|
In the keep skill points thread and various other skill threads everyone has a concern about the new skill system and picking classes. The big one being that taking rogue at first level is so hard to resist. Mainly this is because you max out your skills through all 20 of your levels even if you never take the rogue class again.
There are other troubling variations to this issue as well that I am sure people will chime in about.
This thread is to figure out solutions to this dilema as they relate to the new skill system. This thread is not how to do this with skill points. There are many other threads about how to change skill points to everyones liking.
My weak attempt at a solution was posted earlier in another thread.
The option below might be overkill for taking rogue at first level delema just to get skills, it will help with other things as well.
In True20 they have a mechanic called conviction that works similar to action points, but allows you to do more things with. Each role has a specific ability that only they can use with conviction. You only get the ability for the role you pick at first level, so if you multi-role you do not get the abilities for conviction from every role you go into.
Could we do something similar to that with each class? Each class have a core ability or two that can only be gained by taking that class at first level. If you multi-class into that class you do not get it, but of course you would get all the other abilities of that class except the core ones. So when you take rogue at first level and then take other classes later, at the core you are a rogue who happens to have a few abilities of other classes.
The core abilities would have to be fairly powerful/useful for this to work and not detract to much from the others abilities you could gain from multi-classing into. Enough so that your first level choice is important and not because you are trying to min/max or make some certain build that is optimal.
What does everyone think about that? Of course the reasoning for this delves into to issues not related to skills as well.
I think I had another potential solution posted somewhere else and I will try to find it.
Well, if you're the DM, and you don't like the "1st level Rogue Auto-Choice" you have a very easy way out.
Just say no.
If you're not the party Rogue, or a character with a reasonable multiclass concept, you can't do it. The beauty of the system is that if you have to c@ck-block someone, it's pretty easy for them to convert their character to a single-class.
If your players cry to much about giving up their little min-max trick, maybe you've got the wrong players. But that's not very helpful advice, we can't always pick our friends (or make them behave).
If you're the DM, and the campaign starts at 1st level, you have other options as well. If the entire party decides to take Rogue as their first level, you can mess with them pretty easy. Just throw challenges at them that they can't easily take on without a meat-shield, cleric, or wizard.
Another way to jerk their chains is to restrict what they can take at 2nd unless they meet certain requirements. If you can't find someone in-game to train you in the new class, you just have to suck it and stay a Rogue for another level. Or two. Or more. Eventually, the party will be crying "Gee, I wish one of us had a decent BAB, or could cast high level spells!"
Honestly, I think people are over-estimating how much of a problem it will be. The temptation is a bit greater than with the original 3.5 system, but you still give something up for all those extra skill. You will always be one level behind in the power progression of your "real" class. 8 vs. 2 skills is a big swing at 1st level. It four times as many skills. But the other classes do catch up. By 10th, it would be 13 vs. 7, which has almost cut the advantage in half.
|
|
Also posted this in the keep skill points thread.
Or maybe you only get to roll 1d20 plus your class level (+ ability modifier), but only for the class you took the skill in. So if you took rogue for first level and got all of those skills, but you are still only a 1st level rogue and now also have 14 levels in fighter you only get +1 to that skill check for class level for the skills you took as a first level rogue.
This would make your first level class choice much more important and be the one you are mainly going to stick with even if you multi-class.
I think I am getting somewhere with this idea, but I am not completely there yet.
well doing multi classing something like saga might help but alot of it is up to the GM to say no you always take rouge first so you no longer can sorry no quick fix for u.
|
|
Another from the keep skill points thread:
I agree with Rambling Scribe about the 1st level rogue problem, but I think there's some room for fixing. What about giving the rogue fewer skills to start, but giving them more as they progress in levels.
Would it be too complicated to have different skill progressions? The current progression as it stands across the board seems a little too generous.
|
|
Another post in the keep skill points thread. While not directly addressing the rogue issue this can be a solution as well:
Skills need to be based on their core class levels not character level and any class skills that over lap stack.
Lets assume ability and racial modifiers are 0.
