Lito lalo's page

I can see possible value of allowing this at first level, if you were to limit the number of skills that you could go negative on.

I'm not sure it's realistic to have characters get worse and worse at some skills as they grow in experience and overall ability. "Yeah, Victar over there was bad at figuring out how much things were worth when we started dungeon delving... these days, he doesn't know whats more valuable between gold pieces and copper pieces"

It might be funny, and if that's the kind of campaign you want then by all means... but I would limit this to a first level thing to allow low skill rank classes to pick up a couple extra class skills. No negative skill points after that.

Of course this is an optional thing for the PC's they don't have to take it if they don's wish to. I think its of value to allow them to choose what they can take penalties on to get different benefits on other skills.

This could also symbolise skills being neglected in exchange of expertise on others, no?

This has been tried in a number of other games, and it rarely works well for precisely the reasons mentioned by RDM42. I don't think I've ever made a Perform check other than as a bard or in an explicitly themed campaign (e.g., we're the Partridge Family and we're a traveling band). So when my wizard takes negative ranks in every Perform skill ever, it's simply free skill points.

Or when my fighter takes negative ranks in Perform.

How many Profession skills are there that I will never roll? [So, I have a -5 in Profession (neatherd). What's a neatherd, anyway?] How many free skill points can I put in something I will actually use, like Knowledge skills or Perception?

ETA you might limit the damage this rule will do if you limit negative ranks to class skills only, and not to open-ended skills like Craft/Profession/Perform. That would help ensure that the disadvantages are real disadvantages. But even there, negative skill ranks in Climb are meaningless when you can fly....

Yeah with perform you are right, but the player could only get 2 more skills per level from that and the more negatives they put the GM could have some fun making them relevant in an encounter every now and then.

On the other hand profession is a trained skill so the PC's would not be able to take any negative ranks on them.

And again just to be clear you could only have a cumulative negative skill ranks on a particular skill equal to your level, so if your character is a level 1 character they would not be able to allocate less than -1.

Something that could work is to put negatives further than a mere check as the negative skill stack, up to each GM.

Hey, so I wanted some feedback on how to make better a house rule I came up with, to give my PC's more skill versatility.

So basically I allow the PC's to take negative skill ranks, this is just like taking normal skill ranks every level but on the opposite direction, for example:

at level 1 a fighter with 10 intelligence gets 2 skill ranks, with this system he could choose to put a -1 skill rank on any non trained skill to obtain an extra skill rank somewhere else. this way they could put -1 on appraise to then put it somewhere else, at level 2 the -1 could go to -2 and so on until -20 at level 20.

Of course the higher the negative skill rank the higher the penalty up to GM discretion the negatives could be scaled and given flavor to.

What do you guys think?? I think its a good way to give a little more chance to the classes with low skill ranks p/l like the fighter.

Hey, in the new action economy readying an action is a simple action it takes 1 out of your 3 actions. It says, "ou must have enough acts left to complete the action you ready." does this mean that I would need to use 2 actions plus my reaction to use a readied action or just 1 simple action and my reaction. For instance a fighter readies an action to hit a monster when it approaches to ready it takes 1 simple action and then when the monster comes does the fighter hit as a reaction or does he need to have a simple action unused to be able to hit, apart from the reaction and the previously used action on readying.

also for instance would a caster that casts a spell which takes 2 acts not be able to ready an action to move if a foe comes to a certain area?

Hey one of my players wants to craft a magic item but instead of using one of the bonuses on the book he wants to choose a spell (heroism) to imbue the armor with.

Are there any rules out there the would tell me how to solve this or what requirements he needs to craft an armor with that ability?

he also wanted to craft gauntlets or an item with the breath of life spell imbued is it possible?

thanks

hey one of my PCs wants to try and steal a potion from an npc and smash it into their face on the same turn.

is this possible?

what rules or feats are used?

hey guys im a GM and im starting a campaign with all new PCs do any of you know of any society modules that could be good for learning how to play??

hey guys so im a cleric and i want to take a level in bard. by doing so do the spells that the bard has add to my spells so for example if i have 2 level 1 spells for cleric and 2 level 1 spells for bard would i then have 2 cleric spells and 2 bard spells to use?? or only 2 spells from either list??

hey guy im playing a cleric lvl 8 and i just got enough BAB to do 2 attacks in the same round is it legal to instead of doing 2 attacks with my sword to cast 2 spells or 2 magic attacks??

thanks 0)