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'm in agreement with snowyak and Krome. I like a bit more freedom for my characters... snowyak is actually proposing something similiar that I was thinking of but was afraid to mention. My idea is this: #1 go back to skill points, #2 list the most core natured skills for a class, #3 list something at the end of the degree as "plus 4 additional skills of your choice as "class skills""... kinda like how the human can pick up a skill normally cross class as a class skill.
"Instead of all class skills being (lvl + 3) ranks, and all cross-class skills being half that, a character can instead choose to convert all ranks into "skill points" and allocate them at will among class skills (1 point per rank) or cross-class skills (2 points per rank), to the maximum number of ranks listed. Note that this option should only be chosen by players who enjoy allocating skill points. Everyone else should stick to the default."[/b]
And it's done. Everyone is happy that way, and this whole thread can be put to rest.
Actually, if you want both systems to be perfectly convertible, you tell them to use the number of skill choices as skill ranks (x4 on 1st level), and on every even level you grant them (level+3) additional skill points, to be distributed as the player sees fit over class and cross-class skills.
Got to admit though, that I'm as baffled by those for whom player skill maintenance is such a large hurdle as I probably baffle them. ;D I mean, for NPCs I'm already using the auto-max method for important skills, and simply skim off a few points for skills they should have, but not maxed. Goes fast and dependable. And usually, players take care of their own characters. And monster skills...well...LOOK, A FLYING COW!! *runs*
Actually, if you want both systems to be perfectly convertible, you tell them to use the number of skill choices as skill ranks (x4 on 1st level), and on every even level you grant them (level+3) additional skill points, to be distributed as the player sees fit over class and cross-class skills.
OK, so the phrasing can be adjusted to make the math work out just right, but hopefully everyone can see my point. By declaring "auto-max" the default and then providing a "trade for points" option, everyone on both sides of the debate gets what they want.
I like the unification of certain skills to perception, stealth and diplomacy. Especially diplomacy, actually, as it now suits to different gaming styles. The conversationalist in a group can still talk to every single npc in town an nudge out the precious informations he so desperately seeks, while someone else can find clues regarding what's going on without paying by investing in an extra skill.
However, I think sleight of hand and open lock should not be combined.
Keeping them seperate adds more variety to rogue characters, as a thief mingling in the crowds to snatch some coins from people's pockets isn't necessarily a good burglar...
Regarding the aquiring of skills: please, please please fix this sudden potency of a skill one aquires at a level higher than first. One shouldn't be able to achieve "master status" in a skill one has never used before, and thus never been able to train it...
And now let me quickly add that I'm oh so happy what you do here with this game. Much appreciated.
Greetings, Daniel
I would like to see 4 skill points at first for all classes that now have 2 really . love the combined classes.
|
Regarding the aquiring of skills: please, please please fix this sudden potency of a skill one aquires at a level higher than first. One shouldn't be able to achieve "master status" in a skill one has never used before, and thus never been able to train it...
I may be wrong, but in 3.5 you could do this too. You can put all of your skill ranks into a new skill when you gain a new level as long as it is not more than 3 + level.
Maybe you are saying that was problem in 3.5 too though. Some classes can obviously max out their new skill easier than others though.
Maybe you are saying that was problem in 3.5 too though. Some classes can obviously max out their new skill easier than others though.
Indeed, in 3.5 you could "exploit" the system in that way...
but a GM could easily restrict it, as points could be given more gradually. In Alpha Release 1, it is more like all or nothing.I fully understand that tweaking the skill system may be one of the hardest parts in design.
Greetings, Daniel
I support Paizo's revision on skill points. Skillp points re 3.5 ed are too customizable IMO. I like the restructured and somewhhat SAGAfied take on skills.
My question for you--and I really can't understand this--like, I understand you don't really want to customize a character. OK. And that you'd prefer an easier system. That's OK, too. But why, given BOTH of those things, would you also then want to prevent OTHER people from customizing their characters if they want to? (remember, this doesn't interfere in any way with your NOT doing it). It's like a situation where someone doesn't like fish, so they try to outlaw seafood, if you see what I mean. I'm really confused by this.
I agree with some others. KEEP SKILL POINTS!!!
Not everyone that is trained in a skill is equal. I like about skill points. It allows various degrees of expertise, despite the relevant ability.
This was what I disliked most about SW:Saga and is what I dislike most about PRPG.
Skillp points re 3.5 ed are too customizable IMO.
