I’m fine tuning my idea to be even more simple:
At first level, your character gains a number of skills Choice equal to twice the amount show on table 5.1: First Level Skill Choices. At every even character level after that, you gain another skill choice.
With one skill Choice you can buy:
Basic Training: 1d20 +1/2(character level +3) + modifiers (same as a Trained Cross-Class Skill)
With a second skill Choice you can buy Full Training (only if the skill is a Class Skill):
Full Training: 1d20 + character level +3 + modifiers (same as a Trained Class Skill)
What do you think?
EDIT (Design Goal): The main difference with this system and the Pathfinder is that you can buy half-maximum rank for your hobby skills and reduce the cost of the cross-class skills. Also, the progression of new skills after level 1 will be slower as one skill Choice will only buy half-maximum rank instead of a full trained rank. It will encourage character to buy more cross-class skill.
Jason,
As much as I love what you have done for us 3.x fans so far, and as much as I have tried to warm up to the Pathfinder format, I still must admit that I'm entrenched in the camp that wants the 3.5 rank approach to skills. I'm in agreement in many of the streamlining effects, and I agree that in some aspects the Pathfinder would be a bit easier, but micromanagement of skills is a big love of mine. Don't ask why, I just do.
Also, I would have to at least go with the combination format because I found some serious flaws trying to playtest those low level commoner and expert NPCs.... if you want to keep your tailors, tanners, bakers, bards, blacksmiths, etc. etc. between levels 1 to 3, you had to suffer them being only mediocre at best in their trade.
This brings me, yet, again... sorry... to an idea I have. Either stretch the cap on ranks (from the level+3 rank max) to a higher degree or remove the cap altogether. I know that removing the cap would/could allow a rogue to start level 1 with a max of 20 ranks in disable device, sleight of hand, open locks, or something else... but if you look at it, the rogue really had to give up alot to be one of the realm's greatest at such a skill so early on in one's career.
Again, most everything else, even the 3 rung XP setup (although I would one of the charts to be expressively stated as a standard default), I can agree with... as much as I want to with the skills in the Pathfinder approach, I just still prefer the 3.5 version.
|
1. Pathfinder: The system presented in Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG.
I have to confess, I absolutely hate the proposed new system. Sorry, nice effort, but I like to be able to customize a few skill points here and a few there to support my character's story. And the part about a high-level character picking up a new skill and being instantly good at it just seems wrong to me.
2. 3.5 OGL:The system presented in the 3.5 OGL.
My favorite option, although I recognize the burden this puts on DMs.
3. Combination: Using the system in the 3.5 OGL for characters, and using the system in the Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG for NPCs and monsters ...
I'm fine with PCs having a different system than NPCs and monsters, especially if the NPC/monster system is a streamlined, max'ed-out version of the PC system. And important NPCs could use the PC system if the DM wanted to go to all the trouble.
4. Hybrid System: ...
0 ranks – Untrained: Bonus = ability modifier + racial modifiers (or modifiers)
1 ranks – Trained: Bonus = 1/2 your character level + modifiers
2 ranks – Skilled: Bonus = your character level + modifiers
3 ranks – Expert: Bonus = your character level + 3 + modifiers
4 ranks – Master: Bonus = your character level +6 + modifiers
Not a bad system, but it doesn't seem any simpler to me than 3.5/OGL. And if it isn't MUCH simpler, than what's the point of making people learn a new rule and making compatibility harder?
Me? I like Choice 2 (3.5/OGL as is) or Choice 3 (3.5/OGL for PCs with a Pathfinder shortcut for NPCs and monsters).
BTW- thanks for including us all in this process!
Alright...Ive looked at this a couple more times...in the end, the best choice is #2, but in one of thoes small boxes put "Alternate skill system", and put either #1 or #3(or entigen's or Reckless's solution for that matter). In the end, its a good alternative, but as I am finding it is a tough system to truly simplyfy.
|
|
* Take 3.5 system. Roll together skills with synergy bonuses, as proposed in the Pathfinder system. Synergy bonuses go the way of the dodo.
Agreed. I like synergy bonuses but they don't add enough to the game to make them worth the trouble.
* Allow retroactive Int bonuses, so you don't have to back-subtract. Geron is dead-on with that suggestion; it'll save a lot of difficulty when statting NPC wizards.
It seems hard to justify in-game, but if this is the thing that makes statting NPCs easier, I can live with it.
* Ignore class vs. cross-class skills.
I'm guessing this would make statting multi-classed NPCs easier, but I believe in cross-class skills. I like that anybody can take any skill, but if it is out of your field, then it is going to require more effort, represented by costing more skill points. I could see a rule where once it is a class skill for you, it is always a class skill for you, even when you multi-class away from it (i.e., a rogue/fighter would always have Open Locks as a class skill regardless of which class she was currently working on). That doesn't help with statting high-level NPCs thought.
So maybe you get rid of class/cross-class skills but do something else to make sure that certain classes stay better at certain skills. I want my 1st-level rogue to be better at Disabling Devices than a 1st-level fighter, no matter what. What if there were no cross-class skills but instead each class got bonuses to a few appropriate skills? For example, Wizards get +2 to Spellcraft, Knowledge (arcana) and Concentration. Rogues get +2 to Stealth, Open Locks, Disable Devices, etc.
This would be MUCH easier to backwards stat for high-level NPCs; you could just max out skill as determined by level, then add class bonuses on top of it. For multi-class folks, you could be generous and let them keep the class bonuses even when they start working on another class. My rogue/fighter from the last paragraph would keep her rogue bonuses and her fighter bonuses. A little skill bonus like +2 wouldn't be enough to tempt everyone to take a level of rogue just for the bonuses; remember, they'd be losing out on some goodness back in the class they left, like weapon advancement or spell progression.
Hmm. What do y'all think? Could this work for as a mechanically easier way to represent what cross-class skills stand for?
I like the hybrid system. As for compatability, it would not be hard to look at a NPC's skill ranks in a 3.5 pathfinder module for instance and say does this rise to the level of skilled or expert and apply ranking as such.
