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'm gonna have to vote "None of the above" here. I think that of the proposed changes, the best solution I've seen is:
* Keep skill points, with a (level+3) cap on skill ranks
* Consolidate some skills, but dump skill synergies
* Eliminate class/cross-class distinction
* Lower the range of skill point difference between classes (e.g., 6 for skill-heavy characters and 3 for everyone else)
* Make Int raises retroactive
This provides the customizability of 3.5 OGL, simplifies skill allocation TREMENDOUSLY for high-level characters, and in most cases will produce similar enough results to OGL to keep compatibility. Win on all sides.
Failing this, my far-distant second choice is 1. Pathfinder. As someone else said upthread, "Fiddly bad."
-The Gneech
|
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.
I also did some posts on other forums and sites and have some new additions to these consolidations.
Drop Use Rope but tie in some it's abilities to Profession and Athletics.
Drop Appraise and Tie in some of it's abilites to Craft and Profession.
These changes make sense because those abilites encompass a large array of skills and since they are supposed to add a bonus to appraise checks anyways, I figured rolling Appraise into it wouldn't hurt.
|
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
In my opinion Perception should definitely work as it is now presented in the Alpha rules with one additional subskill: Perception (Insight) which would cover Sense Motive and "folk ken". That said, I think you don't need any Awareness skill as Search is already sort of included in the rules. You can use Perception (Sight) to spot secret doors.
As for Diplomacy, it could be folded into another "new" skill: Persuasion (as someone already posted). Persuasion could also cover Intimidate and Bluff (unless the latter is included in Deception, which IMO is another good mechanical solution).
Knowledge... I don't know. Seems too simple to have just four subskills, but I like that you've folded Spellcraft into Knowledge (Arcana) and Knowledge (Divine).
Sabotage is probably not a good skill name or category. Why would you include Forgery in it? Deception would be a better skill for that.
I'd include Sleight of Hand as a "catch-all manual dexterity" skill to replace Theft. It should include Open Locks and Disable Device, for example. Probably Use Rope as well?
Streetwise could be folded into Survival (Urban) or function as a skill of its own.
Trade is actually a good idea! It could (and probably even should) include Appraise, Craft and Profession either as "skill usages" or subskills. I wonder why I didn't realize it, because one of my favourite RPGs (WFRP) handles it that way.
I was also thinking of folding Ride into Handle Animal or Athletics (if the latter will be in the game).
|
|
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?
ooh, I like this. Keeps the CC/class distinction, but allows for ease of creation. Then characters who want to "break the mold" can do so, but will still not be as good as those who have the skill on their class list.
I think I'm going to try implementing this along with Kirth Gerson's ideas for my current campaign and see how it works out.
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?
This I like as well...goes into my pool of 3.5 skill system houserules. :D
I like the sound of the hybrid system, but it still strikes me as very complicated. I also like the current Pathfinder system quite a bit . . . though there seems to me something inherently wrong with class skills being twice as effective as cross-class skills . . . especially given how easy it is to move between the two.
My Suggestion
Here is another, relatively simple alternate method that I have been pondering, based on my previous skill suggestions, and also on some suggestions from Etrigan, Majuba and Mosaic. It is based on the current Pathfinder system, but attempts to make it both simpler to use, and harder to break:
1- There are three levels of skill aptitude
Untrained: d20 + ability modifier + racial modifier
Trained: d20 + ability modifier + racial modifier + 1/2 level + 2
Expert: d20 + ability modifier + racial modifier + level + 4
2 - There are no class skills
Instead, each class begins with a class-specific selection of inherent trained (but not expert) skills. So Rogue might get Acrobatics, Deception, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Stealth and Theft; while Fighter might only get Climb, Handle Animal, Ride and Swim. These bonus skills are gained only at first level; multiclassing characters need not apply.
3 - Skill points Increase skill aptitude
A skill point can be applied to move a skill from untrained to trained, or from trained to expert.