This way for a rogue3/fighter4 Stealth would be 1d20 + 3(class level) + 3 + ability + racial = 1d20 + 6But Intimidate would be 1d20 + 7(both class levels) +3 = 1d20 + 10
It makes sense that a character that is taking levels in rogue would improve their rogue specific skill and when they take a level in fighter they would improve their fight skills not both unless they are shared skills.
Second I think Skills need to have a focus option other than a feat. There was another thread on this that I could not find that had a good option that I will try to repeat.
So trained Skills get 1d20 + class level + 3 + ability + racial
Second level the character uses another skill point on the same skill and you get 1d20 + 1.5 X class level + 3 + ability + racial
So with the example above the rogue takes another skill in stealth second level we have 1d20 + 4 (1.5 X class level) + 3 = 1d20 + 7
4th level use another for
1d20 + 1.5 X class level + 3 + ability + racial and get to reroll the skill 3/day (I think 3 is to many but haven't tested it)So with above he takes another skill in intimidate
1d20 + 10 (1.5 X both class levels) + 3 = 13Even go as far as one more level with
1d20 + 2 X class level + 3 + ability + racial and get to reroll the skill 3/dayThis way if a rogue wants to be really sneaky they can be. Give a little more variety between equal level characters with the same race and abilities.
Any thoughts on the idea's.
|
|
Also from the keep skill points thread:
I like the skill proposed by the alpha rules, except I'm concerned about people cherry picking classes at 1st level for skills (rogue for sure). I'd say lower the number of initial skills to a flat number for all classes, say 4+int and then have each class have a different rate of learning new skills:
every 2 levels for a rogue
every 3 for bard and ranger
every 4 for druids, barbarians, monks, and sorcerers
every 5 levels for fighters, paladins, clerics, and wizards
Well, if you're the DM, and you don't like the "1st level Rogue Auto-Choice" you have a very easy way out.
Just say no.
This is true, but the weakness of the RAW remains.
It seems to me that in any campaign where my players start at second level or above, at least half of them would be rogue/xxx multiclass characters.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
My suggestion from another thread. It actually involves only one word being changed from the Alpha-1 rules.
"Trained Class Skill 1d20 + Character level + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier"
BECOMES
"Trained Class Skill 1d20 + Class level + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier"
Skill Check is Equal To
-- Untrained: 1d20 + Ability modifier + racial modifier
-- Trained: Class Skill 1d20 + Class level (levels in class for which this is a class skill) + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier
-- Trained: Cross-Class skill 1d20 + 1/2 (character level +3) + ability modifier + racial modifierSo a fifth level wizard / 1st level rogue with 18 dex would have 'theft' at 1d20+8 (1+3+4).
A third level wizard / third level rogue with 18 dex would have 'theft' at 1d20+10 (3+3+4).
A first level wizard / fifth level rogue with 18 dex would have 'theft' at 1d20+12 (5+3+4).
A sixth level wizard with 18 dex who took 'theft' as a cross-class skill would have it at 1d20+8((6+3)/2+4).
The rogue retains the benefit of being a skill monkey and the player who wants a wizard with deep pockets has to decide if that is worth losing a level of spells.
The effect would be to allow a character who takes rogue at first level a broad array of skills but only allow them to advance in those that are also class skills for the class they multiclass into.
A fighter who takes rogue at first level could continue to advance in
Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (dungeoneering)
Int), Profession (Wis), Survival (Wis), Swim (Str) and so they benefit from the rogue's extra skill areas but they give up the automatic 10 hit points for the rogue's 8 and will always be behind the BAB of a straight fighter.