Etrigan's system above is what, as a skill point lover, appealed to me as a , that retains most elements of backwards compatibility. I would phrase (and modify) it thus:
Twice the base skill choices + Int modifier (Int not doubled, e.g. a 9 int Fighter would have 3 skill choices).
1 Choice in the skill (2 for Cross Class):
Trained: 1d20 + 1/2(char level +3) + mods - equiv to Cross class skill.
2 Choices in the skill:
Expert: 1d20 + char level + 3 + mods - equiv to class skill.
Cross class skills require 2 choices to be trained at first level. No cross class skills higher than Trained, period.
One additional skill choice at 2nd level, and every Fourth level after. Can select cross class skills with a single choice. Gain a bonus skill choice with permanent increases to Int modifier.
This would beautify the system to give precisely one level based benefit each level (Feat, skill, feat, stat; feat, skill, feat stat; etc.)
Thinking about it, I don't think the "Dipping" in Rogue problem will be too much of an issue. Someone dipping into Rogue and then picking another class would have to wait until 2nd or 6th level to be Expert at just one other skill (something like Spellcraft, or Knowledge(Religtion)) that they might truly need in their other class. The 3.5 skill point system made doing that fairly easy - get 4 ranks in a whole *bunch* of skills that you'll never get more points in, then the next level dump all your skill points into whatever you need. This way they won't be able to do that and catch up for a bit.
It also encourages picking class skills at first level, but broadening selection after that.
-------------------- Examples --------------------
10th level Human Fighter:
3.5
Climb +13, Jump +13
Slow Hybrid
Expert Skills: Acrobatics, Climb.
Trained Skills: Knowledge(Dungeoneering), Ride.
Equivalent to: Acrobatics +13, Climb +13, Knowledge(Dungeoneering) + 6.5, Ride +6.5. Total 26 ranks vs. 39.
This new system actually helps the "Ride" skill problem, of no one being able to use it at first level when they pick it up, or being able to pick it up with enough ranks when they *do* use it.
1st level Rogue, 9th level Wizard (with a +2 int mod until 8th level when it goes to +3):
3.5
Balance +4, Concentration +9, Decipher Script +13, Disable Device +4, Disguise +4, Escape Artist +4, Hide +4, Knowledge (Arcana) +9, Knowledge (The Planes) +3, Move Silently +4, Open Locks +4, Spellcraft +9, Tumble +4, Use Magic Device +4
Slow Hybrid
Expert Skills: Acrobatics, Deception, Disguise, Escape Artist, Linguistics, Perception, Stealth, Theft, Use Magic Device.
Trained Skills: Knowledge (Arcana), Knowledge (The Planes), Spellcraft, Survival
Equivalent to: Acrobatics +13, Deception +13, Disguise +13, Escape Artist +13, Knowledge (Arcana) +6.5, Knowledge (The Planes) +6.5, Linguistics +13, Perception +13, Spellcraft +6.5, Stealth +13, Survival +6.5, Theft +13, Use Magic Device +13. Total 78 ranks vs. 143.
So even with a Rogue dip, not doubling skill points. That vs. a fighter running out of class skills by 10th level.
Alright I gotta say this...We need to seriously tread carefully looking into any skill system that will escew the numbers you would get from skill points, as doing so is gonna screw up a large bit of the compatability. A little later, im going to put together some examples of all the ideas for...I dunno two 10th Level Characters on opposite sides of the point spectrum, and see what I come out with for results...
|
There is one simple reason the skill point system needs an overhaul. It makes a GMs job nightmarish at times. From the players point of view, any system is not really that difficult, as they are only minor adjustments over numerous levels, but from the GMs side, these are ever shifting variables that require a great deal of work every week to manage.
So, we have 2 sides of the coin. Customizability on one side, and ease of use on the other. In the ideal word, we preserve customizabity, while making the system easy enough to use that a GM can upgrade monsters or generate high level PCs quickly.
So let's look at your examples and see what the problem is for each.
1 - Add 8 levels of ranger to a troll. Make sure to account for the upgrade to the elite array (which might affect Int).
1 - adding the skill points for 8 levels of fighter. This doesn't seem hard. 2*4 + 2*7 + int bonus*8. single-classed monster should be easy.
2 - accounting for an upgrade in intelligence. This should happen when the elite array is applied. Which is at the beginning. So no problem here either. Plus, you have to upgrade all his skills anyway, since the ability scores are all changing. This will always be the case, no matter what you do.
2 - Build the skills for the following character: Rogue 2/Wizard 6/Fighter 2/Arcane Archer 4. Remember that the character's Int score increased from 14 to 15 at 4th, and to 16 at 8th.
1 - what was the the 1st level class? This just has to be dealt with no matter the system you use, unfortunately.
2 - upgrading int during the characters life. Easy Solution: just let characters gain retroactive skills points for this. It won't make anything MUCH more powerful, and make things way easier.
3 - which skills are cross-class and at what levels. Easy Solution: get rid of cross class skills. This solution rankles me a bit more, because I don't think all classes should necessarily be good at all things. But then again, if a fighter wants to study knowledge (arcana) and he has a good story reason to do so, why not? Getting rid of class skills would make the above example quite easy, actually. This creates some prestige class prereq problems, I realize.
3 - Build a party of rival 9th level adventurers to challenge the PCs. Aside from equipment (which I will get to in a later release), the skills are going to be the time consuming component.
1 - same problems as above. see solutions above.
I think what you want in a skill system is this. Declare a combination of classes and levels. Declare an intelligence. You should immediately be able to calculate skill points and assign them without regard to what order the classes were taken in or when the intelligence was acquired (1st level class not-withstanding).
Additional Note: Along with many other posters, I feel that the number of skill points / level needs to be adjusted, both to give some classes more diversity, and to tone down other classes now that skills have been consolidated. I would suggest 3 min, 6 max.
|
.
There is one simple reason the skill point system needs an overhaul. It makes a GMs job nightmarish at times. From the players point of view, any system is not really that difficult, as they are only minor adjustments over numerous levels, but from the GMs side, these are ever shifting variables that require a great deal of work every week to manage.
I agree. Take a look at my link to a system my group has playtested already. Link.