Come on. When is too many choices a bad thing? If you want max rank, just take them. Leave me my skill points.
Whatever PRPG decided to go with, I will always use skill points. It just makes more sense to me.
Keep skill points.
An alternate system for rapid npc generation is fine. And if a player just really wants that, fine. But, please, keep skill points.
I would like to see 4 skill points at first for all classes that now have 2 really . love the combined classes.
I agree with this. The classes that have only 2+INT, in MHO, also tend to suffer from class lists that are too small. Fighters need to be able to Fient, Clerics should be able to study widely and have "noble" skills, etc. Giving 4+INT at least makes more CCS more possible. Also, I have enought trouble now with "I have to take Rogue at 1st level for the skill bonus" syndrome. In the Alpha, this is made even worse, as all those skills continue to advance even after switching classes. The skill point system is central to 3.X, gutting it this way esentially makes this as much a new game as 4.X, maybe more.
As has been pointed out elsewhere, it is elitively easy to reverse engineer the skill points to let players spread things out, but giving the Fighter 8+INT skill points per level, because he took Rogue 1 at 1st but has been strictly a fighter ever since, seems just wrong.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
|
OK, so the phrasing can be adjusted to make the math work out just right, but hopefully everyone can see my point. By declaring "auto-max" the default and then providing a "trade for points" option, everyone on both sides of the debate gets what they want.
I really like the new skill system but I also like Kirth and Raveneye's idea for swapping out the new system for something more like the old one. This would make a great optional rule for a sidebar in the rulebook if the new system is retained into the final version.
I really like the new skill system but I also like Kirth and Raveneye's idea for swapping out the new system for something more like the old one. This would make a great optional rule for a sidebar in the rulebook if the new system is retained into the final version.
Now we just need to fix the rogue so it's not, by default, a 1-level class...
|
|
I just re-read this whole thread. Wow! We said a lot of things in a short amount of time. I also saw this line in my post "Now you have to see my general observation about D&D and how it relates to skills." Replace now you have to see to now you have read (as in suffer through) my observations. Sometimes that happens on messageboards because of poor writing. I assume that is what bothered Kirth, but maybe he just did like my observations or tone.;) Sorry about that. I will try to be more clear in the future.
Jason said earlier in the thread and it appears I was trying to take that idea as mine, "There was a thought in earlier notes of allowing you to "split a selection" to get two skills at a lower bonus (1/2 level + ability mod or 1/4 for cross class) to represent a sort of Hobby skills." I do like this idea for further customization of the current Pathfinder skill system.
Jason also said, "In the end there was one other problem I want to bring up that led to the change. If you wanted to be truly good at specific skills, you pretty much had to max ranks, meaning that this system and the old were pretty similar (in the end). If you split up your points, it took quite some time to have any real proficiency (this is a thin arguement, I know, but it is true for a number of skills, not all though). In the end, it seemed simpler just to assume max and give you more skills to play with." I think this is very true as well and the option above goes a long way to increasing customization of your character (especially skills you do not need to be maxed out in to be useful with).
There is still this issue of taking rogue at first level just for the skills and various other little things.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
|
Now we just need to fix the rogue so it's not, by default, a 1-level class...
I do have that concern but I'm willing to wait for now. The multiclass rules haven't come through yet and I'll wait and see. In the meantime I'd like to get in there and playtest the new skill system.
I assume that is what bothered Kirth, but maybe he just did like my observations or tone.;) Sorry about that. I will try to be more clear in the future.
Jason said earlier in the thread and it appears I was trying to take that idea as mine, "There was a thought in earlier notes of allowing you to "split a selection" to get two skills at a lower bonus (1/2 level + ability mod or 1/4 for cross class) to represent a sort of Hobby skills." I do like this idea for further customization of the current Pathfinder skill system.
There is still this issue of taking rogue at first level just for the skills and various other little things.
Wow! It sounds like you and I are, after a lengthy thread, actually in more or less complete agreement. I have no problem with a default system making things easier; I just wanted the ability to chop them up into "hobby skills," too, if that's my thing. Couldn't understand why someone wouldn't want me to be allowed to do that, but I see now that expressing a preference one way doesn't automatically mean denying others theirs.
And of course I mourn for the rogue as well.