Another option, would be to reduce the number of first level skill choices a rogue has but then allow extra skill choices with level progression. So, the rogue could start with 4+Int first level skill choices and gain additional skills at odd levels (for being a rogue) and even levels like all other characters.
|
|
I am going to post this one more time because I think it got lost, but this is also from the keep skill ranks thread:
I like the skill proposed by the alpha rules, except I'm concerned about people cherry picking classes at 1st level for skills (rogue for sure). I'd say lower the number of initial skills to a flat number for all classes, say 4+int and then have each class have a different rate of learning new skills:
every 2 levels for a rogue
every 3 for bard and ranger
every 4 for druids, barbarians, monks, and sorcerers
every 5 levels for fighters, paladins, clerics, and wizards
I don't like the last one at all but maybe rouges get 2 skills every even level and not one .I do want to see 4 skills as the minimum for most classes.yeah I would be ok with rouges /bards and rangers having 6 skills but giving the rouge 2 every even level that would keep them as skill monkeys.
It seems to me that in any campaign where my players start at second level or above, at least half of them would be rogue/xxx multiclass characters.
Yes, but is that so bad? If half of them took Rogue at 1st, it's maybe a bit cheesy, but it's not the end of the world. It doesn't have to mean that they all grew up as orphans in the same thieves' guild (although it could...)
Taking Rogue at 1st isn't so out of place for a future adventurer. It doesn't have to mean you were an apprentice pick-pocket or whatever. It just means you were a bit of a sneaky punk during the teen years, as opposed to a wizard in training or captain of the ass-kicking team.
Say you're starting at 5th level. I bet many spellcasters will NOT take Rogue 1, because it's a choice between 3rd level spells right out of the gate, or some extra skills.
Since your starting at 5th, the fighters, wizards and clerics will already be starting with 4 + Int instead of 2 + Int.
Now if the player really wants to play a "Gish", then maybe they're willing to give up 3rd level spells for the skills and the evasion.
Anyway, I think overall, if you start a campaign above 1st level, you will probably see a bit more multi-classing because you have to spend less time playing your character while it's "half done".
It seems to me that in any campaign where my players start at second level or above, at least half of them would be rogue/xxx multiclass characters.Yes, but is that so bad? If half of them took Rogue at 1st, it's maybe a bit cheesy, but it's not the end of the world. It doesn't have to mean that they all grew up as orphans in the same thieves' guild (although it could...)
It's cheesy and it speaks to me of the skill limitations of some other classes, can we find a balanced solution?
OK I'm losing posts or this broad is wacky anyhow as i said last time I don't like the last one. how about bard/ranger and rogue get 6 everyone else 4 .how ever the rogue gets 2 skills Evey even level and not one. that way they stay skill monkeys we all love without being abused to much.
It's cheesy and it speaks to me of the skill limitations of some other classes, can we find a balanced solution?
I see your point, the temptation is there, and it's a very min-max trick.
So maybe adjust the # of skills at first a bit (as others have suggested). If the swing at 1st doesn't go from 2 to 8, there would be less incentive to pull the min-max.
So you could bump rogues down to 5 or 6, or bump the 2's up to 3 or 4.
Now here's an idea I haven't seen posted yet: If you still want Rogues to be "skill monkeys" but you don't want everyone to take a level of rogue at 1st, just delay some their "extra" skill choices. Give them 5 or 6 at 1st, and a bonus choice or two at 3rd and 5th, while all the rest of the classes still only get new skills on even levels.
However, with the Rogue talents, Rogues already get lots of new abilities at each level, just like all the re-written classes.
|
OK I'm losing posts or this broad is wacky anyhow as i said last time I don't like the last one. how about bard/ranger and rogue get 6 everyone else 4 .how ever the rogue gets 2 skills Evey even level and not one. that way they stay skill monkeys we all love without being abused to much.
Frankly, with the current progression, they are every bit the skillmonkeys we know and love without having to do much already. I think your suggestion is on the right track, though.
I'd suggest cutting the rogue back to 6 skills to start - the skill folding almost entirely benefited rogues - and upping paladins and fighters to 4 skills to start, with a correspondingly wider set of class skills (we're already seeing this with the fighter, and I approve). Spellcasting classes can remain at 2 skills, though, because multiclassing for skills is not likely to be worthwhile in terms of the loss of caster level. That way combat-primary classes have fewer reasons to multiclass for the skills (do you really want just two more skill points?), and it gives rogues a little more room to grow as they head toward level 20.