At first level, all characters gain 4+(Int bonus) skill points on top of their inherent trained class skills. They may apply only one point to a given skill (thus boosting an inherent class skill to expert, or any other skill to trained, but not beyond).
After first level, all characters gain one skill point per level.
Done!
For Greater-Than-First-Level Character Creation
1 - Determine inherent skills from starting class
2 - Apply 3+level skill points
Done!
Reasoning:
Under the current Pathfinder System, there are two levels of skill proficiency: trained and untrained. However, there are also two states in which a trained skill can exist: classed and cross-classed.
The move from trained to untrained and the move from classed to cross-classed each provide an equal benefit [+(1/2 level + 1.5)], so classed is twice as good as cross-classed but doesn't have an associated cost. Thus, the system becomes easy to game through the magic of multiclassing. By applying a cost to the move from a cross-classed to classed skill, the system becomes somewhat harder to break.
The concept of class and cross-class skills also sucks because it requires players and GMs to consult a chart when leveling multiclassed characters. This slows down prep, and confuses new players. In order to get rid of the class skills, but emulate their intended purpose, we can start each class with a "core" selection of skills that have the equivalent of "half-max" skill ranks, with the option to either max those skills or, for the same cost, "half-max" other less iconic abilities.
After first level, skills advance at exactly the same rate as under the Pathfinder system, with a couple of conceits.
1- because my skill points are half as effective as Pathfinder skill picks (they only half-max a skill instead of maxing it), they are given out twice as frequently.
2 - Because there is no longer an "auto-bump" involved in multiclassing, and because all of the "bonus skills" associated with classes like Rogue are allocated automatically, there is significantly less potential for abuse.
|
This may be a double-post. The system seems to have eaten the first one.
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: The system presented in Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG.
2. 3.5 OGL:The system presented in the 3.5 OGL.
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.
4. Hybrid System: In this system, characters would get a number of skill ranks equal to the number of skill choices granted by the Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG. Skill ranks granted by the first level of your class must be spent on class skills. Skill ranks granted after first level and those granted by a high Intelligence score at first level could be spent on any skill. Instead of the class skill/cross-class skill distinction, your bonus in a skill would be determined in the following method.
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 + modifiersThere are a few additional rules to go with this. At first level, you can have no skill higher than 2 ranks (or the skilled level). Many of the prestige...
My preference: 5. or 6.
I'm not too picky when it comes to skills, and all of the systems would work for me. However, I definitely prefer option 5. or 6. with the scaled or scaled hybrids skills.
Why: I'm not attached to allocating individual skill points, so the 3.5 system doesn't necessarily appeal to me, but I don't like the fact that the alpha rules can be abused by cherry picking a class at 1st level.
So if a trained/non-trained system is used, I would rather have it be scaled. I also like the hybrid system to allow players to be really good at a couple of skills if they want to be. That leads me to prefering the scaled hybrid method.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
|
I like the initial system posted in the alpha rules but it does run a risk of abuse. I had a thought that giving each class a skill progession bonus rather than using level+3 would help with multiclassing abuses.
Rogues progress +4/+1 per additional level akin to the Fighter BAB+3
Barbarians, Bards, Druids, Rangers, and Monks progess slower (like the Cleric BAB+3)
Clerics, Fighters, Sorcerers, Wizards progress the slowest (like the Wizard BAB+3)
|
I like the sound of the hybrid system, but it still strikes me as very complicated. I also like the current Pathfinder system quite a bit . . . though there seems to me something inherently wrong with class skills being twice as effective as cross-class skills . . . especially given how easy it is to move between the two.