You know, I'd ditch the "+2 to two related skills" feats entirely and replace them all with a single feat that just gives you a +2 to two skills of your choice. There is a feat like this in Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved, and it works just fine. That leaves it up to the player to decide on their skill combinations. It can lead to odd combinations, but these can be used as story hooks (maybe the character's mentor was an incredible cook and taught him how to rustle up a mean curry in between lessons on Varisian history...)
Ooooh, I hadn't thought ot that, sounds great. Bridges the gap of having to dig up that obscure feat that gives you a bonus of +2 to two skills of your choice. Then the GM can determine how much RP is requried for that. i.e. 'Must be two similar skills such as swim and climb' or 'must have a good background purpose such as ones survivalist teacher could make a gourmet feast out of a coney and a few easily found herbs'.
*Raises hand and jumps up and down pointing at the above.* Oh mr. designer person! Look here, over here! :-D
I won't miss the skill points if they don't make the final cut.
In the new system, you can take care of the "core" skills for your class 1st level. Stealth for Rogues, Spellcraft for Wizards. You pretty much had to keep these maxed out anyway in the old system. Now you don't have to think about it, it's autmatic.
As you go up in level, you can add some hobbies, and you'll be pretty good at them as you level up. You're the hero, so you should be good at your hobbies.
The fact that some of the skills have been combined lowers the need for skill points.
I was always torn when I had to decide whether my wizard needed one more point of concentration or he could get away without it and spend the skill point on knowledge or spot or whatever.
Now Spellcraft does it all. A wizard will probably start with a 14 INT, maybe more right? So 4 to 6 skills at 1st, which isn't bad. You've only got 2 really important ones now, so at 1st you can afford a few cross-class. By the time you're 10th level, you've probably added 6 more skills (assuming Int boost at 4th/8th).
So 10 to 12 skills, with a bonus that anyone can figure out right away without having to know how you spent the points.
Overall, I think scattering small batches of skill points accross a huge number of skills to take advantage of is a bit cheesy. I do it all the time, but I'm a min-maxer. I'm willing to use my time for other things besides spending skill points.
|
|
I had a brainstorm and I am tired so please bare with me if this does not all come out right.
What if you assign all your skills at 1st level instead of gaining new skills every few levels. Since the skill points are removed you do not need to slowly dish out skills like was needed to do with skill points. You are still going to progress the same no matter when you get the skills. Part of the brainstorm comes from the weirdness with gaining a new skill for a high level character and it is already maxed out when you get it.
While using this method still use the option mentioned above about using one skill pick to do two lesser skill picks. Then at first level your character can be fully customized.
Class and cross-class skills can be kept in this situation and could be a lot more important. This may slightly deter taking rogue at first level for its skills because of what its cross-class skills might be.
As far as how many skills every character gets at first level could be a large discussion, but one that could be realtively easily solved.This is very important to the discussion, but I do not know how the numbers will work out yet. How many skills should you gain at first level?
In general I think there could be a base amount and some classes allowing more than the base.
Of course this does not change the taking rogue at first level problem, but however we solve it I do not think this method will make that any more difficult.
Now if for some reason during your adventuring career you wanted you character to pick up a new skill there can be a mechanic to do that and I always revert to a feat, but there could be another way. Remember though if you assign a bunch of skills at first level I do not see this happening much, but even if it does I can't imagine a character wanting more than one or two more skills.
If this does not make sense or needs some more work let me develop it more tomorrow. Please let me know where I am going wrong or right and then maybe I can tweak it slightly. At least when I am tired this sounds good.
|
|
While using this method still use the option mentioned above about using one skill pick to do two lesser skill picks. Then at first level your character can be fully customized.
And if your campaign moves from caravan-guard duty to city adventures or dungeoneering? You may never sit on a horse again, but you are *STUCK* with Ride as one of your skills, and can never pick up Gather Information, which you totally didn't need at 1st level, but darn skippy wish you had at 6th.
As has been stated, if a player or DM wants to just say, 'Screw it' and pick six skills to have maxed out rather than spend their skill points, *that's always been an option.*
Those who don't know at 1st level every single situation they may end up facing might appreciate a little more flexibility. I'm not one of those people who minutely plans my build over 20 levels, and that's *exactly* the sort of person that this forced-rank thing caters to. I prefer to take a rank of this and a couple ranks of that, *as they crop up in the adventure.*
Oh, I've got a new Summoning spell, and it would be great if I spoke Terran, so I could tell the Thoqqua what to do. Too bad I didn't think of that *at 1st level,* which was the only time I got to make a choice as to what I would know for the next 19 levels of my life, and now I am *stuck* forever unable to learn anything new, like the proverbial old dog.