In essence, we used a hybrid system... OGL style skill point spending with Consolidated spell lists. And only three new skills to include (Initiative, Endurance, and Language). Conversion for monsters consisted of Averaging consolidated skills + 1 for each skill consolidated. Initiative conversion (as a skill) was based on creature type... creatures with an Intelligence of 2 or lower did not recieve this skill as a class skill.
Why isn't there another option along the lines of an optimised OGL skill system?
As I have pointed out in another thread (Keep Skill Points), the simplification of the skill system to mere class dependent bonuses means that the Pathfinder RPG would move towards the same direction as the 4th edition which should not be the point of the Pathfinder RPG or is it?
A fifth option could like this:
7. Optimised 3.5 skill system:
- A few skills get folded into other skills (fewer skills than in the current Alpha).
- The distinction between cross-class and class skills is removed.
- Trained skills have to be learned before one can gain ranks in them.
- Untrained skills are open to all characters.
- Increase the skill points for all classes a bit.
- To help the DM, create sample skill progressionS for each class.
|
|
Why isn't there another option along the lines of an optimised OGL skill system?
[snip]
A fifth option could like this:
7. Optimised 3.5 skill system:
- A few skills get folded into other skills (fewer skills than in the current Alpha).
- The distinction between cross-class and class skills is removed.
- Trained skills have to be learned before one can gain ranks in them.
- Untrained skills are open to all characters.
- Increase the skill points for all classes a bit.
- To help the DM, create sample skill progressionS for each class.
I like what this poster is saying.
1) Start with the 3.5 skill system.
2) Consolidate *a few* skills. (Hide + Move Silently = Stealth, Listen + Spot = Notice, Disable Device + Open Locks = Disable Device, Balance + Tumble = Acrobatics. Do not combine Handle Animal + Ride, do not fold Jump into Acrobatics, do not turn Climb + Swim into Athletics. Consolidations shouldn't include more than two skills, and should rarely combine skills that use different abilities, so combining Listen, Spot *and* Search into a single skill doesn't work for me. It's just too darn good.)
3) Dump Use Rope. Move Forgery into another Craft option, as Alchemy was moved.
4) Adjust Skill-related Feats as necessary (Sneaky would be replaced by Skill Focus: Stealth).
5) Increase skill points for Clerics, Fighters, Wizards, etc. to 4+Int Mod. Classes that already have 4, or 6, or 8 skill points / level can remain at that level, as they will be benefitting more from Skill Consolidation.
6) Note that for quick character design, or NPC design, one can simply pick skills equal to the number of skill points your class starts with and max them out every level. If my Fighter has 4 skill points per level, I can just pick Climb, Jump, Swim and Intimidate and keep them maxed. I don't *have* to fiddle with individual skill ranks. It's an *option.*
Stuff I'm not entirely sure about is getting rid of class skills and cross-class skills. (I like the idea, but also worry about niche protection. Perhaps allow them to be purchased at normal cost, but only be taken up to CC ranks, meaning that a Cleric will only be half as good at Stealth as the Rogue?)
*If* cross-class skills remain in the game, all of the Skill Focus and '+2 to two skills' Feats should *also* grant the Feat-taker those skills as Class skills to all classes.
|
I think a consolidation of certain skills is called for. I do agree that forgery could be a craft skill. As for giving the Fighters/Wizards/Clerics/Sorcerers a skill Boost to 4, I don't think that's such a great idea. A Ranger in 3.5 was dropped to a D8 HD because it was supposed to be skillful with 6+int and kept the attack progression it has. The Ranger would be screwed because it has far less of an advantage over a fighter now.
Listen and Spot = Perception
Hide and Move Silently = Stealth
Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Bluff = Persuasion
Climb, Jump, and Swim = Athletics
Balance and Tumble = Acrobatics
Drop Use Rope
Make Forgery a craft since you would create false documents with timely skill.
That drops 14 skills and replaces them with 5(with Forgery being encompased in another skill) Total of 36 Skills and this can be further reduced.
I hate just 2 skill point. as for the ranger he is back to d10 it seems and I would like him more ranger like less fighter that can track things more druidic warrior or skirmisher less fighter in cameo.skills should help him and 2 more then the fighter is plenty that's well 2 more .
I like what this poster is saying.Why isn't there another option along the lines of an optimised OGL skill system?
[snip]
These are along the lines of what I proposed above, as well. Starting with 3.5 ensures backward compaitibility. Combining skills (a la Pathfinder) to eliminate synergy bonuses, then eliminating "2 points per x-class rank" would then enable easy, streamlined skill selections. Allowing retroactive Int bonuses would make NPC wizards FAR easier to stat as well. Max x-class levels could be retained, to give a nod to the existence and motivations behind that system.
To switch to a whole new system, no matter how streamlined, would create hours of prep work to "retrofit" 3.5e modules, unless that system is fundamentally 3.5-compatible.
For people who feel that fighters need more than 2 skill points, the combined skills help more than a bit with that, and houseruling 1-2 more for their campaigns wouldn't break anything.
Trained, Hobby, Expert, etc. Systems with multiple skill "grades" seem to me to be adding undue complexity to the Saga idea, while still allowing inadequate customization -- sort of a "worst of both worlds" scenario, in my opinion. YMMV.
|
|
3. Combination: Using the system in the 3.5 OGL for characters, and using the system in the Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG for NPCs and monsters (noting that they would not get additional skill choices at higher levels). This system gives NPCs and monster that multiclass a slight edge (depending on the class), but makes them quite a bit easier to create.
This one seems the best compromise between players who want to keep tehir skill points and the GM's who want to quickly stat out NPC's and Monsters. Though wiould look into making the Int bonus retroactive as well, for both PC's and NPC's.
Let's try to clarify my post and got into more detail with this seventh variant (if it is a variant):
Firstly, the distinction between class and cross-class skill is completely arbitrary. For example, whether I am a fighter or a rogue does not matter if I am good at spotting things or not. Therefore, one should remove this distinction.