My Suggestion
Here is another, relatively simple alternate method that I have been pondering, based on my previous skill suggestions, and also on some suggestions from Etrigan, Majuba and Mosaic. It is based on the current Pathfinder system, but attempts to make it both simpler to use, and harder to break:
1- There are three levels of skill aptitude
Untrained: d20 + ability modifier + racial modifier
Trained: d20 + ability modifier + racial modifier + 1/2 level + 2
Expert: d20 + ability modifier + racial modifier + level + 42 - There are no class skills
Instead, each class begins with a class-specific selection of inherent trained (but not expert) skills. So Rogue might get Acrobatics, Deception, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Stealth and Theft; while Fighter might only get Climb, Handle Animal, Ride and Swim. These bonus skills are gained only at first level; multiclassing characters need not apply.3 - Skill points Increase skill aptitude
A skill point can be applied to move a skill from untrained to trained, or from trained to expert.At first level, all characters gain 4+(Int bonus) skill points on top of their inherent trained class skills. They may apply only one point to a given skill (thus boosting an inherent class skill to expert, or any other skill to trained, but not beyond).
After first level, all characters gain one skill point per level.
Done!
For Greater-Than-First-Level Character Creation
1 - Determine inherent skills from starting class
2 - Apply 3+level skill points
Done!
Reasoning:
Under the current Pathfinder...
I really, really like this idea, though I wouldn't limit each class to a fixed set of skills. What if my fighter has never ridden a horse in his life? Maybe "you can choose four from this list: Ride, Climb, Jump, Swim, etc."
As to backwards compatibility, I'm fine with PFRPG using a different skill system, but it would be nice if the final bonuses worked out to be the same. That way I could throw my PCs created with the new system into adventures designed for the old system without having to worry about changing DCs.
4. Hybrid System: In this system, characters would get a number of skill ranks equal to the number of skill choices granted by the Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG. Skill ranks granted by the first level of your class must be spent on class skills. Skill ranks granted after first level and those granted by a high Intelligence score at first level could be spent on any skill. Instead of the class skill/cross-class skill distinction, your bonus in a skill would be determined in the following method.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 + modifiersThere are a few additional rules to go with this. At first level, you can have no skill higher than 2 ranks (or the skilled level). Many of the prestige...
So another idea related to a hybrid system which would also eleminate the 1st-level rogue thing and still there would be "skill points"
Level of Training [LOT]
LOT - Bonus (Examples - needs fine tuning)
Untrained - No Bonus
Apprentice - + 1/3 character level
Journeyman - + 1/2 character level
Expert - + 3/4 character level
Master - + character level
As soon as a character gains his 1st class level, he receives LOT in some skills (usually apprentice or journeyman LOT). Example: a 1st level rogue would receive: Stealth (Journeyman), Sabotage (Journeyman),Perception (journeyman). A Fighter would have Perception (Apprentice), Athletics (Journeyman)...The exact composition needs fine-tuning.
Basic & Andvanced skills: Basic skills can be used untrained. Advanced skills need at least Apprentice LOT to be used.
If a character later multiclasses into another class and would receive his new skills, he would retain his higher LOT (if he already has the skill) or the new LOT.
Each time a character receives a new character level, he gains a number of skill points he can use to increase his LOT by 1 step using a 1:1 skill point : LOT ratio. A skill's LOT can only be increased by 1 step per character level.
How many skill points: I would say this depends on the number of skills used in the game: say 1/4 skill points. So if there are 20 skills overall a character would receive 5 skill points.
Feat Examples
Skill Focus (skill)
Requirements: Apprentice LOT
Benefit: +2 competence to skill checks
Skill Focus (skill), Greater
Requirements: Journeyman LOT Skill Focus
Benefit: +4 competence bonus to skill checks
The Pathfinder way is the OGL system but with the skills automatically maxed out, with skill bonuses tossed in every even character level.They are not. They could be the same if your character didn't gain new skill after level 1... See my post above.
Am I the only one who see this? Is there something I don't understand?
No. You are not alone. It is so *blindingly* obvious to me, that I've been having trouble understanding the folks who kept saying "it's just like 3.5 with maxed skills".
It's not.
A fighter with no skill bonuses or penalties will never have more than two maxed out skills *AND* *NO* *OTHER* *SKILLS* *WHATSOEVER* in 3.5.