This is a non-starter for me.
Skill points explicitly allows a player or DM to just choose max ranks in X number of skills *already.*
Nothing is gained by this change. It's already do-able in the rules.
(Edited for re-posting in this thread)
My reservations are with the organisation of the categories witch don't allow as much refinement in the characters.
Let me explain, in my observations of how the current system of skill points is used by players I see mostly 3 things:
1- A single skill point used to acces an untrained skill (ex.: knowledge local or nature come up fairly often in my experience).
2- Skill points invested in a "secondary"-skill keeping it around half the maximum ranks to get a wider skill use (ex.: 4 ranks of ride and heal for an 8th level Druid).
3- Skill points invested in a "primary"-skill keeping it at max. rank level.
I must admit I've seen a few "5 ranks for the synergy bonus and that's it" (bluff and tumble mostly) but I'd like to discourage that.
Also, the "few-skill classes" already have... well, few skills, so I wouldn't make them "pay" the same price to get "half the stuff" others get (i.e.: cross-class) but I do agree that they shouldn't be able to get to be as good in cross-class skill.
I currently use a house-rule (actually mentionned on these boards) where cross-class skills ranks cost 1 skill point each but you are still maxed at 1/2 (level+3) for ranks.
How could that be implemented in the proposed system you say? I'm glad you ask!
A training point option with three skill categories (This could be an optional rule):
Categories:
Apprenticed, cost 1 training point, gives you acces to a "no-untrained use" skill as a normal untrained (d20+ability modifier+misc. bonus)
Hobby, cost 2 training points, roll as a "Trained Cross-Class" (d20+1/2 (level+3)+ability modifier+misc. bonus)
Trained, cost 4 training points and must be a Class Skill, roll as a "Trained Class" (d20+(level+3)+ability modifier+misc. bonus)
Each Skill Choice would gives 4 Training points and you can upgrade categories by investing more Training points in the skill. Character could also gain 2 training points per level (but you lose a skill choice in the full progression that way).
I know it's a bit more complicated and that the wording could be sexier (I'm sure you have all the right people for that) but I feel it would make detailing of a character more interesting, I'd use it that way so there !
That's it for now but I'll be back!
EDIT: Seems a similar idea has also been thrown aound by Naughty Jester but I cannot find the original post.
|
|
I also prefer skill points. While I would like to see an easy system for DMs to create characters quickly a static bonus and then figuring how many new skills they have acquired doesn't seem to be right.
So, I like skill points more or less the way they are in 3.5. I would like to suggest one change (which doesn't matter too much). In 3.5 if you are a bugbear you get x4 skill points for your first HD, and x1 skill points for your first class level.
Rather than giving everyone x4 skill points at 1st HD, give it to them when they take a class level. Or get rid of the x4 and just give everyone a static number of skill points per level.
I would like to see 4 skill points at first for all classes that now have 2 really . love the combined classes.
Seeker... we agree on too much, we're gonna have to sit down and try to work this out so we can have a nice, long argument some day.
(I'm kidding, I hope...)Anyways, I agree also... that is one thing that I would like to see changed from 3.x and I don't think it would really matter as far as the changes go... especially if you are using Pathfinder in place of the class rules of the PHB... (who cares in an NPC was cheated on skill points... in two rounds they won't need to use their Listen or Craft: Saddlemaker checks any longer!)
The 2+Int was always too lacking... fighters were made a bit too dumbed down in that respect, and I've often wondered, why oh why did they do this to wizards? Aren't they supposed to be book educated and intellectual?
One more vote for skill points here. Plenty of good arguments and reasoning in other posts, so I won't get redundant, just contributing a "me too."
|
|
The 2+Int was always too lacking... fighters were made a bit too dumbed down in that respect, and I've often wondered, why oh why did they do this to wizards? Aren't they supposed to be book educated and intellectual?
Definitely agree here. Every class should have a minimum of 4+Int Mod SP / level. The classes that already have 4, 6 or 8 SP / level will benefit even more from the skill consolidation / smaller skill list, so they don't desperately need more skill points.
|
I'm going to have to try the current method, but I am a fan of skill points. The idea of putting 1 or 2 points into a side skill has always been nice, and the option of maxing ones skills is also always there (though it is harder to make DCs for this method that are standardized).
