|
Should a brd be able to invoke bardic abilities through Dance? If so, then you want to keep that as a Perform skill. If not, no problems.That's a good point. On one hand, bards are supposed to get a lot of skills, so if our dancing bard doesn't have to spend one on Perform (dancing), I'm not sure he's got THAT big of an advantage over his lute-toting friends. But then again, we don't want to mechanically make one type of bard "better" than the others. I'll have to think about this one. Maybe dance could be one subset of the music performances? I know it's a stretch in terms of "realism," but it might work in game terms.
I suggested in another thread that Sense Motive be combines with Appraise to form a new skill called "Scrutinize" which allows yo to gather information from small details (like a person's "tells" or the fact that the yellowing on this antique parchment was really caused with lemon juice)That's an interesting thought... does "scrutinize" subsume parts of Search as well? There are some overlap ramifications with Perception that we'd need to think through, but the basic idea might work pretty well.
---
Thanks for the suggestions, and the feedback!
I'm not sure I like the idea of a skill called 'Scrutinize' -- I'd prefer Search and Sense Motive being part of Perception. And Appraise could be folded into Craft/Profession (both of which could be simply merged into 'Trade') since IMO you *need* professional knowledge about, say, jewelry to accurately estimate how valuable a necklace is (i.e you have to skilled in Craft (Jeweler)). It's vastly different these days when you have plenty of information resources at your disposal, so you could learn to "appraise" jewelry through theoretic studies without actually learning the craft itself.
I'd prefer Search and Sense Motive being part of Perception.
That intuitively makes a lot of sense, but I still believe very strongly that Perception (Search + Spot + Listen + Taste + Smell + Touch), in terms of game mechanics, is already like 10x better than any other skill. Add Sense Motive to it as well, and I feel like you might as well make it an entire character class instead of just a skill.
|
I'd prefer Search and Sense Motive being part of Perception.
With all due respect, I'd still like to see Search separate. I think actively searching for something is more a function of how smart you are while noticing something (Perception) is more a product of how keep your sense are.
And again, two skills based on two different ability scores allows different characters to contribute.
|
|
I'd prefer Search and Sense Motive being part of Perception.That intuitively makes a lot of sense, but I still believe very strongly that Perception (Search + Spot + Listen + Taste + Smell + Touch), in terms of game mechanics, is already like 10x better than any other skill. Add Sense Motive to it as well, and I feel like you might as well make it an entire character class instead of just a skill.
It should be important -- it's probably the most often required (and used) skill in the game (note that Touch and Taste do not come into play very often). I'm also quite convinced that Perception should be a class skill for everyone -- in my experience usually at least *half* the group is surprised in every battle because Spot and Listen are cross-class skills for most of the classes and thus nobody wishes to invest their few skill points into them.
|
|
(Damn, these boards just ate up my reply...)
Alright, another try. Kirth, it's entirely possible to "classify" all "subskills" under "categories" (Deception, Perception, Trade, Athletics, Acrobatics, etc.) and treat them as *separate* skills. That way your fighter could have Trade (Armorsmith), Perception (Sight) and Perception (Listen) as class skills, but *not* Trade (Jeweler) or Perception (Insight) which would both be cross-class skills.
It should be important -- it's probably the most often required (and used) skill in the game (note that Touch and Taste do not come into play very often). I'm also quite convinced that Perception should be a class skill for everyone...
I'm hesitant to break with the 3.5 skills rules to that extent. The creation of a mandatory "super-skill," one that's a base ability for everyone... well, it's less like a skill then, and more like a saving throw or a base attack bonus, except without good and bad levels. That's a huge break with tradition, and with internal rules consistency, and it sort of destroys any kind of backward compatibility. It also royally shafts rogues, who used to be the Search experts, but would now be no better at it than everyone else.