In Pathfinder, that same fighter picks up fully maxed out class skills at every level where it's appropriate... AS WELL AS KEEPING THE OTHER SKILLS HE ALREADY HAD fully maxed to the new level cap.
It is geometric power expansion curve... and if a class had enough levels to progress through, it would eventually aquire perfect competency in every skill in the system.
Gene P. <alcore@uurth.com>
Slidell LA
My personal preference would be to keep the Alpha Skill system. I like the consolidated skills, and it still makes backwards compatibility work. I'm not sure it's any easier than 3.5: especially since you can say for your dark Cleric, pick 2+Int mod skills; give them level +3 ranks. It lacks the customization, but it's essentially the same as the Alpha version.
I do find that with consolidating the skills, my characters have a ton of skills. I made an elven rogue with a 20 Intelligence, and just about ran out of ideas of what to take next. Let alone the 10 more skills I would get across 20 levels.
I'd be careful about adopting some of the options, just that it makes the backwards compatibility less viable.
I converted all of the player characters in my current campaign to each of these systems. All PCs are 6th level. Here are the results:
1. Pathfinder: This was an extremely quick conversion to make. All characters wound up with max ranks in every skill they had purchased even a single rank in under the OGL rules. Many gained due to the combining of skills (The Bard with Diplomacy gained Gather Information ability, She had lots of Sense Motive and gained Bluff via Deception). Each had additional skill choices left to spend on things they had never before purchased. Quick and Easy, but a significant power up with major multi-classing issues.
2. 3.5 OGL: No conversion necessary.
3. Combination: No conversion necessary.
4. Hybrid: This was the hardest to convert and the most time consuming option presented. It also led to the widest disparity between existing OGL skill totals and new ones. I assumed that at each level a character gained the same number of new ranks as at 1st level (so a rogue gains 8 ranks at 2nd level). This system also seemed to most greatly diverge from expected skill bonuses to level appropriate DCs. At 1st level every characters was -3 from expected skill totals making everything harder. At 6th level almost every current skill was at Master level +3 above OGL max making everything easier. By 6th level characters had way more ranks to spend and so were significantly boosted in number of skills as well as maximum bonuses.
5. Scaled: This converted nearly as quickly as the Pathfinder method. Only multi-classing issues slowed it down. This produced the closest results to what the players had achieved with skill points using OGL at 1st and 6th levels.
6. Hybrid Scaled: This was the only option that resulted in a power down. Characters recieved so many fewer ranks under this system that at 6th level they had significantly lower bonuses than their OGL versions did. I made the same assumption that at higher levels the same number of ranks was awarded as at 1st level. Characters were weaker under this system often not having enough ranks to master their core skills without sacrificing things other skills they had mastered under OGL. For example at 6th level the sorceror with 14 Int could only master Spellcraft and Knowledge (arcana) and had no ranks left for Bluff and Diplomacy which she had taken before. Instead she could be skilled in all of them, but this left her with signifcantly lower totals than she had under OGL.
Conclusion: What follows is my opinion with the goal being to stay as close to possible to the current skill levels of my PCs while increasing the ease of use of the system.
Without a doubt the best system here was 5. Scaled. It was quick to convert or create higher level PCs/NPCs (which is a huge boon to me as a DM). It resulted in comparable skill bonuses and number of skills among characters, but with some gains due to the combination of OGL skills under Pathfinder. So it seems the most backwards compatible to other 3.5 products. The multi-classing issue that exists in the Pathfinder method is still present, but not as severely. A first level rogue gains 4+Int skills which he can keep maxed out regardless of what class he takes afterwards instead of 8+Int. This is much easier to live with than the Pathfinder method.
I would still like to see the multi-classing issue addressed in some way, such as if half your class levels -2 do not have a skill as a class skill than it drops to cross-class bonus. So a rogue 1/fighter 9 would have cross-class bonus in his rogue skills, but a rogue 10 or a rogue 5/fighter 5 would have them at maxed class skill levels. This could lead to skill levels reducing when a character levels up in another class, but skill atrophy is more acceptable to me than super front-loading the skill based classes.