On the other hand, personally, I do like the idea of giving out new skills every 2 levels. Perhaps (and this may have already been mentioned and I missed it. If so, sorry, just ignore this) using skill points, but points per level is
x + int + level/2(round down)
so a fighter gets 2 + int + 0 at first level, and then 2 + int + 1 at second level, and so on. Actually, I think I'm going to house rule this for the future.
Yet again, I have to say that I haven't been able to read this entire messageboard, and I don't know if this has been mentioned and shown to be not viable or unpopular.
I found a different thread first, but this seems to be the active one, so I apologize for this (a substantial repost):
For starters, consider skills not found in the core Pathfinder rulebook but that, due to expansions that eventually find their way into your game are now available choices.
Consider Grom the 19th level Barbarian:
In 3.5 Grom is no more capable at many skills than a commoner. This is actually reasonable. Skill points represent applied experience in things the character has actually done or expects to do. So in areas where the character has never dabbled, even a 19th level character should still be an utter noob.
For instance: Seamanship.
If in Grom's career he has been a landlubber, then Grom should have no more idea how to handle a ship (or even small boats bigger than a canoe) than any other 1st level commoner.
Now, at the point where Grom is about to get his 20th level, he knows that he is hunting an aquatic dragon and sees a need for this skill...
With Pathfinder he is already magically talented in Seamanship in untrained ways. And if he makes it into a trained skill, he immediately jumps to be one of the the worlds most competent mortal sailors. (He is, after all, 20th level now!)
With 3.5, Grom is free to put some skill points into Seamanship... He'll reach, maybe, rank 5. This is a very quick jump in talent in a skill, but not ridiculous.
I like that Pathfinder offers ways to add additional class skills over time. I think *that* is a good thing.
I think the Saga skill ranks thing is a very poor fit for those of us with Simulationist tendencies and a realistic view of how PCs should go about learning to do things.
Gene P. <alcore@uurth.com>
Slidell LA
My sugestions.
Keep everything as stands in alpha 1, include a sidebar that explains that this is based off the assumption of gaining X ranks per level, X+3 at first level, and an additional Y+3 at levels Bla bla and bla, and keeping skills at there highest possible level. Players wishing to have more organic characters can instead spend ranks individually paying two ranks for a +1 to cross class skills.' There, its a sidebar, The people who like skill ranks get them, the people who like trained skills get them, both sides get the same quantity of skill ranks, so where is the problem?
My sugestions.
Keep everything as stands in alpha 1, include a sidebar that explains that this is based off the assumption of gaining X ranks per level, X+3 at first level, and an additional Y+3 at levels Bla bla and bla, and keeping skills at there highest possible level. Players wishing to have more organic characters can instead spend ranks individually paying two ranks for a +1 to cross class skills.' There, its a sidebar, The people who like skill ranks get them, the people who like trained skills get them, both sides get the same quantity of skill ranks, so where is the problem?
Thanks, Eled, that was exactly my proposal as well. But for some reason, there are a lot of people who will apparently stop at nothing to stamp out skill points forever. Even if they don't have to use them, they don't want anyone else using them, either. No one has been able to tell me why, but my proposal and yours have been accepted as viable by at least one Saga skill enthusiast (namely NSTR - thanks!) -- and ultimately ignored by the rest.
My pleasure, Truth to tell I'll end out using a hybrid of the two with my characters, with several skills I keep maxed, and sprinkle the remaining skill points as I please. I'm particularly noted for Wizards and the like having 1 rank on every knowledge skill. So I have a vested intrest in keeping both ways.
|
|
And if your campaign moves from caravan-guard duty to city adventures or dungeoneering? You may never sit on a horse again, but you are *STUCK* with Ride as one of your skills, and can never pick up Gather Information, which you totally didn't need at 1st level, but darn skippy wish you had at 6th.
As noted many, many times the skill list is dramatically reduced. In fact there is no longer gather information actually. In 3.5 all of the little extra skills caused there a need for a character to think that way. There were tons of skills you would never used even if you were spreading out all your skill points.
By the way the skill ranks you spent in Ride in 3.5 are lost as well. In general it works out the same.
As has been stated, if a player or DM wants to just say, 'Screw it' and pick six skills to have maxed out rather than spend their skill points, *that's always been an option.*
What you quoted me has saying above is actually the opposite of maxing all your skills out. Some can be at half and you can get 2 for every one of a maxed out one. So those who want to be generalist or eccentric can easliy do that.
