The truth of the matter is, I really liked the skill points. I thought that was one of the best things about 3.5. If you wanted a hobby, you could get one.
I don't like it when characters are suddenly the best in the world at their hobby skill which they just threw a couple of ranks into. That's what this feels likel
I like skill points, I just don't like forced into class skills and worthless cross-class skills.
More freedom of customization and enough ranks to be worth the time to allocate. That's all I ask.
I agree with that.
But I have to say I really like the way Jason makes you pick a number of skills.I'd say keep the skill points and each class has one fixed skill list and a list from wich he can choose say 2 or 3 skills.
|
I personally prefer skill points, but the present system simply maxes out your skill points in your chosen skills, which isn't a bad compromise. The calculation of the bonuses is a bit clunky (and seems an awkward compromise - the +3 bonus will seem arbitrary to anyone who doesn't know the old rules) but overall I'm not very bothered.
I am slightly concerned that too many initial skills are being handed out for the skillful classes, given that a lot of them have actually been amalgamated and you get bonus skills as you go along.
im kinda torn on one hand the saga way is fast on the other its not as divers ..but yeah I would like to see skill points stay
|
From what i've read by now I'd say I also refer Skillpoints - in my oinion they add a level of variety to the game that isn't mtched by your system - on the other hand, both systems can be described in short space, so I could easily imagine putting both variations in the hardcover without wasting much space.
Thanks, Paizo, for the Open Playtest!!!
I was thinking about skills last night when I stayed up too late. I'd prefer to have something more like Spycraft, meaning:
- Skill points instead of Saga style
- Complex skill checks
- No cross-class skills, all skills available for all characters
- More Skill Points for each class
- Combine similar skills as presented in Alpha
Use the Pathfinder system, then allow players to select one non-proficient skill now and then that gets a small bonus. This would account for hobbies.
I've already said this, but let me reiterate it here since there is a thread specifically on the topic. Or rather, let me just say I agree with Rezdave, who captures my thoughts on the subject well.
I prefer Skill Points to the Pathfinder "Force Max" system. This is somewhat like reverting to 1st Ed. when Thieves had specifics skill-table percentages.
If people want to max then the extant Skill Point system lets them. However, for those who want to max a couple key Skills and then have a broader base of abilities to get them by in most day-to-day circumstances in other areas the new Force-Max does not give them any flexibility.
Since Pathfinder is about role-playing and "telling the kinds of stories we want to tell" rather than WotC's evolving delve hack-n-slash MMO-on-paper-and-tabletop system, I think retaining the flexibility of Skill Points is critical.
I was thinking about skills last night when I stayed up too late. I'd prefer to have something more like Spycraft, meaning:
- Skill points instead of Saga style
- Complex skill checks
- No cross-class skills, all skills available for all characters
- More Skill Points for each class
- Combine similar skills as presented in Alpha
Spycraft does have class and cross-class skills. I think that's a good thing, and I think it would be a mistake to forego that.
What spycraft does do is provide a variety of options (principally in Origins) to expand class skill lists. A simple way to get at the same thing without adding a whole lot of complication would be to simply allow players to choose a bonus class skill.
|
While I haven't number crunched the Pathfinder skill system, I have to say my first readthrough has me leaning to beg you guys to keep skill points.
That being said, as a DM, I believe a 'shortcut' option should be allowed for players who don't want to fiddle with skill points, or DM's creating NPCs on the go ...
|
|
I love the way PathfinderRPG does skills. It is similar to the SIEGE system in Castles & Crusades, but Pathfinder gives more specific uses in the form of skills instead of just ability checks in C&C.
If you want your character to have a hobby skill you can just do it in game instead of having intense recordkeeping for all skills so that you can have hobby skills. In the campaign the character just starts doing their hobby skill and the GM decides what type of bonus to that skill the character gets.
The 3.5 skill system is good, but overly complicated in number crunching and recordkeeping for what you get in return.
This is much more streamlined system that is easy to work with and add to for the people who wanted the skills tracking to be more involved.