Kirth, it's entirely possible to "classify" all "subskills" under "categories" (Deception, Perception, Trade, Athletics, Acrobatics, etc.) and treat them as *separate* skills. That way your fighter could have Trade (Armorsmith), Perception (Sight) and Perception (Listen) as class skills, but *not* Trade (Jeweler) or Perception (Insight) which would both be cross-class skills.
Now we're verging into a system I've used in the past, in which you first acquired skill in the broad heading (e.g., Perception), and could thereafter purchase specialization in one of the various sub-skills far more cheaply than acquiring another rank in the overall broad field. That system worked great for our point-buy game, but for rules that are supposed to be 3.5e-compatible, I unfortunately can't see it working too well. If you have a mechanism for sub-skill specialization that doesn't require expenditure of feats, I'm all ears.
|
|
Kirth, it's entirely possible to "classify" all "subskills" under "categories" (Deception, Perception, Trade, Athletics, Acrobatics, etc.) and treat them as *separate* skills. That way your fighter could have Trade (Armorsmith), Perception (Sight) and Perception (Listen) as class skills, but *not* Trade (Jeweler) or Perception (Insight) which would both be cross-class skills.Now we're verging into a system I've used in the past, in which you first acquired skill in the broad heading (e.g., Perception), and could thereafter purchase specialization in one of the various sub-skills far more cheaply than acquiring another rank in the overall broad field. That system worked great for our point-buy game, but for rules that are supposed to be 3.5e-compatible, I unfortunately can't see it working too well. If you have a mechanism for sub-skill specialization that doesn't require expenditure of feats, I'm all ears.
The difference to your system is that the "category" in itself would not have any ranks at all, so your Perception (Insight) would not affect your Perception (Listen) at all and you'd have to buy them separately, because every "subskill" would be a different skill in itself. Actually, the only difference to having a list of separate skills (Ride, Climb, Jump, etc.) to my suggestion (Athletics: Ride, Climb, Jump) is that it's more consistent and overall probably easier to handle. Note that some of the skills already work this way in 3E: e.g. Craft, Profession and Knowledge.
If we are talking about completely "folding" skills into another (i.e. there would not be any "subskills" for most skills), such as being able to use your Athletics skill for climbing, swimming, riding and jumping, *then* it's a different matter (and this is what 4E has done with skills).
I think Sense Motive should simply be kept separate, or maybe replaced with Will saves to disbelieve?
I like the idea of making Sense Motive a saving through, although Will is inappropriate. Will measures your ability to resist mental pressure (sort of the mental version of Fortitude). Sense Motive would be the ability to catch something quick and slippery, sort of the mental equivalent of Reflex.
But adding a fourth saving throw would hurt Pathfinder's backwards compatibility.
|
|
The creation of a mandatory "super-skill," one that's a base ability for everyone... well, it's less like a skill then, and more like a saving throw or a base attack bonus ...
I once toyed with the idea of moving Will saves to Cha and creating a Surprise save based on Wis, but that would be a HUGE change and require a ton of retro-stating.
It is without precedent, but what if Deception=Bluff and Sense Motive and Diplomacy=Diplomacy and Sense Motive. This allows paladins and cleric to be adept at seeing falsehoods, but not in perpetrating them.
|
|
If you have a mechanism for sub-skill specialization that doesn't require expenditure of feats, I'm all ears.
Hmmm... you could have a system (which Jason has already suggested) in which you can "specialize" in skills/sub-skills by "mastering" them either with a feat (I think that you should use a feat since you now get more of them) *or* simply taking the skill twice.
I'd prefer the following system:
* "Untalented" Cross-Class skills: D20 + modifiers
* "Talented" Cross-Class skills: D20 + half your LVL + modifiers
* "Untalented" Class skills: D20 + half your LVL + modifiers
* "Talented" Class skills: D20 + your LVL + modifiers
* "Mastered" Class skills: D20 + 1.5/2*your LVL + modifiers *OR* D20 + your LVL+5 + modifiers (I personally prefer the former, although that 2*LVL may be an "overkill" and 1.5*LVL would be a more balanced option)
(Note: you could only "master" class skills which you have as "Talented")
If we are talking about completely "folding" skills into another (i.e. there would not be any "subskills" for most skills), such as being able to use your Athletics skill for climbing, swimming, riding and jumping, *then* it's a different matter (and this is what 4E has done with skills).