Secondly, the distinction between trained and untrained is a distinction that actually serves a purpose and seems realistic. It should stay as a clear distinction between characters that learned to use a certain skill and characters that didnt. Untrained skills or so-called basic skills can be used by everyone. Trained skills or so-called specialist skills can only be used by characters that learned them through means of a class, feat or other options.
Thirdly, one of the main problems of the OGL skill system is that most characters have too few skill points. One could argue that one should give certain classes more skill points but that would reduce the skill advantage of classes like the rogue, especially combined with the removal of the cross-class/class distinction. Therefore, the only viable solution is to give all classes more skill points. Thus, classes with a small number of skill points (like the fighter) would get access to more skills with decent ranks, but classes with a high number of skill points (like the rogue) would still have more ranks in more skills and be more apt in more skills.
Fourthly, one of the biggest concerns are the consolidations and removals of skills in the Pathfinder RPG. Some consolidations do make sense, some don't. Below you'll find a list of changes to the OGL list (including all skills introduced to the system).
- Consolidate Jump and Tumble into Acrobatics.
- Consolidate Hide and Move Silently Stealth if it is necessary. These skills are not the same, but they are frequently used at the same time.
- Consolidate Disable Device and Open Lock into a new skill (Disable Device?). Both skills consist of working with mechanics.
- Consolidate Escape Artist and Use Rope into a new skill (something akin to tie/untie but not only for ropes).
- Consolidate Decipher Script and Speak Languages into Linguistics and reformulate the way aquiring languages work into a rank dependent system like that one gains an additional language for every two (?) skill ranks in Linguistics.
- Reformulate Autohypnosis and Concentration in such a way that one represents the ability to control the body and the other represents the ability to control the mind.
- Move balance into the skill that represents the ability to control the body.
- Move Forgery into Craft. Forgery is crafting something.
- Remove Gather Information. This should be role played and not merely rolled. If it is necessary to have it, keep it as an option within Diplomacy.
- Remove Profession and create profession feats that give bonuses on the relevant skills and allow the character to use these skills to earn money.
- Create a Skill Focus [_____] feat which gives a bonus to a chosen skill. This would remove the need to create feats like persuasive and stealthy.
- Reformulate the spellcraft skill that it actually covers active casting. Passive usages of this skill are mere checks on Knowledge [Arcana]. This could lead to a casting check for all spells.
- Remove Listen, Search, and Spot. Introduce the new skill Perception which serves for discovering hidden or incoming people/things.
Finally, one has to create sample skill progressions for each class and guidelines how they were created. This would help DMs to create NPCs by creating a starting point for the skill points. The DM would have to cover high INT bonuses and special skill choices for a special NPC nothing else.
Edit:
- Discribed the consolidation of Listen, Search, and Spot in a more accurate way.
- Realised that I can change my name on the boards and changed it to my usual boardname Baroth. Therefore, Sebastian Elliker is the same poster as Baroth. Sorry.
- Consolidate Listen, Search, and Spot into Perception.
Here is my problem with all this consolidation, is suddenly because you can see well you can also hear well. While deaf people might enjoy this cross over it does not allow one to leverage the skill system to help/better define characters, non player characters or monsters.
Personally in my game, we have not only the three skills from the OGL but also added "Perception" as another skill since it does cover different subject matter.
As I read a few of these threads I am already asking myself, why change? Oddly enough was the same question I asked regarding 4e and the answer is still "Don't change".
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I like option 3, with a quick streamlined version available for NPCs and Monster, but the detailed point system for PCs (or major NPCs that the DM want's to take more time on.)
That being said, I can live with some version of the hybrid system, which lots of people seem to like. My reservation with this system is as a few previous posters have said, I'm not sure if it makes things simpler enough for the DM. I also would like to see some option for PCs to have a hobby in a few skills, the equivilent of 1 rank, unlike the trained options which gives them half max ranks. Maybe simply having a sidebar on the hobby option that lets you use 1 of your skill selections in the hybrid system to pick 3 skills that you don't have any selections in and get 1 rank in them.
|
As I stated in another thread - I'd rather stick with the skill point system, but since both the 3.5 and the athfinder Alha system aren't to complex to exlain - (I'd guess the mechanics would fit on less than a page) I see no problem in resenting either one as a variant system in the players handbook while making the other "official" - in this case I'd be biased toward the skill point system as official since I think the other one is faster for NPC creation and thus adventure conversion from official to variant (skill points to pathfinder system) would be easiest.
I would vote for both as well one on a side bar the other official i would like the alpha system official but i can very easily live with it as an option.
- Consolidate Listen, Search, and Spot into Perception.Here is my problem with all this consolidation, is suddenly because you can see well you can also hear well. While deaf people might enjoy this cross over it does not allow one to leverage the skill system to help/better define characters, non player characters or monsters.
Personally in my game, we have not only the three skills from the OGL but also added "Perception" as another skill since it does cover different subject matter.
As I read a few of these threads I am already asking myself, why change? Oddly enough was the same question I asked regarding 4e and the answer is still "Don't change".
The reason why one does consolidate Listen, Search, and Spot into one skill is, that, within the game, these skills fullfill the same role, namely, to discover hidden objects and people. It would probably be more accurate to say that one removes Listen, Search, and Spot and introduces a new skill called Perception.
I never thought of Listen, Search, and Spot as accurate descriptions of the actual senses. Senses would be represented in abilities or traits and not in skills.But thanks for your comment, it helped me to clarify my position on this matter and consequently, I have changed my post accordingly.
|
|
For information on design focus threads, please read this thread.