That is the problem with a hybrid system like D&D currently is where it is class based and skill based (feats too). It is hard to find the right balance to make the game feel right.
I have to throw my vote behind keeping skill points as well. As a player I usually pick one or two skills for my character to be really good at, then spread the rest around so that I'm moderately good at a lot of different things. This is especially true when I play Bards, Rogues, and other Jack-of-all-Trades types.
Our Group got togther and talked about the base rule set and the skills were one of our favorite systems
It makes for alot easier to level up characters and make NPCs on the fly
(This makes great for our gaming group cause as we game some like to intake in other things and there minds are not always the most mathmatcily proficent)
Please keep this new skill system
I do not like the skill point system. The system is so level dependent that it is hard to find competent NPC. Mozart would have to be a 16th level expert to match its composition skill - it is ludicrous. I like the Pathfinder system, it could be even simpler. You could choose some "specialty" skill (+2 bonus) then maybe a skill "mastery" (+5) at 5th 10th 15th & 20th. I would like to have the +(level) or half-level bonus disappears. It would also at last worth spending Feat to gain a +2 bonus on skill check.
To get a more complete picture, I simply state here, that I'm strongly in favour of skill points opposed to learned skills. With learned skills, you lose too much customization in my oppinion.
Though merging some skills and increasing the number of skill points would be something I'd like to see.
I will neither miss skill points nor bemoan their continued existence in Pathfinder. They simply don't matter very much to me. I will only note that calculating skill points for NPCs is a tedious chore. Provided NPC/monster generation makes it easier to handle skill points, I could honestly care less about whether Pathfinder retain them or eliminates them.
another vote for keeping skill points, I think they add a great deal to the game in terms of character customization that can be missed using a forced-max system.
Please keep the old skill point system.
I like the flexibility and variety the skill point system provides. I very much enjoy choosing how the spend skill points to tailor specific NPCs and creatures.
Present the "new" system as an alternative option for those who do not care for the skill point system or want a more streamlined character creation process.
While I admit the cross-class system can be confusing, I personally like it. To me it represents the particular training and focus of each class.
Please keep the ability to add new skills over time. I like the idea of gaining access to new skills as you advance in levels. This reflects a character's growth overtime, experience, and exposure to other skills. From a meta-gaming POV this is a way for characters to gain access cross-class skills, just not right away at 1st level.
As an aside, thank you for opening up the design process and asking for input. The boards are going to be buzzing for a while.
I like skill points, and prefer that system. However I do know many players who dislike the upkeep. Also many more would pick cross-class skills with the far lessened upkeep.
If selected skills is used, it needs to be about half as many - 2nd and every 4th after, counterpoint to the stat point boosts. That would give precisely one "level based" item per level (Feat at odds, stats and skills at even). As it is, even the dumbest fighter would run out of class skills quickly.
There's another thread here where it was already mentioned that the old skill point system is easily implemented again by taking the numbers of skills at 1st level, and simply using them as skill points (x4 at 1st level instead).
Interestingly enough, the current Pathfinder system is a bit more generous, compared to the 3.5 skill points, since a new skill is learned at the current level of competency, while all the other skills are automatically kept maxed out. Try to do that with the skill point system. ;) Maxing out your number of skills at 1st means you only get to keep them maxed out while you level up, but you won't be able to learn a new skill at the then maxed-out level as well.
Of the two groups I play and DM in only 1 person is strongly opposed to skill points. The remaining 9 or so either love or don't mind dabbling with skills points.
I think the Star Wars SAGA skill system works well for Star Wars but skill points seem to add a level of, I dunno ... grittiness, which we like in our fantasy games.
Maybe there'd be a way of providing both options -- either skill points or a "fast track" option similar to what's in the alpha ...
For me, as a DM, skill points are the hardest part of designing an NPC for me, with all the synergy bonuses, armor check penalties, etc. Its also really hard to figure out where skill points were spent in a monster stat block.