Note: For those who don't like the idea of instant skill mastery at higher levels I propose that all skills gained after 1st level are gained at cross-class levels. If that skill is a class skill it raises to class skill levels when you go up another level. That way there is some progression of ability over time.
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'm gonna have to vote "None of the above" here. I think that of the proposed changes, the best solution I've seen is:
* Keep skill points, with a (level+3) cap on skill ranks
* Consolidate some skills, but dump skill synergies
* Eliminate class/cross-class distinction
* Lower the range of skill point difference between classes (e.g., 6 for skill-heavy characters and 3 for everyone else)
* Make Int raises retroactiveThis provides the customizability of 3.5 OGL, simplifies skill allocation TREMENDOUSLY for high-level characters, and in most cases will produce similar enough results to OGL to keep compatibility. Win on all sides.
Failing this, my far-distant second choice is 1. Pathfinder. As someone else said upthread, "Fiddly bad."
-The Gneech
I'm pretty close to your option except I would like to see the cap at least being level+5. Also, I agree almost halfway with the skill point differences... except I'd prefer to see the high in and the weaks (2+) brought up to 4+
|
|
4. Hybrid System: In this system, characters would get a number of skill ranks equal to the number of skill choices granted by the Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG. Skill ranks granted by the first level of your class must be spent on class skills. Skill ranks granted after first level and those granted by a high Intelligence score at first level could be spent on any skill. Instead of the class skill/cross-class skill distinction, your bonus in a skill would be determined in the following method.
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 + modifiersThere are a few additional rules to go with this. At first level, you can have no skill higher than 2 ranks (or the skilled level). Many of the prestige...
A couple more observations and changes. Do not know if other people have mentioned these ideas because I have not had a chance to read this entire thread.
I like the hybrid system concept, but every time I try to come up with a way to make it better it just doesn't work out. This is usually because it becomes almost as complicated as the 3.5 skill point system.
But... What if everything stays the same, but all the skills you choose at first level start at Expert (of course you can only take class skills at first level still). Then after first level when you get a new skill rank you start at rank 1 for new skills. From my end this seems to help this work out. We can also use the rule that you can use a skill rank at first level to take two skills at the Trained or Skilled levels (not sure which level would work best).
I am still not sure if having 0-4 rank levels and having a different calculations for each as being almost as difficult as counting up the skill points when creating monsters and NPCs. I am going to play around with that today.
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.
I think this is a good compromise. I would also allow a free skill pick when a character adds a level in a new class for the first time.
No. You are not alone. It is so *blindingly* obvious to me, that I've been having trouble understanding the folks who kept saying "it's just like 3.5 with maxed skills".
It's not.
etc.
I agree with you that this is pretty obvious. Adding skills, however, is a necessary evil of an auto-max system, which otherwise screws muticlassing.
Under a straight conversion of OGL to an auto-max system, a character would choose a number of skills at first level, and simply have those skills maxed for the rest of his career. That's fine and dandy until he decides to take a level of Wizard, and discovers he can never learn Spellcraft, or until he moves to the land of nubile cat-eared elven damsels and realizes he can never learn Meowish.
This presents even more problems when you consider that the SRD encourages multiclassing into prestige classes, and that many existing OGC sources take this as a given.
There are a lot of good reasons for moving away from a skill-point system, but for a new system to work with multiclassing it must allow for some degree of skill expansion. Incidentally, True20 launched with auto-max skills, but moved back to skill points for its final release when this problem proved insurmountable. Their initial solution was straight auto-max, with additional skills added via a feat called "Skilled".
Granted, the PRPG system does allow for a rather rapid increase in trained skills, and the downside of this is that it takes away from the clarity of class distinctions at high levels. I could see slowing it down--adding one skill every four levels, for example--but this again has the potential to severely hinder multiclass options. Instead of never getting Spellcraft, as in the above example, the character multiclassing into Wizard at second level would have to wait until level four to get it . . . which is not a lot better.