Those who don't know at 1st level every single situation they may end up facing might appreciate a little more flexibility. I'm not one of those people who minutely plans my build over 20 levels, and that's *exactly* the sort of person that this forced-rank thing caters to. I prefer to take a rank of this and a couple ranks of that, *as they crop up in the adventure.*
Oh, I've got a new Summoning spell, and it would be great if I spoke Terran, so I could tell the Thoqqua what to do. Too bad I didn't think of that *at 1st level,* which was the only time I got to make a choice as to what I would know for the next 19 levels of my life, and now I am *stuck* forever unable to learn anything new, like the proverbial old dog.
I do not know if you feel this way, but a lot of the arguments for skill points say that it is not realistic in the Pathfinder method, but skill points are. How and when was your character going to learn terran. Was your character going to be taught for a few months to speak this language and then you use a skill point. Also I did say in my post that there needs to be a way to get skills after first level and suggested feats, but it could be by some other method.
This next part I am not trying to flame or trying to make this personal. I just do not understand why there is this mindset that every character needs to be able to handle all situations and that it should be done through skills. (This applies to more things than skils. In my own group if they do not have the exact thing that would be perfect for a given encounter they say they can not do it. Skills, powers, and feats seem to crush the creative roleplaying side of things. Hey, it happens to me from time to time too.) There are other ways to handle situations without having the exact thing you need to make it easy. So, it is going to be hard to communicate with those Thoqqua. This makes a great roleplaying opportunity of how you are going to figure out how to communicae with them.
What I was trying to help with my post was the customization issue that has come up over and over. The basis of that issue is that you will not have enough skills. If you get all your skills at first level then mostly that issue should go away.
Currently the cleric gets 2+Int skills. If the cleric gets them all at first level they would get 12+Int. They will still all be low ranked at first level (3+level) if it is a class skill and cross-class would be lower. You could then even get more skills than that if you split some of those skills into two lesser ones. The skill list is also significantly reduced so I can not think of any skills you wish you had that you do not already have. On top of that if you feel there is a skill that you do not have that will solve some in game problem if you had it there will be a mechanic involved to do that. I personally like feats because you would gain them like you would skill ranks for the most part.
|
|
Thanks, Eled, that was exactly my proposal as well. But for some reason, there are a lot of people who will apparently stop at nothing to stamp out skill points forever. Even if they don't have to use them, they don't want anyone else using them, either. No one has been able to tell me why, but my proposal and yours have been accepted as viable by at least one Saga skill enthusiast (namely NSTR - thanks!) -- and ultimately ignored by the rest.
I am still working on coming up with a different system though too that can make everyone happy. It would be great if we were all unified and did not have people playing different ways. Do not know if that is possible, but I am trying.
|
|
So, I was thinking about my previous post, and realized that the method I put forward doesn't actually mimic the current method. Also, I can't seem to edit my last post, so I'm going to post another.
Basically, I was thinking that one could mimic the current system in the alpha by using skill points. The method I gave would work for odd levels. It was
x + int + racial bonus + level/2 (round down) ; With x = class skills per level.
But that won't work, because at even levels you won't end up with level + 3 skill points in a single new skill, you'll end up with one skill point in them.
SO, I then thought that at even levels you would gain:
x + int + racial bonus + level/2 + 4
I then wondered if this would be too confusing. I personally don't find addition that confusing, but I can understand that others aren't that great of fans.
So there, that's what I meant in my original post, and then while wondering about it, nearly drove off the road. It's been a rough couple of days, I hope I didn't anger anyone over my incorrect math skills.
|
|
Now we just need to fix the rogue so it's not, by default, a 1-level class...I do have that concern but I'm willing to wait for now. The multiclass rules haven't come through yet and I'll wait and see. In the meantime I'd like to get in there and playtest the new skill system.
I wonder if this couldn't be addressed by granting 4 x INT bonus skill points at character creation, then add normal (unmultiplied) skill points by class.
Rogues would still get more per level, but 4 x INT (+ 8) @ first level (for rogues) isn't such a great advantage over 4 x INT (+ 2) @ first level (for fighters) as 4 x (INT + 8) is over 4 x (INT + 2) for starting characters.
Fewer skill points, sure, but you could a) not be bothered, or b) make it 8 x INT bonus (+ class skill points) at first level to compensate, in which case everybody gets the same initial boost AND it minimizes dipping 1 level of rogue for the 80 billion skill points you get.
