classes skill points MINUS the highest number of skill points per level from your previous classes TIMES 3."

This way you are not as f**cked when MC into a high skill class.

What I DON'T like about this:

1) It's more complicated
2) A 1 level dip into rogue gives A LOT of skill points

This way you are not as f**cked when MC into a high skill class.

I always liked that about the old system. When multiclassing you had to decide if you start with the high hp or with the high skillpoint class.

@ Valandil: Sorry, me no english native, me german. :P

What I meant was: I am missing the ability to have more skills at first level, but with only 1 or 2 skill ranks just to flash out character concept/background/whatever.

Thanks.

A fairly common houserule is to give a few extra skill points at character creation that can only be used for background skills.

The current Pathfinder skill point system is the same as D&D 3.5 except that cross-class skills are easier to acquire and after lvl 3 are more effective.

Max skill ranks

LVL.....PF....D&D(3.5)
1........1.......2
2........2.......2.5
3........3.......3
4........4.......3.5
5........5.......4

Also, I dont remember getting the x4 past character lvl 1, which made choosing your character lvl 1 class important. I could be wrong it has been awhile since I played 3.5

The current Pathfinder skill point system is the same as D&D 3.5 except that cross-class skills are easier to acquire and after lvl 3 are more effective.

Max skill ranks

LVL.....PF....D&D(3.5)
1........1.......2
2........2.......2.5
3........3.......3
4........4.......3.5
5........5.......4

Also, I dont remember getting the x4 past character lvl 1, which made choosing your character lvl 1 class important. I could be wrong it has been awhile since I played 3.5

It's the same if you max out all your skills.

If you want to throw a point into 4-5 skills at 1st level to reflect background that you're probably never going to put points into again, it's not the same.

1) Max skill rank for class skills is 3+level, cross-class is half that level.
(multiclass characters have to calculate seperately and add them together in the end)

Wait wait wait...you want that horrid half for cross classed skills again?!? Why in god's green earth would you do that?

Half-ranks were stupid, and WotC should be ashamed for ever printing that in any book ever.
So if you ignore half ranks (by rounding down) but still use Class/Cross-Class, then things work much more smoothly.

At level 8, your max ranks in a CC skill would be 5, not 5.5.

Gods NO!

I only want to restrict MAX RANK!

Not make CC-skills actually cost double again!

Hell no!

No sir no!

Nada!

Nein Mein Herr!

Mais non!

Niet!

Boo!

Iee!

...

BTW, just read point 2) and you should have got your answer right away...

Agreed!
And while we're at it, split Spot and Listen back into two skills!

The problem with the lower max rank for cross-class skills is that it makes cross-class skills essentially useless.

In 3.5, you had three basic levels of skill investment:
- Full (this is a class skill, and you've kept it max'd)
- Half (cross-class skill, max'd)
- None

The problem is that this means that investing in a cross-class skill eventually becomes a losing proposition. The adventure designer can set the DC for a skill check high enough to challenge people who invest max ranks, which comes close to making it impossible for someone who has the skill as cross-class. Or he can challenge the person with the skill cross-class, and make it trivial for the character who has it as a class skill.

What ends up happening is that DCs are set to challenge the character who has the skill as class, and max'd out. This makes it nearly impossible for the person with the skill cross-class to operate.

The counter is that the PF way makes the distinction between class and cross-class skills almost negligible, often less than the stat difference.

The counter is that the PF way makes the distinction between class and cross-class skills almost negligible, often less than the stat difference.

If the +3 bonus between class and non-class skills was so negligible, you wouldn't see so many players looking for ways to monkey a non class skill to class status.

thejeff wrote:

The counter is that the PF way makes the distinction between class and cross-class skills almost negligible, often less than the stat difference.

If the +3 bonus between class and non-class skills was so negligible, you wouldn't see so many players looking for ways to monkey a non class skill to class status.

Hey, a +3 bonus is a good thing, don't get me wrong. It's even better when many of those traits actually give another +1.

But even assuming he didn't take one of those traits would you have the Cleric who's maxed his Wis make the perception check or the Rogue, who's got it as class skill, but only has a 12 wisdom? Assuming they've both maxed Perception. The Cleric's only a little behind at the start and will surpass the Rogue as soon as he gets a stat bonus or 2 and some booster items.