I love this new fast track "trained" or "untrained" system and think it should be kept.
|
|
I say ditch skill points and use the system as presented in Pathfinder RPG.
The standard 3e skills system is far too fiddly, requires far too much book-keeping and yields too few benefits in return for the work involved. The new system sacrifices the granularity of the standard 3e system for ease of use both in play and in designing monsters and NPCs. This is a worthwhile tradeoff and a very important factor in attracting and retaining players for the Pathfinder RPG!
3e went too far in the level of granularity where the skills system is concerned. The Pathfinder RPG solution is robust, elegant and simple, while retaining an acceptable level of detail. Keep it.
I agree.
|
Nope, as GM, I gotta say, lose the skill points - I like skills as presented in the alpha file. Points are customizable and "precise," sure, but that's part of what drives me crazy about them. Add in buff spells and synergy bonuses... and that's why my avatar's bald. This newer system still allows for more training as you progress, your skills scale up with you (as they more than likely would anyway in a point system) and it's SO much simpler.
|
I’m kind of middle ground on this one. I like the new system because it would be easier to introduce to new players and would make creating monsters and NPCs easier. Still, I like the old skill system because of how it allows people to create different characters and show off their backgrounds. I also like the skill point system because it would be one less thing the convert when using older material with PFRPG.
Is there a way to offer both systems, with one or the other being a sidebar or something in a DMG style book?
So I tend to like getting rid of skill points. I do like that they provide more variety in the characters. I don't like the heavy min-maxing (synergy bonuses, boo!) they produce. And I really don't like the time and pickiness they put into stat blocks. Sure, it's "background for major NPCs", but it's "wasted time for random hobgoblins."
In our game we've been using alternate skill rules nearly identical to this for 6 months in the Rise of the Runelords AP and it hasn't hurt much. And my character's very into the skills.
I do think that the "slam dunks" here are the skill combining and greater skill access,a dn that skill points are more debatable.
This is a case where we can easily have our cake and eat it, too.
The current proposal streamlines NPC statting, but at the expense of a most of the currently-available PC customization - and for those of us who like to be able to customize our characters' skills, that's a MAJOR turn-off, akin to "stealing" fun from us in the name of simplicity. The existing (3.5) system of course is perfectly customizeable, but (as pointed out by many here) it's a pain in the neck for statting NPCs - enough so that a seeming majority just don't want to deal with it anymore.
We can make a system that offers both, however:
1. Retain the proposed skill "groups" (Perception, etc.) - this reduces the number of selections with little noticeable effect on customization (how many people take Listen and not Spot, for example?)
2. Use the currently-proposed system for NPCs (or PCs that you don't want customized).
3. Those who prefer can choose to trade ranks for skill points on a 1:1 basis (2:1 for cross-class skills) at each level gained, with the caveat that any skill on any of their class lists is a "class skill."
There may be balance issues I'm not forseeing here, but this system allows your 10th level rogue to have a base +8 bonus on Theft instead of a base +13, and then a base +5 in some other skill, if you so desire -- while making it equally possible to avoid the fuss and just go with the "default" +13, if that's your preference.
The big advantage is that you keep the streamlining possibility that so many people crave, but without totally alienating the skill-customizers like me who absolutely HATE the lack of choice that the current proposal represents (and I need to stress that for some of this latter group of people, the new system is REAL problem. Game breaking, even.)
This is one area that I need to playtest. This has many good possibilities that make the whole skill system very simple by walking away from the skill points. Take the Wizard a class that always felt like it was bumbled when skill points were assigned to it. Now with a +3 to Int gives the Wiz 5 skills to choose from Appraise (Int), Craft (Int), Fly (Dex), Knowledge (all) (Int), Linguistics (Int), Profession (Wis), and Spellcraft (Int) a good deal. At first level choosing the skills Spellcraft (Int), Linguistics (Int), and Knowledge (arcana) (Int), with a good chance to succeed +7 too all three of these class skills rolls. Then cross class skills of Acrobatics (Dex), and Disable device (Int) would be +4 and +5 if there was a Dex bonus of +2. Then if you were human you could add another. Wizards under 3.5 never felt this smart.