Edit: side note, I vote keep class/cross-class skills and pre-determined class skill lists by class. These things are easily ignored if you don't want to use them, but more work to put back in if they're left out.
|
|
The reason I don't like skillpoints..
1) It's easy to forget to allocation them when you're leveling up fast.
2) New player's stare dumbly at you when you try to explain how to use skillpoints with class and cross class so forth.
That said, I enjoyed this setup in Saga... although other things in Saga grate on me.
One thing I think we all need to see is Skill Focus. It's gotta provide a higher bonus so people can "specialize" in certain skills over others.
As far as edits go, I'd reduce the Rogue from 8 to 6. He really doesn't have as many skills anymore and with a good Int bonus any extra flavor can be cover.
I'd also like to see the Ranger get a stronger emphasis on Perception. I always thought the Ranger should be the anti-sneak attack class and be able to use his senses and bow to pick off opponents before they surprise the party.
I've always liked skill points since they were introduced. It just made sense. Though I do like the idea of getting to pick your skills that way players do not feel obligated to just put a point in something because it is a class skill.
Also a thing I've tried out with cross class skills that if they pay quadruple the point price for a skill ever after it will be a class skill. I like the idea of actually training for something.
Mostly the reason I like skill points is you can have a better division between characters otherwise you end up with people who can basically get the same results because they have similar abilities and rolls.
Also with the combining that has been done I believe the Bard and Rogue should be switched so Bard has 8 and Rogue has 6.
Love the new combined skills (many DMs have house-ruled this anyway), but favor the customization and diversity of skill points, plus it makes leveling-up more fun!
1) It's easy to forget to allocation them when you're leveling up fast.
2) New player's stare dumbly at you when you try to explain how to use skillpoints with class and cross class so forth.
1. Never comes up at our table; people apportion skills before they roll hit points when they level up. Then again, we focus more on skill use than on combat, in a lot of cases.
2. Cross-class skills have always sucked. We houseruled in 3.5 that they get 1 rank per point spent, but just have a lower max. That's worked out extremely well for us. The 2-for-1 deal is confusing, annoying, and, most importantly, unnecessary, insofar as it presents a barrier to aquiring cross-class skills, rather than an incentive to stay in-class.
|
Interesting take on skills. I like what Paizo has done with the skill system to make book keeping easier. What I don't like is the restrictiveness. Now I don't think that Skill Points or Paizo progression really solve this problem but I can't think of a system that could correctly fix that. I was thinking of uping all skill selections by two so that a fighter got 4+int while a rogue got 10+Int but that ends up being a hassle. But if I upped it by one, it doesn't seem like such a problem. A fighter getting 3 skills at level one is far better than just 2. I don't know what to do with the system yet and cannot offer any suggestions yet. I'll stick with the skill point system because of the versitility but hope that something good can come soon.
|
I prefer Skill Points to the Pathfinder "Force Max" system...
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.
IMH(but strongly felt)
I totally agree. I enjoy skill points. I actually like a longer list of skills rather than a condensed list, but I can do that easily in my own games. I think it would be harder to put back the variety if Pathfinder goes with All-Skills-Max'ed. If someone doesn't like dithering with skill points they can 3 or 4 skills (or however many their class gets) and max them out at every level. Or play a fighter. But I enjoy a few points here and a few points there to help build a story.
It also seems strange that if I pick up a new skill at 8th level, as long as it is a class skill, I'm suddenly really good at it. I like the uneven progression and late start feeling of new skills. And again, if someone else doesn't, it's pretty easy to work around in a skill-point system, just max your skills. I don't see how I can go the other way, though, and add the variety back into the system presented in the alpha release.
I'd much rather see Skill Groups (ala Iron Hereoes) or a more generous Skill Point distribution than the skill acquisition presented in the Alpha playtest doc.
I don't see how I can go the other way, though, and add the variety back into the system presented in the alpha release.
If Pathfinder stays with the skill choice system, you do it like this. Should work fine. :)
Actually, if you want both systems to be perfectly convertible, you tell them to use the number of skill choices as skill ranks (x4 on 1st level), and on every even level you grant them (level+3) additional skill points, to be distributed as the player sees fit over class and cross-class skills.
All the suggestions made so far still do not address my primary concern, and I am not sure that any "keep the new way and allow the old" can.