It appears to be what Pathfinder is doing to skills as well. We already have Acrobatics (Balance, Jump and Tumble), Deception (Bluff, Sense Motive), Linguistics (Decipher Script, Forgery, and Speak Languages), and several others.
If Perception combines Appraise, Listen, Search, Spot and Sense Motive, we might as well simply make it an Ability like Charisma. I wouldn't like that at all.
That's why I like Perception (perceiving that which is hidden or obscured) and Scrutinize (understanding that which is perceived but subtle or confusing). (Maybe "Acumen" is a better term than "Scrutinize")
Both as Wisdom abilities, but different in scope.
Perception = Listen, Search, Spot
Scrutinize = Appraise, Sense Motive
I'd prefer the following system:
* "Untalented" Cross-Class skills: D20 + modifiers
* "Talented" Cross-Class skills: D20 + half your LVL + modifiers
* "Untalented" Class skills: D20 + half your LVL + modifiers
* "Talented" Class skills: D20 + your LVL + modifiers
* "Mastered" Class skills: D20 + 1.5/2*your LVL + modifiers *OR* D20 + your LVL+5 + modifiers (I personally prefer the former, although that 2*LVL may be an "overkill" and 1.5*LVL would be a more balanced option)(Note: you could only "master" class skills which you have as "Talented")
Or we could go back to 3.5e (ranks in individual sub-skills), which is starting to seem somewhat less complicated...
That's why I like Perception (perceiving that which is hidden or obscured) and Scrutinize (understanding that which is perceived but subtle or confusing). (Maybe "Acumen" is a better term than "Scrutinize")
Both as Wisdom abilities, but different in scope.
Perception = Listen, Search, Spot
Scrutinize = Appraise, Sense Motive
I kind of like it, although I'm not sure I like the name "Scrutinize", and I'd probably make "Scrutinize" Int-based ("understanding that which is perceived but subtle or confusing" seems logically to be a function of intelligence to me). Plus, as someone else pointed out above, skills based on different abilites allow different characters to shine.
|
|
If we are talking about completely "folding" skills into another (i.e. there would not be any "subskills" for most skills), such as being able to use your Athletics skill for climbing, swimming, riding and jumping, *then* it's a different matter (and this is what 4E has done with skills).It appears to be what Pathfinder is doing to skills as well. We already have Acrobatics (Balance, Jump and Tumble), Deception (Bluff, Sense Motive), Linguistics (Decipher Script, Forgery, and Speak Languages), and several others.
If Perception combines Appraise, Listen, Search, Spot and Sense Motive, we might as well simply make it an Ability like Charisma. I wouldn't like that at all.
That's why I like Perception (perceiving that which is hidden or obscured) and Scrutinize (understanding that which is perceived but subtle or confusing). (Maybe "Acumen" is a better term than "Scrutinize")
Both as Wisdom abilities, but different in scope.
Perception = Listen, Search, Spot
Scrutinize = Appraise, Sense Motive
Frankly, I don't see that streamlining the system or making it more elegant. What Pathfinder has so far done is a kind of "hybrid" system between 3E and 4E -- some of the skills work as "super-skills" (e.g. Acrobatics and Deception, like you said) and some still have those "sub-skills". Note that I was suggesting that *all* skills could work as sub-skills that are mechanically treated as *separate* skills. That is no different from how they're working in 3E, except that they would "categorized" for the sake of simplicity and elegance. Also, IMO that would make the skill system more consistent, since some of the skills already work that way. You'd still have to invest in (and use) those Perception (Insight) and Perception (Listen) separately -- no matter how many Perception "sub-skills" there are in the game. Besides, Craft and Profession have literally *dozens* of "sub-skills", and should they be made into an ability score?
|
I think Sense Motive should simply be kept separate, or maybe replaced with Will saves to disbelieve?I like the idea of making Sense Motive a saving through, although Will is inappropriate. Will measures your ability to resist mental pressure (sort of the mental version of Fortitude). Sense Motive would be the ability to catch something quick and slippery, sort of the mental equivalent of Reflex.