It has become apparent that there are a great number of opinions on the new skill system. I would like to spend a moment to talk about some alternatives that we might explore to help address some of the problems. Here are the options: <snip>
I think by rolling the skills into each other (stealth, perception, acrobatics, etc.) you've actually made all of the changes you need to. Altering the system too far beyond that makes this something other than third edition. I'd put the new system in alpha in a sidebar as a suggestion for NPCs (who, despite what some might say, really don't need to be given the same level of attention as PCs do unless they're major, recurring villains. If that hobgoblin warrior has 5 skillpoints more or less than he should have and they're all in craft (weapon smith) or if I missed a skill synergy from bluff to diplomacy, nobody is going to much care when they're fighting him. I think sometimes as GMs we tend to get a little anal-retentive when we're making NPCs when in reality, it's just not necessary most of the time, and I certainly don't want to deprive my characters of the extra customization potential just because it's easier for me to make an NPC with the new system. There is often much more value in spreading the skill points out a bit thinner as a player, because you want to be able to do a bunch more stuff. Having even a couple of ranks in knowledge (arcana), knowledge (religion), knowledge (nature), heal, craft: alchemy, [perception] and [stealth] are, in my experience, nice for ANY player character (those skills come up frequently to one extent or another in most campaigns), but they don't need to be maxed out. I don't need to have enough ranks in craft: alchemy to run an alchemy shop, I just want to be able to keep myself in acid vials and alchemist fire. I don't need enough ranks in heal to be a brain surgeon, but being able to stabilize the party healer when he drops in combat is good. I don't need enough ranks in stealth to assassinate the headmaster of the Darkshadow School for Sneaky Ninjas(tm), but it's nice to be able to sneak past a sleepy guard now & again. I don't need to be a full-fledged sage, but it's nice to have some idea what the HELL that thing is or be able to tell who the evil cultist was devoted to by looking at his holy symbol. These are all things that go away under the new system, which is why I don't like it. The all-or-nothing approach just really sticks in my craw.
|
|
A quick thought on combining skills -
I'm okay with rolling Spot and Listen (and Smell, Taste, Feel) into Perception or Notice or something. Actually, I think this allows the other 3 senses to be useful. And modifiers that came up in the races section (+2 to Perception if it deals with spotting something) covers enables folks to get away from all senses being equally acute if folks want to.
But I feel that Search should remain separate.
#1 - It is based on Int, not Wis like Spot and Listen.
#2 - Spot and Listen represent how keen someone's senses are. Search represents how good they are at finding things and knowing where to look for clues; it is much more mental.
#3 - It is active, not passive. Look at how Spot and Listen are used. When I DM, I have a list of PCs Spot and Listen ranks and I have players roll a d20 10 times before we start playing. As we play, when there is something PCs might notice, I check their next roll on the list and their Spot skill. If they make it, I tell them what they happened to notice. With Search, the PC declares, "I search the room."
I've been playtesting the skills in numerous formats. Here's what I've found so far...
if you have a medium to high level character with a very good Intelligence score in the Pathfinder format, with the consolidate skills, you start to find yourself running a bit thin of class skills to pick up... unless you grab more than a couple of Craft or profession checks. This was applied with a Wizard... I still had enough to skills to choose from to stay in the class, but sadly two wizard comparisons were starting to become very much the same character in a skill perspective, even with trying to select different skills (they had different crafts and professions though).
One thing I did find in favor of keeping the old rank system but with the consolidated skill points, with several characters, is that the consolidation of skill points GREATLY improves the old system. The reason? Less individual skills meant the skill point spreads went a little farther. This was even beneficial to wizards I found, via the Linguistics in particular. One thing that I did find, however, was that... again (I'm sorry to keep getting on my soapbox on this), the removal of the max rank caps helped as well. On the npc side, I had essentially what they were hinting at that they wanted with 4e... only the skills you were needing and less fluff. As a blacksmith is perhaps the most common, immediately thought of villager role next to the merchant and the inn keeper, I went ahead and made an Expert: 1 blacksmith with an Intelligence of 11. He had 24 skill points. These were broken down in the following areas... Appraise 6 ranks, Handle Animal 4 ranks, Craft: Blacksmith 10 ranks, Ride 2 ranks, Perception 2 ranks
There you have it.... automatically very good blacksmith, capable also serving in the local militia ranks if needed... 1st level character. Throw Skill Focus: Craft Blacksmith on top of the ranks and you have a masterful blacksmith.
|
|
SCALED
I like this. I like the removal of skill points per level but I do not like the rogue getting 8 and the cleric only getting 2. Using the Pathfinder rules I would take one level of rogue no matter what i wanted my real class to be just to get those skills.
So scaled plus some more balance in the number of skills for each class.
One other consideration - since skills are choices and do not grow why not use class level instead of character level for trained skills. If you multi-class you will end up with weaker skills unless the skills you want are held in common by each of your classes.
Additionally I would add some kind of background skill choice for things like craft and profession - or even cultural skills. I don't see any reason to take them in Pathfinder because skill choices are much more valuable.
SCALED
I like this. I like the removal of skill points per level but I do not like the rogue getting 8 and the cleric only getting 2. Using the Pathfinder rules I would take one level of rogue no matter what i wanted my real class to be just to get those skills.
So scaled plus some more balance in the number of skills for each class.
One other consideration - since skills are choices and do not grow why not use class level instead of character level for trained skills. If you multi-class you will end up with weaker skills unless the skills you want are held in common by each of your classes.
Additionally I would add some kind of background skill choice for things like craft and profession - or even cultural skills. I don't see any reason to take them in Pathfinder because skill choices are much more valuable.
I'm gonna say it yet again {even though people are gonna start throwing things at me soon}
4 and 6 skills bard/ranger/rogue 6 everyone else 4
3. Combination: Using the system in the 3.5 OGL for characters, and using the system in the Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG for NPCs and monsters (noting that they would not get additional skill choices at higher levels). This system gives NPCs and monster that multiclass a slight edge (depending on the class), but makes them quite a bit easier to create.
This one sounds like the the best compromise to me. And this is from someone that took one look at the new skill system in the alpha test and went something in the line of 'faugh! NOOOO! Do Not Want! gimme my skillpoints back.'
Only, please, not as a this one is for PCs and this one for NPCs presentation.
But more the simplified PathfinderRPG skill-system presented as a side-bar variant.
Some groups surely will adopt it, both for PCs and NPCs.
While others (like mine) are too fond of the system that allowes them jack-of-all trades characters with total control in the custimisation of skills.
But yes as a DM, it would be a nice option for NPCs when I'm feeling lazy. Like using an array for ability scores even if that's not what we use for PCs when it comes to ability scores.