But even assuming he didn't take one of those traits would you have the Cleric who's maxed his Wis make the perception check or the Rogue, who's got it as class skill, but only has a 12 wisdom? Assuming they've both maxed Perception. The Cleric's only a little behind at the start and will surpass the Rogue as soon as he gets a stat bonus or 2 and some booster items.

I don't understand your question. If it's about choosing between the cleric and the rogue, Perception is far from the only consideration.

The counter is that the PF way makes the distinction between class and cross-class skills almost negligible, often less than the stat difference.

I think that's intentional. When Pathfinder was being designed, one of the goals was to make it easier for a single character to have a more varied set of skills. To do this, they eliminated a lot of the drawbacks to putting skill points into non-class skills.

The Pathfinder system is actually a lot more friendly to using non-class skills than the 3.5 system is.

In the 3.5 system, skill points in non-class skills were pretty much a waste. Not only did they cost double, but you could only get them up half way.

It's smart that you're planning on doing away with the double cost, since that was clearly the worst part of the 3.5 system. However, if you keep that second drawback, there's still very little reason to ever try to max a non-class skill, because the DCs will be tailored to the fully maxxed-out class skill.

The difference won't be very large at low levels. But as level increases, the gap widens. Eventually, whatever skill points you have put into non-class skills will become worthless. DCs will increase too far, and you won't be able to keep up.

So your players will still be discouraged from picking non-class skills for flavor, because those points will lose value as the game progresses.

But in the Pathfinder system, if your players choose to invest skill points in a non-class skill, they still get a good return on their investment. The +3 for class skills is a useful bump, especially at low levels, but it's not so huge that it renders non-class skills irrelevant.

More importantly, as level increases, the math works the other way: the difference between a maxxed class skill and a maxxed non-class skill stays at 3, which means the difference becomes less statistically significant as the numbers increase. This means that if you take non-class skills early on for flavor, you can still keep them useful if you choose to keep investing in them.

thejeff wrote:

But even assuming he didn't take one of those traits would you have the Cleric who's maxed his Wis make the perception check or the Rogue, who's got it as class skill, but only has a 12 wisdom? Assuming they've both maxed Perception. The Cleric's only a little behind at the start and will surpass the Rogue as soon as he gets a stat bonus or 2 and some booster items.

I don't understand your question. If it's about choosing between the cleric and the rogue, Perception is far from the only consideration.

That the class skill difference becomes less significant than other differences and I'd rather see it more important.

The example wouldn't be choosing which class to play, but which character in the party you'd use for a given task. Maybe Perception wasn't the best choice, since multiple people usually get to roll it. Make it Sorcerer with maxed non-class diplomacy and a boosted CHA and a Cleric with a maxed class skill Diplomacy, but only a decent CHA. Who gets to try to talk the king into helping them? And who gets to roll to Aid instead?

I'm not sure what the best approach is. I think 3.5 made the difference too great, but I think PF may have overreacted and made it too small. I'm not sure what a good compromise would be. Maybe just a larger penalty?

I have a better solution that may not rely on either you get 4 ranks at first level but you can put up to level +3 ranks in class skills but can put only up to your level in cross class skills and no class skill bonus. This way you can still get flavorful dipping of one rank without minmaxing the same ranks over and over agian. This also prevent dipping in class skills to get a +4.

I've tried giving characters bonus skill points at first level = 1/2 what they get from their class per level + 1/2 their INT mod.

For background flavor skills, why not just award them as trait bonuses?

For background flavor skills, why not just award them as trait bonuses?

I think that's a good idea.

It could be something like:
You get a bonus on one profession skill equal to (max rank) - (learned rank) /2 = Bonus
For example: If your max rank is 4 and you have 1 rank in the chosen profession you get a trait bonus of (4-1)/2=1,5 rounded down to 1.
If you did not have a rank in the profession you'd get +2. But if the profession is a class skill putting a rank into it is still worthwhile.

lots of smart stuff...

Trinite, I must thank your for your sharp and clear statement.

I consider this thread closed but feel free to hang around and enjoy the coffee and cake...

Thank you all very much and have a nice weekend!

If you want it to flesh out characters, consider instead giving 4 extra skill points at 1st level, which can only be spent in Profession, Craft, Perform, and Appraise skills (and maybe some more if there's anything as sucky, don't remember ATM).

It's easy, doesn't care what class you are or how you multiclass, and is means even the most stupid fighter can have a background - without giving anything powerful for adventures. And it won't step on the toes of the rogue/monk/ranger/bard.