Incidentally, this is an issue that I see with the Scaled system as well. If Wizards and Fighters get a new skill every fourth level, then a character multiclassing into Wizard would have to stick to his new class for four levels without Spellcraft just to learn it; a character going Ftr3/Wiz3/PrClass3 might never get a new skill at all. If skill acquisition is acquired based on variable number of class levels (like BAB), then there is the potential for multiclass characters to accumulate a large number of empty skill levels and thereby get hosed.
. . . of course, under the scaled system you could give every class its first skill at level 1, but then you give multiclass characters a significant skill boost over even the fastest advancing classes, and that could also be an issue. Basically, this is the way saves are set up now, and it's already problematic.
|
|
While talking on the other forums, some of us have thought a good idea. Instead of changing the existing beyond the consolidation of skills. Lets keep skill points but instead of cross-class skills costing 2 for 1 rank, allow for them to be 1 for 1 but with the same maximums. So I could spend 2 points into bluff instead of 4 for the same bonus. It would still allow skill points and fix the problem of people not being able to spead out their skills. Also another point that came up, the amount of skills people should get. 4+int/6+int/8+int seems like a good progression but with the cross class fix, you may be able to add in the 2+int again since it goes a long way now than it did before.
1. Pathfinder: The system presented in Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG.
While this way is quick and simple, it seems more appropriate for a video game, to a roleplayeing game. It doesn’t take into account NPCs that would be skilled in certain areas without being high level characters. What about the old blacksmith that has worked years at the forge and never adventured a day in his life. Because of his limited level, his skill would be limited. However, the 15th level fighter that visits his forge sees the blacksmith and decides to pick up the trade. He instantly becomes more skilled than the blacksmith. Why should ALL skills be based on character level? I don’t think this type of system works for a RPG.
2. 3.5 OGL:The system presented in the 3.5 OGL.
This system is obviously broken. There is too much of discrepancy between skill light and skill heavy classes. Most people focus on maxing out a few skills. It can be cumbersome for some people.
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.
Interesting idea, but it doesn’t fix the problem. It just combines two problems together.
4. Hybrid System: In this system, characters would get a number of skill ranks equal to the number of skill choices granted by the Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG. Skill ranks granted by the first level of your class must be spent on class skills. Skill ranks granted after first level and those granted by a high Intelligence score at first level could be spent on any skill. Instead of the class skill/cross-class skill distinction, your bonus in a skill would be determined in the following method.
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
There are a few additional rules to go with this. At first level, you can have no skill higher than 2 ranks (or the skilled level). Many of the prestige class requirements would need an alteration to require expert or even master standing in some skills.
Again, interesting idea, but it still doesn’t fix most of the problems associated with each system. Why should ALL skills be based on character level?
5. Scaled Skills: At first level, this system works like the system presented in the Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG. The only difference is that the number of skill choices is changed (classes with 2 choices still get 2, classes with 4 choices get 3, classes with 6 or more choices get 4). From this point onward, characters gain skill choices based on their class levels. In other words, additional skills are class dependent benefits. Classes with 4 initial choices (in this system) get a new skill every other level. Classes with 3 initial choices (in this system) get a new skill every 3 levels. Classes with 2 initial choices (in this system) get a new skill every 4 levels.
Again, why should ALL skills be based on character level?
6. Scaled Hybrid: This is a blend of options 4 and 5, where the rate by which you get new skills depends on your class, but the bonuses derived from these skills is like in the hybrid.
And finally, why should ALL skills be based on character level?
Keep skill points but reallocate them to each class to a minimum of 4 skill points.
Increase maximum skill rank to a flat 20/10, class/cross-class, irrespective of level. If the number of skill points you have is related to level, why should max skill rank also be related to level?