As a player, I loathe and detest the mere thought of using it for my character. (Both array and this new system for skills. :) )
Even if it does give those NPCs slight edge, skillwise on paper vs. PCs using the 3.5 OGL system. I can't see that it is going to make much of a difference in actual gameplay. There are very few skills that come into play for NPCs, vs. the skills PCs use during the course of the game.
The absolute main bulk of NPCs are created for one encounter, or one purpose only. Even with the 3.5 OGL system, the skills they are expected to have to use during that one encounter will generally be maxed out during the creation process. Ain't many DM's that throw a couple or ranks into craft or profession for their NPCs - right?
Giving them a few extra maxed-out skills, ain't going to tip the scales. More likely just result in NPCs with a bunch of maxed-out skills that they never even use.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I like the current system but with the following change:
"Trained Class Skill 1d20 + Character level + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier"
BECOMES
"Trained Class Skill 1d20 + Class level + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier"
And, maybe, Crosswiredmind's zero-level or 2 rogue skills moved to second level to avoid class dipping.
I have let this thread "sit" for a day, allowing people to add their input before I dump a large amount of information in here.
This is not meant to point out how others are wrong. These are just my thoughts on skills.
Some have asked: Why Not Get Rid Of Cross Class Skills?
And my answer may come from my laborer/blue-collar worker/food service employment background... But not every job/role/profession(not the skill) gives you the same opportunity to learn, or more importantly practice certain skills. For example, I am in manufacturing now. I work with 150 pound metal objects, manipulating/cleaning/altering/testing them. That doesn't exactly lend itself well to teaching me accounting. Sure, I could learn it. But I will never be as good as someone who gets to use that skill everyday.
Cross Class is a simplified way of eliminating the "did you use that skill this session? No? Then you can't increase it" design philosophy.
This segues well into consolidating skills.
I don't like it. Just because you are trained in one skill, doesn't mean you automatically have equal ability in another.
Examples:
Hide and Move Silently are two different skills. Just because you have the ability to dampen your footfalls doesn't automatically give you the knowledge of good hiding techniques. Further, I would argue that Hiding should fall under Wisdom, and not Dexterity. Even the biggest, clumsiest oaf can hide well with a little common sense - and assuming the conditions allow it.
Concentration and Spellcraft. As others have pointed out, these really are two different skills, despite the mechanical uses of Concentration only really being magic based. Ever sense 3.0, Concentration was the best skill choice to represent a Monks ability to meditate. Now they have to learn about magic, spells and magical theory in order to meditate... And other reasons I won't repeat but that are some where in theses forums.
Balance, Tumble, Jump. Just watch any episode of Ninja Warrior, or other shows that are similar, and you will see that being skilled in one doesn't automatically give you skill in another.
And yet, some are looking for greater consolidation.
"Purchasing" max ranks.
This isn't good. Sure, it isn't that far from a 9th Level Rogue dropping all/most of his levels skill points into Perform(flute), but what about the 16th Level Fighter picking up Spellcraft for the first time?
Sure, you could give skills levels. When you first pick up a skill it is 1st Level and it gians a level every time you do... But that adds back in "unnecessary" bookkeeping and takes you closer to the Paladium games, and I don't consider that good.
So, clearly from my point of view the 3.5 OGL version of skills is the best way to go.
Having said all of that, I can accept a certain amount of simplification for gameplay. For this, I like the presented PRPG Alpha skill rules. (Yes, something needs to be done about the multiclassing imbalance.) If Pathfinder strays much farther from 3.5 than this, it will be much harder for me to allow the current 3.5 skill rules in any Pathfinder game.
How about this:
* Take 3.5 system. Roll together skills with synergy bonuses, as proposed in the Pathfinder system. Synergy bonuses go the way of the dodo.
* Allow retroactive Int bonuses, so you don't have to back-subtract. Geron is dead-on with that suggestion; it'll save a lot of difficulty when statting NPC wizards.
* Ignore class vs. cross-class skills.
* Then all you need to do is pick 'em and max 'em out.
1. While I don't overly like the merging of the skills this would be an acceptable compromise to for the sake of speeding up the system. Skill Synergies don't have to die... they just need to be moved under the DMs discretionary +2/-2, add to the DM section an option to award +2 circumstance bonuses for good/logical combined uses of skills (an RP aspect).
2. Yes, I was already writing that into my how house-rule rewrites for a private 3.75. While it may not seem to make much since it makes about as much sense as suddenly gaining an additional hit points equal to your level for increasing Con. (With an Int increase a character would gain Level -1 + 4 skill points).
3. The a question is the cap on cross-class or what bonus goes to using class skills? I agree that pulling the the 2 points per 1 rank would make tracking skill point use much easier. An idea would be to keep the 1/2( Level +3) max rank in cross class and allow PCs to Save their skill points for use at later levels. This gives a total pool of skill points to work when you make a high level character. While such a pool (an every class you have giving you class skills) can make unorganic characters, what's organic about characters starting at high levels anyways?
The Rogue 2/Wizard 6/Fighter 2/Arcane Archer 4 Mr. Bulmahn was talking about is a good way to look at this. Assuming Int 16 (as the Int change is a non-issue). Built as a High-Level character from scratch it would have a Skill Pool of 123 (I think) which can be spent in any skill. Full Max ranks for any class skill (of any class) the character has, up to Cross-Class ranks in class skills he doesn't. This gives the character max (17 ranks) in 7 skills and 4 skill points still in the pool.
For information on design focus threads, please read this thread.
It has become apparent that there are a great number of opinions on the new skill system. I would like to spend a moment to talk about some alternatives that we might explore to help address some of the problems. Here are the options:
1. Pathfinder: (snip)
2. 3.5 OGL: (snip)
3. Combination: (snip)
4. Hybrid System: (snip)
I'm in favor of 3.
Having played spycraft 2.0 for some time now, I find simplifying NPCs but keeping things robust and detailed for players is a very workable compromise. Even in D&D, most PCs and many NPCs I will handpick ranks for, but for most NPCs I just max out the ranks of a few skills.