Will is also used to disbelieve illusions, lies are just mundane illusions of word.
Will is also used to disbelieve illusions, lies are just mundane illusions of word.
No, disbelieving illusions is an artifactof 2nd edition. The Will save for illusions indicates resisting the effect of the spell telling your mind that something is real. The gestures and sounds of a liar are real (unlike the photons or sounds of an illusion) -- it's the meaning that is false. I think that makes it fundamentally different from illusions.
Hasn't "Scrutinize" just become Search a al 3.5?
I hope not. You can't use Scrutinize to do any of the things that Search did. It doesn't let you find traps or secret doors. Since those things are hidden you need to use Perception. I might suggest that Decipher Script be added into Scrutinize.
I am on the fence whether it should be Int or Wis.
Craft and Profession have literally *dozens* of "sub-skills", and should they be made into an ability score?
Unlike Craft and Profession, it is expected that people will use all these Perception subskills a lot. That makes the game a lot more complicated. The schema you outlines above with Untalented Cross-Class, Trained Cross-Class, Untalented Class, Talented Class and Masterful Class, with different benefits to all subskills is just agoonizing in its complexity.
There is a balance to be had between consolidating too many skills and having too many skills. I realyl don't see the benefit of having eight types of Perception (Listen, Spot, Intuit, Smell, Search, Appraise, etc.)
|
|
It is without precedent, but what if Deception=Bluff and Sense Motive and Diplomacy=Diplomacy and Sense Motive. This allows paladins and cleric to be adept at seeing falsehoods, but not in perpetrating them.
Krell, if you look at my post from a little earlier today, you'll see that I quite succinctly (if I do say so myself) explained and described doing this very thing. Take a read-through of that post and see if it mirrors or resembles your thoughts....
Also, Mosaic; I have been battling making Intimidate a STR based skill since 3rd edition was first released.
I consider the Terminator to be one of THE most intimidating figures in pop-culture movies - and it has nothing to do with his charisma.
Robert
It is without precedent, but what if Deception=Bluff and Sense Motive and Diplomacy=Diplomacy and Sense Motive. This allows paladins and cleric to be adept at seeing falsehoods, but not in perpetrating them.Krell, if you look at my post from a little earlier today, you'll see that I quite succinctly (if I do say so myself) explained and described doing this very thing. Take a read-through of that post and see if it mirrors or resembles your thoughts....
Also, Mosaic; I have been battling making Intimidate a STR based skill since 3rd edition was first released.
I consider the Terminator to be one of THE most intimidating figures in pop-culture movies - and it has nothing to do with his charisma.
Robert
Robert,
My apologies for not noting your initial suggestion! I had read many of the posts and skimmed the rest, but yours eluded me. Some of the other suggestions have gone far afield and appear more cumbersome than what they're intended to replace. Rather than shoehorn Sense Motive into a single slot it seems that including it within the two skills, Bluff and Diplomacy, would demonstrate the two character types who can discern liars. The same could be applied to Gather Info, it could be within Diplomacy and Intimidate, two disparate means to an end. I'm less sure that Gather Info should be also contained in Bluff however.|
|
Will is also used to disbelieve illusions, lies are just mundane illusions of word.No, disbelieving illusions is an artifactof 2nd edition. The Will save for illusions indicates resisting the effect of the spell telling your mind that something is real. The gestures and sounds of a liar are real (unlike the photons or sounds of an illusion) -- it's the meaning that is false. I think that makes it fundamentally different from illusions.