Oh yes I want to see larger skill sets I do like cross skills though. and if ya cant give every one 4 at lest give them 3 .two just is not enuff at all.but glad ya like my ideal been toying with it since I downloaded alpha.
It seems to me with the pared down skill list that rogues could have fewer skills.
This got me wondering why the skills distribution is 2/4/6/8 in points or number of skills. I think that these numbers were chosen for their elegance rather than fairness.
With fewer skills maybe we can give the rogue 7 skills or 7 points and work down from there, so that the distribution is 4/5/6/7, which still has the elegance but makes the classes with fewer much more appealing, OR another distribution that doesn't stiff fighters and doesn't make rogues into veritable skill god's that are almost a prerequisite class for anyone who wants some skills.
Whatever, I just really hope Paizo looks carefully at the REAL reasons for these numbers and comes to a decision that makes classes useful rather rendering their formulas elegant because they are sequential and divisible by two.
|
I think changing the new skill choices every 2 levels just for rogue is a bad idea. I think that mechanic should be unified, the same for everybody.
The question is, what defines the rogue? Is it the skill-monkey aspect, or the sneak attack aspect? I would say sneak attack, with a secondary focus on skills.
An easier way to address to 1st-level rogue cherry-pick would be to give them 6+Int skill choices at 1st level, same as Bard and Ranger. It still makes skills important for rogues, but doesn't make them worse than bards and rangers.
Then, rather than double their skill choices every 2 levels, simply add a new class ability at 2nd level: the rogue gets an additional 2 skill choices. This would give them the total number of rogue skills, just not at 1st level to avoid the cherry pick.
Alternately (I just thought of this while writing), make an extra 2 skill choices one of the possible Rogue talents to choose. That way, a rogue can get more skill choices if he wants them, or can focus on other abilities instead. You would probably have to limit this so that it can only be taken once however, or else the rogue could have every skill in the book!
This got me wondering why the skills distribution is 2/4/6/8 in points or number of skills. I think that these numbers were chosen for their elegance rather than fairness.
I don't think the original reason was elegance. I do believe it had more to do with game balance, with BAB, bonus feats, spell-casting ability, etc.. added into the mix. Rangers and Barbarians get more skill points than a fighter, but get less bonus feats and armor.
I am not sure that the rogue skill monkey is a big issue as it appears as at first glance. At 20th level, a rogue will have 18 skills, while a fighter will have 12 skills. That is a bigger improvement for fighters than it is for rogues.
I know that min-maxers will always be a problem, but I would hate to see everyone else "punished" by the RAW just to curtail them. The most powerful control n the game is the DM, who can quite legally and easily vet char design.
How about this? Every class is on a level playing field at 1st level, meaning they all get the same amount of skill choices. I'd suggest something like 4 + Int bonus. Then you simply vary the progression of new skill choices per class. The fighter might get 1 new skill choice every 3 levels while the rogue gains one new choice per level. Something like that. I'm pretty sure the design team could wrap something like this in a much better text and progression. That way, 1st level would be no dip-temptation for any of the classes, and there would be enticement to actually stay with the rogue class once you chose it.
I think Sargon's last idea is pretty good, 6+ Int modifier is pretty hefty, especially with combined skills.
If a character really does want to skill monkey it up they can do so with a rogue talent slot.
OK I'm losing posts or this broad is wacky ...
I'm losing posts, too...is there somebody sneak-deleting posts, or do we have an overflow problem? O_o
I think the solution is... to make everyone skill monkeys. The rogue's skill points should be decreased and other classes should get more skill points as well as in some cases increased skill choices. In exchange, perhaps give the rogue a higher Bab, or perhaps something like a bonus to sneak attacks.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
An easier way to address to 1st-level rogue cherry-pick would be to give them 6+Int skill choices at 1st level, same as Bard and Ranger. It still makes skills important for rogues, but doesn't make them worse than bards and rangers.