I do think etrigan has a point about bloating out skills; using the pathfinder system as presented in the alpha is a comparability obstacle; in the combination system, the "NPC" subsystem would need to be toned down somewhat.
4 doesn't seem to save that much work to me.
I like the current system but with the following change:
"Trained Class Skill 1d20 + Character level + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier"
BECOMES
"Trained Class Skill 1d20 + Class level + 3 + ability modifier + racial modifier"
While I like the elegance, it conflicts with "what if '1/2 character level' is more than class level?" Plus having to add class levels together if its a class skill for both.
And, maybe, Crosswiredmind's zero-level or 2 rogue skills moved to second level to avoid class dipping.
Brilliant! - Give Rogues 4-6 skills at first, and an extra skill choice every 2-4 levels. Without skill points this is an extremely easy to implement system. Could do the same with Rangers and Bards, with half the progression (start with 4, get an extra every 4-8 levels).
Me and my group really like the Alpha form of the skills a few could be moved around but I think that system is one of the best improvements that you guys have introduced. It stream lines and saves alot of time. Of all the people on here how many have tried to makie the high level characters for the game (most DMs give up running games after like 12th or 14th level part of it is because of the difficulty of running high level games another part of it is the amount of work that goes in preparing for a high level game) I think this saves alot of time and doesnt change the game. and give the people the option if they want to play with skill points have a sidbar with skill points in them
I want to know how does skill points compared to Alpha Skills change the over all game please explain
|
|
I am cross-posting this from another thread, because I think this thread is more relevant to these ideas and suggestions.
While I really loved to tinker with skill points in 3E, they were sometimes a head-ache to keep track of (not to mention that statting an NPC took time). Having said that, I'd prefer a simpler system (which was presented in the Pathfinder RPG) and I liked that although you get ranks in all your class skills, it would make a real difference to take a skill. However, if we're talking about several different ranks in the skill system, in that case I would prefer to keep the skill points. So, I think that my group would prefer the skill system presented in the Pathfinder Alpha 1 (*Option 1*) with the following alterations:
One of the posters on another thread mentioned that you should really benefit from "mastering" a skill. I would suggest the following system: you get 1 per level on Trained class skills (plus the modifiers), 1/2 rank per level on Untrained class kills and Trained cross-class skills (plus the modifiers) and just the modifiers on Untrained cross-class skills. You could only "master" (i.e. spend a Feat on) a class kills which you have as Trained, and you would get 2 per level (plus the modifiers) *or* maybe just 1 per level +5 (plus the modifiers). That way it would *really* make a difference if you spend that Skill Focus or Master Skil feat (whichever it would be called) on a skill.
I would also like to see wizards and sorcerers get more skills, especially if there are going to be several skill ranks in the game. In fact, I am probably going to test how "balanced" it will feel to give all the classes 4 skills at 1st level.
Perception, definitely, should be a class skill for *every* class, since it will probably be the most often used skill in the game. Besides, I always wondered why most Fighters sucked at Spot and Listen, although you would think that guys who spent half the night on guard duty (when the spellcasters are sleeping) should excel at it.
I definitely think that even though the rest of the skills would become more "general" in nature, Craft, Knowledge and Profession should have subskills which should be treated as completely separate 'trained only' skills.
Here are more thoughts and feedback on individual skills (and some suggestions for new skills, too):
Acrobatics: I would separate Jump into Athletics skill, since this skill already seems to cover Tumble and Balance. I would also definitely include Escape Artist in this skill, perhaps even as a subskill?
Athletics: This skill would cover Climb, Jump and Swim.
Appraise: I would rather see Knowledge (Arcana) or even Spellcraft cover the identification of magic items, since that would be more logical in my opinion. Isn't Knowledge (Arcana) about the theory and history of all things magic? Also, the dwarven racial description ("Greed") does not have the Appraise bonus on metal items, but the skill description does, so I was wondering which of them is correct?
Climb: Easily folded into Acrobatics or Athletics (preferably the latter if anything like it is included in the skills).
Deception: In my opinion this could cover several "specializations" via subskills? (just like Craft or Profession do). For example, you could take Deception (Bluff), Deception (Forgery) or Deception (Disguise). In any case, whether it will work as a "single" skill covering several areas or like Craft and Profession, I think it should definitely cover Disguise and Forgery. They need not even be subskills -- Forgery, for exaple, could be just another entry in the Deception skill, but you could only use it if you also have the Linguistics skill as Talented.
Disable Device: This skill could easily be included either in Craft (Locksmith) or Theft or even Sleight of Hand (which I suggested as a new skill below).
Disguise: This skill should be folded into Deception, definitely, because it feels a bit odd on its own if the aim is to reduce the number of skills and to have them cover more than in 3E.
Escape Artist: This skill should be folded into Acrobatics.
Fly: This is perfectly useless and weird as a skill. In my opinion it should be included in the Acrobatics skill, possibly even as a subskill Acrobatics (Fly).
Insight: As far as I could tell, there is no Sense Motive-type of skill in Pathfinder, so I thought that this type of skill would work well in D&D and cover "folk ken", Sense Motive and "common sense". Or, perhaps you could include it in Perception as Perception (Insight)? To me that would be the "ideal" solution.
Linguistics: As I said above, I would rather see Forgery being included in Deception. However, perhaps Linguistics could give you a +2 synergy bonus on your forgery attempt? Or, maybe you should not get any synergy bonuses (especially if the synergy bonuses will be gone altogether), but just need to have a rank at Linguistics to use Deception to forge documents?
Sleight of Hand: This is vanished although it would be a nice "catch-all" skill for several "thief" skills. Just like Craft or Profession, it could have "specializations"? such as Pick Pockets/Theft, Disable Device and Open Locks.
Spellcraft: I would *definitely* split it into Spellcraft (Arcane) and Spellcraft (Divine) because in my group we have had endless arguments over whether a cleric can use Spellcraft to identify arcane spells or a wizard to identify divine spells.
Survival: This skill covers survival in the wilds, but I would definitely include 'Streewise' in the skill system either as a separate skill or by dividing this skill into two subcategories: Survival (Rural) and Survival (Urban).