Hasn't "Scrutinize" just become Search a al 3.5?I hope not. You can't use Scrutinize to do any of the things that Search did. It doesn't let you find traps or secret doors. Since those things are hidden you need to use Perception. I might suggest that Decipher Script be added into Scrutinize.
I am on the fence whether it should be Int or Wis.
Craft and Profession have literally *dozens* of "sub-skills", and should they be made into an ability score?Unlike Craft and Profession, it is expected that people will use all these Perception subskills a lot. That makes the game a lot more complicated. The schema you outlines above with Untalented Cross-Class, Trained Cross-Class, Untalented Class, Talented Class and Masterful Class, with different benefits to all subskills is just agoonizing in its complexity.
There is a balance to be had between consolidating too many skills and having too many skills. I realyl don't see the benefit of having eight types of Perception (Listen, Spot, Intuit, Smell, Search, Appraise, etc.)
Actually, I think my list (and the Pathfinder skill list) has -- even including six Perception sub-skills -- far fewer skills than 3E does. And talking about complexity... I liked to tinker with skill points, but I actually like the Pathfinder system even more, because it *is* far simpler to calculate and use skills in PF than 3E. Especially since some character concepts are pretty difficult to do in 3E because some classes have far too few skills points.
A concrete example: a recent adventure I wrote (and ran) featured an evil wizard who was masquerading (with Polymorph) as another NPC. The module was written for a group of 4th to 6th level PCs and thus I determined that a 7th level specialist wizard would be an appropriate challenge (for that particular group of PCs). However, he needed to have pretty high ranks in Disguise, Bluff and Diplomacy to pull off his trick. In the end, I had to add *several* levels of Rogue to accomplish just that, and naturally drop his wizard levels accordingly. The trouble was... he didn't access to Polymorph anymore. What to do? I didn't want him to use any magic item, because I knew that the PCs would cause too much mischief with a permanent item (even a wand with a low number of charges). Finally I just gave him a bunch of scrolls that he had purchased, although it didn't feel satisfactory at all.
No system is perfect, of course, but I honestly believe that PF will streamline the skill system and reduce the number of skills (although not too dramatically as 4E has apparently done). I even believe that in the end it is more likely that the PCs will have too *many* skills than too few (or too few ranks in too many skills which also happens quite often in 3E). BTW, IMO Appraise should be part of Craft/Profession/Trade -- not Perception.
|
|
Robert,
My apologies for not noting your initial suggestion! I had read many of the posts and skimmed the rest, but yours eluded me. Some of the other suggestions have gone far afield and appear more cumbersome than what they're intended to replace. Rather than shoehorn Sense Motive into a single slot it seems that including it within the two skills, Bluff and Diplomacy, would demonstrate the two character types who can discern liars. The same could be applied to Gather Info, it could be within Diplomacy and Intimidate, two disparate means to an end. I'm less sure that Gather Info should be also contained in Bluff however.
No problem.
If you don't think Bluff can help you "gather Info" try watching Donnie Brasco, or The Departed. :-)
Robert
|
We've started switching the characters in my Rise of the Runelords campaign over to PFRPG and there's been 3 complaints so far. The biggest was the switch away from skill points, so we just stayed with skill points...
The second was rolling Sense Motive into Bluff. Both my Paladin and Cleric have issues with this. Both are honest characters, and neither gets to use their high Wis to work with this. It's also not a class skill for either anymore.
Keep them separate.
(3rd complaint is too many hit points giving people the bonus racial hit points as suggested in PFRPG.)
Paladins aren't supposed to lie, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't be good at it. For that matter, a high level paladin is also quite good at killing innocent children (i.e. high BAB), not that he's going to go around doing it.
|
|
The second was rolling Sense Motive into Bluff. Both my Paladin and Cleric have issues with this. Both are honest characters, and neither gets to use their high Wis to work with this. It's also not a class skill for either anymore.