Trinite wrote:

lots of smart stuff...

Trinite, I must thank your for your sharp and clear statement.

With your fine specimen of a post you convinced me to drop the idea with no hard feelings at all.

I consider this thread closed but feel free to hang around and enjoy the coffee and cake...

Thank you all very much and have a nice weekend!

Well, I hate to kill off any houserule, but thanks for the complement!

I will add that there are a couple of side-effects to the Pathfinder system that you might think about trying to fix:

1. Because class skills are less important, having a long list of class skills is a less valuable class feature. It's a small, but real, stealth nerf to Rogue and Bard. If you feel like Rogues aren't getting enough glory as skill-monkeys, consider giving them even more skill points per level, or maybe allow them a higher maximum than normal on certain skills.

2. Because the gap is always 3, ability modifiers to skills become more mathematically significant in overall skill rolls. Having a high modifier can potentially make a bigger difference than having something as a class skill. This isn't necessarily a problem, as far as I can see, but it is a factor.

3. I join in recommending that if you want your players to have more diverse skill sets, give them bonus "background" skill points to spend at character creation. Alternatively, allow them to "train" skills by awarding them a free skill point whenever they succeed by 5 or more on a skill that they have no points in. If you want, you could limit this to only during Level 1, or 1 and 2.

Its funny, I was thinking about what house rules I would introduce if I ever were to run 3.5 with house rules, and this was pretty much what I came up with as well.

1st level PCs don't get 4x skill points but get normal number of skill points + 12 Skill points. This means when creating higher level NPCs or the like total skill points don't differ depending on order of classes.

Class skills are capped at Character Level+3

Cross class skills cost 1 point per rank but are still capped at (Character Level+3)/2 rd.

Possibly give each character at character creation 8 or so ranks to put into one or more Profession, Craft or Perform skills to represent their background. Not sure whether to limit them to level+3, or let them put all points into a single skill if they wish (though not allow regular skill points to be used on same skill). Trouble is I am not sure about Craft and Performance as those have more in game uses than Profession, generally at least.

In the 3.5 system, skill points in non-class skills were pretty much a waste. Not only did they cost double, but you could only get them up half way.

[...]
IHowever, if you keep that second drawback, there's still very little reason to ever try to max a non-class skill, because the DCs will be tailored to the fully maxxed-out class skill.

The difference won't be very large at low levels. But as level increases, the gap widens.

I am not sure I agree with this, it sounds like you feel DCs should be set to challenge the character with maxed out class skills, I wouldn't necessarily do this.

Rather I may set the DC of a general task to be a challenge to a moderately competent character, and if somoene has maxed out in that skill then they are likely to accomplish it easily (though with the range of results on a d20, may still fail).

E.g. A level 7 fighter has put 5 ranks into Open Lock and has a +3 Dex bonus, for a total modifier of +8. Trying to pick a very simple lock with some Masterwork Thieves Tools (+2) would not be that challenging, (DC20, 55% chance of success or an auto success with Take 10) and an Average lock (DC25, 30% chance of success) would be possible but challenging.

Now a level 7 rogue with 10 ranks, a +4 dex, and the Nimble Fingers feat would have a +16 modifier (+18 with MW Thieves Tools) & would be able to Take 10 on both a Very Simple and an Average lock, however under stress could still fail both Open Lock checks - just not very likely (Very Simply DC20, 95% chance of success, Average Lock DC 25, 70% chance of success).

So yes, while a Rogue with maxed out skills is going to find it easier the Fighter IMHO hasn't wasted those ranks in a Cross Class skill.

Now, if we are talking about skills like Hide (or Stealth in PF) then having cross class skills even, limited to (Character Level+3)/2 rd are not likely to be wasted as there will be times when everyone needs to sneak somewhere - success cannot be achieved by a single person with maxed out skills.

Of course, I can still set DCs to be challenging for a maxed out skill PC, but that would be in a case where only they need to succeed (so not in an ambush or other stealth situation for example) and where it is that PC's chance to shine - success means an easier was forward (but failure wouldn't result in a dead end, just a more difficult route).

To be honest, its discussions like this that make me realise how much I have come to enjoy 4e's skill system with its Half Level bonus to all skills as you level up (so everyone likely has at least a chance to all sneak into the castle), and the general Background bonus that works like Savage World's common knowledge checks and doesn't require expenditure of valuable skill points to justify a background with a skill that may only get used once in a blue moon.