Do away with restriction between multi-class skill points. Once a skill is a class skill, it is always a class skill regardless of what class is increased. Chances are, if you are putting points into a skill, you are using it and you should be able to increase a skill that you are using.
|
|
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'm gonna have to vote "None of the above" here. I think that of the proposed changes, the best solution I've seen is:
* Keep skill points, with a (level+3) cap on skill ranks
* Consolidate some skills, but dump skill synergies
* Eliminate class/cross-class distinction
* Lower the range of skill point difference between classes (e.g., 6 for skill-heavy characters and 3 for everyone else)
* Make Int raises retroactiveThis provides the customizability of 3.5 OGL, simplifies skill allocation TREMENDOUSLY for high-level characters, and in most cases will produce similar enough results to OGL to keep compatibility. Win on all sides.
Failing this, my far-distant second choice is 1. Pathfinder. As someone else said upthread, "Fiddly bad."
-The Gneech
I have to agree with this poster on most points. The consolidations in Alpha are excellent and much needed. I think the simplification of the system in that step alone is enough to streamline the NPC creation issue. A rogue's gallery table of NPC stats for quick reference wouldn't hurt either. You could even leave the points/class level alone (omit bullet 4 above), and still have a big improvement over 3.5. By consolidating like skills, you have effectively granted more skill points to Pathfinder characters over their 3.5 counterparts.
Incidentally, this is an issue that I see with the Scaled system as well. If Wizards and Fighters get a new skill every fourth level, then a character multiclassing into Wizard would have to stick to his new class for four levels without Spellcraft just to learn it; a character going Ftr3/Wiz3/PrClass3 might never get a new skill at all. If skill acquisition is acquired based on variable number of class levels (like BAB), then there is the potential for multiclass characters to accumulate a large number of empty skill levels and thereby get hosed.
I would suggest that this sitution is easily fixed by allowing any class levels with similar awards to stack. So a fighter 2/wizard 2 would earn his new skill bonus. Plus if you know you're planning to multi-class in such a fashion you can buy Spellcraft as a cross-class fighter skill and it would automatically upgrade to a class-skill when you took your first level of wizard.
Alternatively each could be given a value. 2+ skill classes give you 1/4 of a skill each level, 3+ gives you 1/3 each level, 4+ gives you 1/2 each level. When ever you take a level that brings your total above 1 you get to pick a new skill.
The Multiclassing problem is why we can keep skill points. The biggest concern with the current system is the time it takes to stat up a High-level NPC/PC. Especially those with odd multiclassing, which doesn't work well in this kind of Max-Rank system.).
Everyone seems so focused on a Max rank system but we really do not need it to a get the result Pathfinder is looking for. At it's simplest we need a way for high level characters to easily spend skill points without having to do exhaustive accounting. This as already been laid out in this thread. To repeat.
1) Cross-class skills cost 1 point.
2) Increasing you Int Bonus gives you the backdated skill points. (Like Con & HP currently do)
By doing that you have eliminated two of the biggest hurdles in tacking skill points for high level characters. Add to that:
3) Characters can save skill points they don't spend.
While this seems rather silly for characters in play it will allow high level characters to simply total how many skill points they are supposed to have and then spend them as they wish.
As a nod to cross-class skills being outside a particular classes typical range we still:
4) Keep the cross-class max ranks as it exist in 3.5.
Which means that multiclassed characters treat all skills on any of their class lists as Class Skills for Max Ranks allowed.
While this will increase the number skill points in use compared to 3.5 it is far less then the current Pathfinder Alpha. It is also much closer to the 3.5 system while getting the end goal of faster high-level character creation.
|
|
I have been stating up creatures and characters for the past couple of hours. Considering I was able to do many of them and change some things about the hybrid system I think I am really liking this. You can see below the changes that I was thinking of before. I think the following is my final answer as it relates to the Hybrid system.
Ranks change to the following:
0 ranks - Untrained: Bonus = ability modifier + other modifiers
1 ranks - Trained: Bonus = your character level + modifiers
2 ranks - Skilled: Bonus = your character level + 3 + modifiers
3 ranks - Expert: Bonus = your character level + 6 + modifiers
As mentioned below the skill choosen at first level are automatically at Skilled level, but you can not add another rank to bring it to expert at first level. Also, a character can use one first level choice two gain two skills at the Trained level instead of one at the Skilled level.