Theft: I would rather see this skill folded into Sleight of Hand or other skills. In any case it should be renamed, as in my opinion it is a bit misleading now. If this skill remains, however, your Pick Pockets checks should benefit from creating a diversion via Deception.
|
Backwards compatability is going to the key aspect of PRPG for me and my group. Drastic changes that require major reworking to be so will not be implemented...it's that simple. I am all for consolidating a COUPLE of skills to streamline a bit but anymore than a couple effectively breaks backward compatability.
One of the problems I think that is occurring with this conversation is the intent of designers and regular, everyday DMs. If I am statting up an NPC for an encounter, I will estimate his/ her skills, i.e. Class level+3 ranks in maxed out skills, level only for ranks in other class skills, etc. Simple and quick. I would never make a full stat block for a one encounter NPC. Now, Jason and the other designers don't have that luxury when putting out modules or Pathfinder books. I can see how statting up every NPC would be a huge pain, but most DMs don't have to.
Now, when I am a player, I love the ability to customize my PC using skill points. It helps me build story for character in very detailed terms.
Each of the three gamers mentioned above, regular DMs, publishers, and players have very different outlooks and very different needs. That being said, I think an elegant solution would be stick with OGL skill system with some consolidation and the publication of a table with basic skill progressions for each class as other posters have suggested. And remember, above all else, backwards compatibility should be the main goal of any and all changes. I am DMing RoTR now and instituting some of these Pathfinder RPG changes would add to my prep considerably, which seems to be an insult considering that I am running a Pathfinder AP.
I find the quick conversion of the skills pretty easy. Since it doesn't look like there is any.
I am fairly confident that I could convert an AP on the fly with the quick conversion rules. The creatures lose a little power than if I went with a full conversion currently, but I would count the lost skills as only a minor loss that has little affect on the party.
I like the new system, but I do think it could use a few tweaks. The main issues seem to be certain classes starting with too many/too few skills, and spontaneous addition of max rank skills. I think these can be easily solved with minor variants to the system as written. For example:
Brilliant! - Give Rogues 4-6 skills at first, and an extra skill choice every 2-4 levels. Without skill points this is an extremely easy to implement system. Could do the same with Rangers and Bards, with half the progression (start with 4, get an extra every 4-8 levels).
There's a solution to the "Too many skills" problem. For too few, I say change some of the numbers on how many skills characters get at first level. Instead of the 2, 4, 6, or 8 method, let's try 3, 4, and 5. This evens the starting playing field a bit, but by adding in additional skill choices in the class features progression, you can still retain the feel of certain classes being the Jack of all Trades type. The rogue could get them every 3rd level. This would give him an additional six skill choices over everyone else in the long run.
Then we move to the problem I like to call "Spontaneous Mastery". This too has a simple fix. Simply say all bonus skill choices after first level are treated as cross-class skills. Picking the same skill twice allows the it to be treated as a class skill. This way, a character will have to wait at least two to three levels(depending on whether the rogue feedback above is added to the rules) to max out a new skill, and you retain flexibility in having certain things being just a hobby.
|
|
So maybe you get rid of class/cross-class skills but do something else to make sure that certain classes stay better at certain skills. I want my 1st-level rogue to be better at Disabling Devices than a 1st-level fighter, no matter what. What if there were no cross-class skills but instead each class got bonuses to a few appropriate skills? For example, Wizards get +2 to Spellcraft, Knowledge (arcana) and Concentration. Rogues get +2 to Stealth, Open Locks, Disable Devices, etc.
Very nice and interesting idea
got me thinking
players want and some DM want flexibility and customization while other want easily prepared NPCs and higher level PCs. The problem with 3.5 is the rogue 3/ wizard 4/ some prestige class 5. To build such an NPC it would be a mass of class vs cross class skills, different skill points at different levels etc.
What if all all classes got the same number of skill points at each level , but level and class bonuses to specific skills. In the above example lets say 3 skill points per level, so 3+4+5 (the various class levels) so 12 x 3 or 36 skill points to spend however (no class or cross class). In addition they get class and level dependent bonuses to specific skills. So three levels of rogue means +3(+1 per level) to say Acrobatics, appraise, deception, diplomacy, disable device, Disguise, stealth and theft. With 4 levels in wizard they would receive +4 in craft, Knowledge arcana, knowledge planes, and spell craft, For the 5 levels of a prestige class the get +5 in a set group of skills.
Its just an idea. how many skill points all characters get each level and what skills would be connected to what classes can be debated. But its simple fair, and building NPC would be quick
Ok guys I had a thought alot of the dislike of alpha seems to be that if you pick a skill up at 6th level its as good as say ones you had at first.
so maybe something like 3+modifier+level{starting when you took it}
like so 6th level fighter
climb 3 str17+3 that's +12 at 1st and if taken at
2nd 3+3+5=+11 and cross 3+3+2=+8
4th 3+3+3=+9 cross 3+3+1=+7
6th 3+3+1=+7 cross 3+3+0=+6
still fast and easy to figure out but it scales so your better with skills you have had longer and more easily ports over to the 3.5 skill system.
But I feel that Search should remain separate.#1 - It is based on Int, not Wis like Spot and Listen.
So, what about Listen+Spot = Perception and Search+SenseMotive = Awareness (?). So my starting list would be:
Acrobatics: Balance, Tumble
Athletics: Climb, Jump, Swim*
Awareness: Search, Sense Motive
Diplomacy: Diplomacy, Ride*
Knowledge (speciality):
- Arcane : Knowledge (arcane, Spellcraft)
- Nature : Knowledge (nature, Survival)
- Divine : Knowledge (religion, Spellcraft)
- Warfare: Knowledge (military, Heal)
Influence: Bluff, Intimidate
Legerdemain: Sleight of Hands, Use Rope
Linguistics: Decipher Script, Speak Language
Perception: Listen, Spot
Sabotage: Disable Device, Forgery, Open Lock
Stealth: Hide, Move Silently
Streetwise: Gather Information, Knowledge (local)
Trade (speciality): Appraise**, Craft, Profession
* perhaps requires a feat to activate that skill use
** appraise only items in which you have a trade