Then, rather than double their skill choices every 2 levels, simply add a new class ability at 2nd level: the rogue gets an additional 2 skill choices. This would give them the total number of rogue skills, just not at 1st level to avoid the cherry pick.
Sargon's proposals work for the rogue. Does it work though for the 11th level fighter who takes a level in wizard and has Spellcraft out the wazoo?
I think changing 'character level' for 'class level' is still needed.
"Trained Class Skill 1d20 + Character level + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier"
BECOMES
"Trained Class Skill 1d20 + Class level + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier"
|
|
If the reason to make skills "on/off" instead of using skill points is to simplify (specially when creating multiclass characters of high levels), counting class levels instead of character levels doesn't make any sense, because it brings back the bookkeeping and, in that case, why not keep skill points in the first place?
Frankly, I don't think that everybody taking rogue as 1st level would be a problem, because if you start your campaign at 1st level everyone will want to get their "thing" - Fighters will want their extra feat and BAB, wizards and clerics will want their spells, and so on. The problem may be found when multiclassing, with players getting a level in Rogue just for the big "uuumph" in skills. I think that the additional coolness in each class' level, along with the +1 hp per favored classes, can prevent that in the long run.
I think the solution is... to make everyone skill monkeys. The rogue's skill points should be decreased and other classes should get more skill points as well as in some cases increased skill choices. In exchange, perhaps give the rogue a higher Bab, or perhaps something like a bonus to sneak attacks.
In other words, give fighters rogue skills and then nix the rogue, is where this seems to be headed. My discomfort here is that I've always liked the rogue. I like playing the skill monkey. Wizards have spells, fighters have combat, clerics have healing and buffing, and rogues have skills. Take that away and the rogue niche is gone.
Yes, but is that so bad? If half of them took Rogue at 1st, it's maybe a bit cheesy, but it's not the end of the world.
No, but it's the end of the rogue as a 20-level class, and we're into a new era where rogue is a 1-level class. That's my issue here. The nifty little "extra abilities" are nowhere near good enough to define a class the way the rogue's skills did in 3.5e, nor to balance that class with the others.
Another question of class balance.
(1) Would everyone be in favor of taking 1 level of wizard, and then multiclass to fighter for the next 19 levels, and end up casting spells as a 20th level wizard? You wouldn't have all the wizard extra abilities, just the spellcasting, so that's fair, right?
(2) Or, what if I take 1 level in fighter, then multiclass to wizard. At the end, I should be a 19th level wizard with a BAB of +20, right? After all, I'm not getting all the abilities and bonus feats, just the base attack progression.
No? Then why is the rogue's area of expertise up for grabs, but no one else's? Are rogues inherently a lame archetype/class idea that needed doing away with? If not, then really they should retain their identity and area of expertise.
|
|
I think changing 'character level' for 'class level' is still needed.
If I am understanding your detailed explaination earlier correctly I think that might punish characters who multi-class. What do you think?
I do not want to punish multi-classing I just do want there to be auto-choices out there (or at least close to auto-choice).
Having said that I do like the idea and had a similar one myself. Someone who wants to be that Fighter 10/Wizard 10 would probably have their skills suffer for it though. Wizard would only have +10 to their Spellcraft and Knowledge (Arcane) instead of +20 when they reach 20th level.
Maybe this okay in the new system though.
I think changing the new skill choices every 2 levels just for rogue is a bad idea. I think that mechanic should be unified, the same for everybody.
The question is, what defines the rogue? Is it the skill-monkey aspect, or the sneak attack aspect? I would say sneak attack, with a secondary focus on skills.
An easier way to address to 1st-level rogue cherry-pick would be to give them 6+Int skill choices at 1st level, same as Bard and Ranger. It still makes skills important for rogues, but doesn't make them worse than bards and rangers.
Then, rather than double their skill choices every 2 levels, simply add a new class ability at 2nd level: the rogue gets an additional 2 skill choices. This would give them the total number of rogue skills, just not at 1st level to avoid the cherry pick.