Keep them separate.
Well this goes back to my earlier suggestion to make Sense Motive an ASPECT of each Diplomacy, and Bluff (deception).
Someone who's good at being diplomatic (or a suave double-talking lawyer politician brown-noser type) should also have the ability to be keenly aware when someone is attempting to schmooze them as well.
Thus since Paladins and Clerics should both get Diplomacy as a class skill(especially paladins), they should have the ability to sense motive (by making an opposed Diplomacy Vs other Dip or bluff).
Would this fix the problem for your players I wonder?
Robert
I've been thinking about this, and there's an aspect that makes a simulationist approach problematic.
I can't usually automatically tell when someone's lying to my face. But if I think about what they've said for a few minutes, afterwards, I can always figure it out. My wife, on the other hand, can often tell right away if someone's being dishonest, but if she doesn't sense it immediately, she'll never in a million years figure it out until I explain it to her.
She's got a high Diplomacy; I for sure don't. I'm cunning, in a low sort of way; she's not. But rolling Sense Motive (immediate) into Diplomacy, and moving Sense Motive (on reflection) into Bluff just seems REALLY clunky.
|
|
I've been thinking about this, and there's an aspect that makes a simulationist approach problematic.
I can't usually automatically tell when someone's lying to my face. But if I think about what they've said for a few minutes, afterwards, I can always figure it out. My wife, on the other hand, can often tell right away if someone's being dishonest, but if she doesn't sense it immediately, she'll never in a million years figure it out until I explain it to her.
She's got a high Diplomacy; I for sure don't. I'm cunning, in a low sort of way; she's not. But rolling Sense Motive (immediate) into Diplomacy, and moving Sense Motive (on reflection) into Bluff just seems REALLY clunky.
Well my suggestion wasnt about doing so retrospectively; its just an opposed check at the time of the conversation.
Robert
Well my suggestion wasnt about doing so retrospectively; its just an opposed check at the time of the conversation.
Understood. And I certainly wouldn't advocate taking the approach I outlined in-game, either. I'm just VERY leary of allowing more than one skill to oppose another. That opens a can of worms:
Player: "I want to use Stealth to out-stealth the guy, instead of using Perception."
DM: "Well, since you can use either Diplomacy or Bluff to counter Bluff, that seems perfectly reasonable."
|
|
Unlike Craft and Profession, it is expected that people will use all these Perception subskills a lot. That makes the game a lot more complicated. The schema you outlines above with Untalented Cross-Class, Trained Cross-Class, Untalented Class, Talented Class and Masterful Class, with different benefits to all subskills is just agoonizing in its complexity.
There is a balance to be had between consolidating too many skills and having too many skills. I realyl don't see the benefit of having eight types of Perception (Listen, Spot, Intuit, Smell, Search, Appraise, etc.)
How will it make it any more difficult than a Bard having ranks in five different Perform sub-skills? And how is my "schema" any more difficult to handle than skills in 3E? Note that you can only have *two* different values in cross-class skills, and three in class skills (or two, if you are not willing to spend a Feat to "master" a skill). If you implement the variant skill system in UA (pages 80-82, I think?) the system seems far simpler than having to calculate class and cross-class skills for multi-classed characters in 3E.
I agree to a certain point with you about Perception, and I would not roll Appraise into it (rather, I'd merge it into Craft). However, there are, in my opinion, at least three Perception skills that are important to the system: Insight, Sight and Listen (although I don't mind if Touch, Smell and Taste are also included in the game). You could also add Awareness to that list as a sort of Danger/Sixth Sense (like it works in Passages RPG), but that would diminish the importance of both Sight and Listen.
EDIT: Using the UA skill system would really solve the multi-classing problem, too, since it would not automatically "upgrade" all your "new" class skills into higher values.