This turns Rogue into the default level 1 class and means that every other class thereafter gets 8+INT skill points per level.
If this is the case, then all classes should simply be given 8+INT skill points. Then both systems can work perfectly well side by side. Otherwise the old system is simply not compatable.
PFRPG permanently sets skill points at each level at whatever they were at 1st level. They are no longer truely based on class.
|
|
All the suggestions made so far still do not address my primary concern, and I am not sure that any "keep the new way and allow the old" can.
This turns Rogue into the default level 1 class and means that every other class thereafter gets 8+INT skill points per level.
If this is the case, then all classes should simply be given 8+INT skill points. Then both systems can work perfectly well side by side. Otherwise the old system is simply not compatable.
PFRPG permanently sets skill points at each level at whatever they were at
1st level. They are no longer truely based on class.
John's point (and I've seen it repeated elsewhere) is spot on. While I don't really see the need for a class/cross-class distinction (considering it more trouble than it is worth), I think he brings up a major flaw in the system.
The fact that you get maximum ranks in any skill that was ever a class skill makes combinations that cover the 'gamut' of skills very attractive. Check me if I'm wrong, but if I took one level of rogue and one level of ranger, couldn't I have maximum ranks in nearly every skill? Fly, and some Knowledge skills - (arcana) (engineering) (history) (nobility) (planes) (religion)- are the only ones that don't appear on either list.
Everything else would be class skills. I don't think that is a good thing. With 34 skills in the game, there would be 27 skills I could know. Let's say I start out as a smart character - an elf, with a +5 intelligence modifier. That gives me 13 skills to choose as Rogue 1. With 10 more skills to add, I would have 23 of the 27 maxed out at 20th level.
And that still allows me to take any other class I want for my other 18 levels of progression...
Though this does give me an idea....
|
|
All the suggestions made so far still do not address my primary concern, and I am not sure that any "keep the new way and allow the old" can.
This turns Rogue into the default level 1 class and means that every other class thereafter gets 8+INT skill points per level.
If this is the case, then all classes should simply be given 8+INT skill points. Then both systems can work perfectly well side by side. Otherwise the old system is simply not compatable.
PFRPG permanently sets skill points at each level at whatever they were at 1st level. They are no longer truely based on class.
I think we need another thread for this specific discussion because this one seems to be whether people dislike or like the new skill system.
For the record I have addressed this issue earlier in this thread, but it does not mean I did a good job. There were a couple other attempts at it too.
Off to start a new thread on balancing the Pathfinder system.
If in Grom's career he has been a landlubber, then Grom should have no more idea how to handle a ship (or even small boats bigger than a canoe) than any other 1st level commoner. Now, at the point where Grom is about to get his 20th level, he knows that he is hunting an aquatic dragon and sees a need for this skill...With Pathfinder he is already magically talented in Seamanship in untrained ways. And if he makes it into a trained skill, he immediately jumps to be one of the the worlds most competent mortal sailors. (He is, after all, 20th level now!)
I don't see where this is that big of a problem. As a 20th level barbarian, Grom is a swirling mass of studliness. He barely qualifies as mortal: he's got hundreds of hp, he's got DR/-, he can hack the limbs from giants. If at 20th level he decides he's going to learn how to do something, why should he be really good at it? He's seen more s#it than several villages worth of noobs. If he's going to pay attention to seamanship at all, it's almost not worth it to bother with it unless he can do something impressive with it. Otherwise, why even break out the d20 to make a check? Just jump the ocean or cleave it!
With 3.5, Grom is free to put some skill points into Seamanship... He'll reach, maybe, rank 5. This is a very quick jump in talent in a skill, but not ridiculous.
Boring! I do see your point that it strains reality that he gets so good so fast. But I think it's less fantastic than things like DR.
If Grom has made it to 20th level, clearly he's favored by the gods, fate, destiny, whatever. He's going to be routinely doing amazing things. So if the world needs saving from a sea-dragon, and Grom sees the need to pick-up some seamanship, well by Crom's balls he's going to pick up some seamanship. And he's going to kick ass at it, because that's just how he rolls. He's going to suck midi-seamanship-orians right out of the salty air! And he's going to catch that sea-dragon and make it his b!tch. In the end, he'll probably use his axe, and the boat driving will be incidental to the heroic tale.
But I see no point in getting hung up over just how high his seamanship bonus was and how quickly he aquired it.