Alternately (I just thought of this while writing), make an extra 2 skill choices one of the possible Rogue talents to choose. That way, a rogue can get more skill choices if he wants them, or can focus on other abilities instead. You would probably have to limit this so that it can only be taken once however, or else the rogue could have every skill in the book!
I think you miss under stood me man I meant they get 2 skills Evey even level not double them. so to clear this up
Barbarian 4 + Int modifierBard 6 + Int modifier
Cleric 4 + Int modifier
Druid 4 + Int modifier
Fighter 4 + Int modifier
Monk 4 + Int modifier
Paladin 4 + Int modifier
Ranger 6 + Int modifier
Rogue 6 + Int modifier
Sorcerer 4 + Int modifier
Wizard 4 + Int modifier
this was what i suggested for starting skills
and this is what i suggested for new skills
level normal rogue
1st 1 2
2nd 1 2
4th 1 2
6th 1 2
8th 1 2
10th 1 2
12th 1 2
14th 1 2
16th 1 2
18th 1 2
20th 1 2
after I type this I reread what you wrote . But adding a class skill does the same thing so just make it official and be done with it.
|
IMHO I think rogues should be the skill monkey. yes this can be abused but the final say is up to the DM.
The real way to fix it is to reach into Advanced dungeons and dragons Second Edition and bring back the percentile thieving abilities and percentile points, if you want to keep complaining about this.
considering with my 16 int character I made I had the core thief-acrobat skills barely (which in total is 11 skills, this includes linguist and use magical device.)on abuse, ya people will abuse it. but again the golden rule of 'DM has last say' comes into play. If your game becomes a wrecked thing due to player abuse look for ways to rectify this. You're the DM you control the world, the players get to control just their character.
edit reason: typos....
I would suggest everyone getting a base 4 skills. Rogues would get bonus skill every few rogue levels. This would keep dedicated rogues as skill monkeys and lessen cherrypicking.
I would also highly suggest using a another portion of the maximum rank skill system from Unearthed Arcana. Characters that take a level of a new class automatically gain a new trained skill from that class.
I think the solution is... to make everyone skill monkeys. The rogue's skill points should be decreased and other classes should get more skill points as well as in some cases increased skill choices. In exchange, perhaps give the rogue a higher Bab, or perhaps something like a bonus to sneak attacks.In other words, give fighters rogue skills and then nix the rogue, is where this seems to be headed. My discomfort here is that I've always liked the rogue. I like playing the skill monkey. Wizards have spells, fighters have combat, clerics have healing and buffing, and rogues have skills. Take that away and the rogue niche is gone.
Well I certainty wouldn't give Fighters Stealth or Theft, but there might be some overlap in skill selection. But really have a classes niche be skills is stupid, and so is giving a class a niche of combat. They're only parts of the game. Wizards have spells. Well spells have both in combat and out of combat. Do you want to split the Wizard up into combat and non combat versions? Heck, spells like Invisibility and Find Traps already encroach on the Rogue's niche. And even if you still want the rogue to be a skill monkey, then the answer is not to gimp the other classes and to give the rogue a huge number of skills. Give the rogue feats and talents that allow them to do cool adventuring stuff the other classes can't.
Edit: Also, maybe change around the rate in which classes get new skills.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I think changing 'character level' for 'class level' is still needed.If I am understanding your detailed explaination earlier correctly I think that might punish characters who multi-class. What do you think?
Not at all. It just doesn't reward munchkinism. They continue to get the benefits of multiclassing, they just don't advance in the areas they haven't been working on. If you multiclass in classes that share skills, you continue to benefit.
The argument against it is that it adds a layer of complexity and then, why not just use skill points. It doesn't add MUCH complexity and even then only for the multiclassing characters.
A lot of this is assuming that multiclassing will stay the same. Future alpha documents might change multiclassing significantly, or at least clarify how multiclass character's skills add up.
Yes, I think the OP has identified a real problem. The most balanced solution would probably be compensating benefits given to other classes only if they are taken at first level.
For example: martial classes could receive bonus hit points and spellcasters bonus spells.