BTW are there still some skills that cannot be used untrained?
|
|
When I first read the skills section, I said "Nooooo! Not my skill points!!!" Then, I looked at the experiene chart and saw that you gain trained skills as you level. That cooled me off to "I think I need to playtest this and see what my players think."
As a side note regarding skills, the entry for Skills under familiars on page 18 needs to be corrected if you're not going to have skill ranks. Perhaps:
"The familiar is treated as trained in any skills that an animal of its type is trained in and any skills its master is trained in. It treats these skills as class(racial?) skills if they are class skills for the animal type or if the master treats them as class skills. The familiar uses its own ability modifiers for skills. Regardless of a familiar's total skill modifiers, some skills may remain beyond the familiar's ability to use."
|
|
I believe that you should keep skill points for two reasons:
1. They are almost essential to character customization. They allow you to give your charcter a very distinct feel.
2. The "Maxed Out" version does simplify charcter creation but seems as if it would make conversions between books much more dificult.
I can see what Paizo are trying to do here (speed up character advancement, make it easier to create NPCs and monsters, make character's better at skills), but I just think it needs a bit more work, since a lot of players and DMs won't like it. Indeed, one of the enjoyable things in one of our games is the comparison between the party's two monks and who has the better skill ranks in Jump, Tumble, etc, etc (it's one of those you have to be there things). That would cease to be a source of enjoyment.
Count me as another in favor of keeping skill points. I love the level of customization they allow; to me they've always seemed another way in which to tell your character's story, and I loved tinkering with their placement to match a concept. In addition, when I create a monster or NPC that doesn't need that level of detail, it's easy enough to replicate the proposed system by simply giving them max ranks for their level in a few areas.
I'm in the population of folks that believe 3.5 wasn't broken. Therefore, the only thing that matters to me is backward compatibility. If I can't quickly convert character stats from a Paizo adventure back to "pure" 3.5, then this experiment comes to an end for me.
|
Contributor
|
I am in favor of simplifying skills, however I have a number of concerns with the alpha skill system.
I'm going to limit myself with the big one: Multiclassing.
I create a character, and make him a Rogue at level 1. He gets 8+ Int bonus skills, all maxed.
Next level, I take a level of fighter (or any other class). I now have 9+ Int skills all maxed out. I never go back to rogue, and my single level dip into rogue gives me six extra maxed out skills for the rest of my career. And, guess what, one of them is Acrobatics (tumble was already better than most skills). Now I'm a super-tumbling fighter with skills out my butt.
That's too big a benefit for a single level of rogue.
|
|
I am not seeing the LARGE difference in customization between the Pathfinder system and the 3.5 system. It is actually a small difference especially since there is decrease in the amount of skills. There are 34 skills (not including the Knowledge skills) in the 3.5 system vs. 24 skills (not including the Knowledge skills) in the Pathfinder system. On top of that most characters will not be using Fly. So, all of those customizations of putting a 1 or 2 skill points here or there becuase it is fun will not be the same with less skills. There will not be the need. This is a more streamlined and generalized system.
I am not seeing the emotional attachment to skill points. I recommend people try this system out and see how the feel about it then. You might not miss your skill points after that. ;)
Also do not forget that you will still get more skills if you look at the experience chart.
For those that like to roleplay having a couple of points of skill points here and there (meaning the ones you do not have maxed out) you can still do that by creating a background and having your GM agree to a small bonus to those types of checks even though you are not fully trained. There are many other options that would be easy to implement as well if you want to have minor customizations of skills. :)
Maybe I am biased against skill points because I have never had fun during a game trying to record keep and figure the skill points out. Also never had fun or roleplayed that some character has one or two more skill points in a skill then another character. Skill bonuses will still be differenet because of different abiltiy modifiers too. Also skill feats as well. :)