|
Considering how few skill points most classes get each level I think there should be a modification when playing in a large campaign world -- one that requires a Knowledge Local for each specific Region (or Kingdom, etc.), such as FR, GH, or a long standing Homebrew world.
If the whole of the campaign is to be played just in Chult or Sterich March or whatever, no big deal, no modification allowed (or necessary). But for a world spanning campaign the players will have knowledge of the regions and the PCs can't dedicate so many ranks in various Knowledges Local. This is wrong.
Here's my proposition, in such campaigns a PC purchases x number of Knowledge Local ranks and then has x number of ranks in as many Knowledges Local as his/her INT modifier.
So, a PC with a 16 INT allocates 1 rank into Knowledge Local. That PC must select 3 (INT mod) different Localities: Waterdeep, Western Heartlands, Cormyr, and has 1 rank in each for a total modifier of +4.
Opinions?
-W. E. Ray
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Or you could impose a -4 penalty using the skill for a region you're not specialized in.
And a feat called Well-Traveled or something that negates that penalty.
I like Daigle's solution and think I will adopt it for my own campaigns. It's less complicated and less complicated is always good, imo.
I would, however, designate some areas as 'obscure' and probably ramp the penalty up to -10 for them. Places like Aglarond and Dambrath, for example. Unless, of course, the character is from there.
A pet peeve of mine: Knowledge Local. I can't really blame WotC for this ill-designed skill, after all, it never existed before 3.0 to my knowledge (no pun intended).
But I have an over-arching problem in general with the skill system 3.5 offers that is tied into Knowledge Local. Its that prior to being a first level adventurer, your PC never existed. That is, you have no occupational ability or skills. Further, how do you make an aged adventurer at level 1 without the explanation of level drain?
Other game systems address pre-adventuring occupations admirably such as Powers & Perils. Other game systems assume that you were adventuring prior to "now": Powers & Perils (again) and Twilight: 2000. Other systems have in game reasons for knowing next to nothing: Paranoia.
The answer (perhaps 4.0) should come in some form of "Free" Non-PC class skill sets. I know I'm going to get rebutal posts about classes having skills such as "Profession" and "Craft", so as a pre-emptive counterpoint, I would add that a) not all classes have access to Profession skill (which makes no sense to me at all), b) players (in my experience) tend not to take these skills if they have no combat value, especially in the face of limited number of skill points.
And tying this idea back to Knowledge Local. My fighter grew up in the small village of Homlet. She has no ranks in Knowledge Local. Does this mean she is blissfully ignorant of all local events and gossip? Strike it from the list; there's got to be a better solution.
|
My personal system, is to modify the method in which players acquire ranks in Knowledge {Local}. Although everyone's mileage may vary, I establish a "regional" version of Local and a "city" version of Local. (Conceivably, there could be a distinction in between these two, but I find people either know their country well or know a specific city well, rather than some intermediate area).
Since a use of Knowledge (local) is then limited to a specific country (or country-sized region, like Eberron's Q'Barra, Lhazaar Principalities, Shadow Marches, Droaam, etc.) or city, I reduce the cost of each rank as follows:
"Regional" Knowledge (Local)- 1 class skill point equals 2 ranks; 1 cross-class skill point equals one rank.
"City" Knowledge (Local)- 1 class skill point equals 4 ranks; 1 cross-class skill point equals two ranks.
Max skill ranks still apply, although a player may invest in multiple regional or city applications of the skill. Also, the synergy bonus to Gather Information from 5 ranks in Knowledge (local) will only apply when the PC is in the corresponding region or city in which they have invested the sufficient number of ranks.
This system allows for the "fish out of water" occasion when a well-informed PC moves to an entirely different locality. Conceivably, a DM using the "retraining" system could permit PCs to trade their contacts and insider knowledge in one city or region for another, albeit over time.
Also, any class may now become reasonably informed of the "goings-ons" of their nation or home city, as even cross-class points get 1 or 2 ranks for their investment. Bards and rogues (and others) are simply very good at developing the contacts necessary for being well-appraised of local happenings and thus can gather ranks for minimal investment.
I haven't used this rule in conjunction with a Prestige class or feat requiring Knowledge (local) ranks, but a GM could conceivably force such a character to sufficiently diversify (2 regions, 4 cities, or some combination of the two) to represent the proper expenditure of skill points.
|
|
OTHER SOLUTIONS
One of the guys in my gaming group who sometimes takes the helm as DM often gives PCs free skill points in certain skills. For example my "knowledge b!%&+" (my consumate PC) will get a ton of Knowledge skills for free where some other PC gets other free skills. The DM does it fairly and it does not unbalance the game but it's clearly homebrew.
What I really want to do -- though it's part of a veritable overhaul -- is establish 2 sets of skills. One set will have game affecting / balancing functions and will cost ranks. Skills such as Spot, Listen, Hide and Survival really affect the game. The second set of skills would be essentially free -- just tell the players not to go overboard -- and would provide Fluff in characterization. Damn it, I want to run a PC with 20 ranks in Chess. Not Gaming, just Chess. Remember the 2E skill, Cooking? There's lots of stuff like this that we as DMs give our fluff NPCs for game atmosphere. But a PC has to purchase ranks in Knowledge: Fine Wines or Profession: Glass Painter the same as Concentration or Tumble. No chance.
Of course, this doesn't solve my original question of Knowledges Local.
Anyway, thanks for all the input.
-W. E. Ray