After reading this in a dozen threads with the same arguements pro and con being made, I have come to a conclusion:
The only way to make the skill system backward compatable, and get rid of skill points, results in a system even MORE complex than skill points.
As for skill monkey, while there has been a lot of hand waving "oh its not a problem", "oh the DM should just disapprove it", the fact that the rules have it SO attactive is a problem with the rules. Either give everyone the same skill size and eliminate the problem or accept that no player in his right mind will ever want to start as anything other than a rogue and its not min-maxing, it's just recognizing a massive whole in the system. No matter what class you are, you need skills, rogue provides them, and they always stay maxed. Complaining that this is min-maxing is like complaining that someone who wants to cast spells takes wizard (after 1st level or course).
|
|
I think you miss under stood me man I meant they get 2 skills Evey even level not double them. so to clear this up
Barbarian 4 + Int modifier
Bard 6 + Int modifier
Cleric 4 + Int modifier
Druid 4 + Int modifier
Fighter 4 + Int modifier
Monk 4 + Int modifier
Paladin 4 + Int modifier
Ranger 6 + Int modifier
Rogue 6 + Int modifier
Sorcerer 4 + Int modifier
Wizard 4 + Int modifier
this was what i suggested for starting skills and this is what i suggested for new skills
level normal rogue
1st 1 2
2nd 1 2
4th 1 2
6th 1 2
8th 1 2
10th 1 2
12th 1 2
14th 1 2
16th 1 2
18th 1 2
20th 1 2after I type this I reread what you wrote . But adding a class skill does the same thing so just make it official and be done with it.
No, I understood you. If normal classes get 1 skill every 2 levels, and the rogue gets 2 skills every 2 levels, that is doubling them. The problem with doubling the number of new skills for rogues is that they then get way too many skills. By 10th level, one of the regular classes gets 6 new skills, the rogue gets 12. By 20th level, a rogue can have 31 skills trained out of a possible 34. A rogue should be a skill monkey, but they shouldn't have 91% of all the skills available, IMO. That's going too far.
And I didn't mean add a class skill. I meant adding skill choices as a rogue talent, one of th abilities they must choose. Choosing more skills in this case would mean they couldn't choose Minor Magic or Bleeding Attack.
humm your right I was working off the top of my head and hadn't counted it up yeah that would be too much. how about they get 2 at 6th,12th and 18th level. if they start with 6 that gives them 3 more then a ranger or bard and 5 more then clerics and such and just 7 more if some classes still use 2 points.do you think that would be more in line?
|
|
The problem I have with that is it makes the skill system different for different characters. I think unified systems are better. It's why we have a unified XP system for all classes in 3.x (unlike in earlier editions), unified feats, etc.
Look at the fighter for example. He gets extra feats, but he doesn't have a different level-based feat system. He gets the same feats at the same levels as everyone else, and his extra feats are class abilities, thus keeping the system unified.
I think it should be the same for skills. Give rogues more skills if you like, but make it more of a class ability, perhaps staggered like Fighter feats are with regular level-based feats.
I can see your point there and can respect that I don't see a big issue but will consed to your point and will say that giving it as a rogue only skill would work just as well and is problem more balanced and brings em more inline with the fighters feat seat up
|
I think changing 'character level' for 'class level' is still needed.
Tarren Dei wrote:
"Trained Class Skill 1d20 + Character level + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier"
BECOMES
"Trained Class Skill 1d20 + Class level + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier"
****
This seems to be an adequate solution. Skills that are cross-class for both/all classes continue to progress, others do not.
Or you would you have them progress at cross-class rates?
I would have to agree with skills being based on the pertinent class(es) levels, rather than total character level.
However, I would also like to put forth the idea of raising certain classes' starting skill choices (and perhaps widening their skill lists as well). Giving the other classes a few more skill choices would make them a more desirable 1st level choices. For instance, fighters should get the Acrobatics, Diplomacy, and Perception skills, to account for (among a vast number of other archetypes) nimble fighters, honorable knights, and highly trained guardsmen.