When stating up characters I noted that in my version characters got the same amount of maxed out skills (level +3) as the 3.5 skill point system. This could be good or bad depending on your point of view given the condensed skill list. I think it is a good thing.
Now I know this will not work for people that enjoy having one or two skill ranks in a skill. No version of the Pathfinder system I have seen from posts do that either without being as difficult as skill points.
Of course this is not going to please people that think that Pathfinder should have the same results as 3.5. Not trying to please that crowd because any change where you do not use skill points is going to be different no matter what.
Is this a fun, playable, and reasonable way to do things based on the Pathfinder skills version at this point.
4. Hybrid System: In this system, characters would get a number of skill ranks equal to the number of skill choices granted by the Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG. Skill ranks granted by the first level of your class must be spent on class skills. Skill ranks granted after first level and those granted by a high Intelligence score at first level could be spent on any skill. Instead of the class skill/cross-class skill distinction, your bonus in a skill would be determined in the following method.
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 + modifiersThere are a few additional rules to go with this. At first level, you can have no skill higher than 2 ranks (or the skilled level). Many of the prestige...
A couple more observations and changes. Do not know if other people have mentioned these ideas because I have not had a chance to read this entire thread.
I like the hybrid system concept, but every time I try to come up with a way to make it better it just doesn't work out. This is usually because it becomes almost as complicated as the 3.5 skill point system.
But... What if everything stays the same, but all the skills you choose at first level start at Expert (of course you can only take class skills at first level still). Then after first level when you get a new skill rank you start at rank 1 for new skills. From my end this seems to help this work out. We can also use the rule that you can use a skill rank at first level to take two skills at the Trained or Skilled levels (not sure which level would work best).
I am still not sure if having 0-4 rank levels and having a different calculations for each as being almost as difficult as counting up the skill points when...
|
|
1) Cross-class skills cost 1 point.
2) Increasing you Int Bonus gives you the backdated skill points. (Like Con & HP currently do)
3) Characters can save skill points they don't spend.
4) Keep the cross-class max ranks as it exist in 3.5.
I like all of these suggestions. While I don't think 4 is necessary, I certainly understand that some people are more comfortable with the class/cross-class distinction. Once a skill is a class skill, for any class, it could be set to maximum. So, if someone really wants to be good at the skill, they will have to take a level in a class that grants access, I don't think that is bad at all.
I do think that there are a couple of additional changes that should be considered. The x4 skill points at 1st level is also a little more confusing. While level +3 is the 3.5 default, I don't think that Pathfinder needs to limit itself with that. Keep skill points, but don't be afraid to go just a little farther.
My suggestion is to give the classes skill points as follows:
Rogue 12+Int
Ranger/Bard 10+Int
Barbarain, Druid, Monk 8+Int
Cleric, Fighter, Paladin, Sorcerer, Wizard 6+Int
By this system, a rogue has as many skills as under 3.5 by 6th level (no int mod) or by 9th (+4 Int mod). All of the levels work the same way, which gives a more gradual progression. This is particularly good for creatures with racial HD. Getting 4x more skill points for your first HD as a bugbear doesn't make for a very good rogue, no matter how many levels you take later. This also addresses the temptation to dip into rogue at 1st level for the multiplied skills. Obviously the rogue would get more than anyone else, and over a few levels it is a substantial number over both the other classes and the 3.5 rogue - and other classes catch up or exceed their 3.5 totals much earlier (Barbarian would be 3rd level with 10 Int, and at 5th would exceed the 3.5 assuming an 18 Int).
For reference, a couple of quick charts.
Skill Points for a 3.5 Rogue (10 Intelligence) (18 Intelligence)
Level Skill Points
1 32 48
2 40 60
3 48 72
4 56 84
5 64 96
6 72 108
7 80 120
8 88 132
9 96 144
10 104 156
Skill Points for Suggested Rogue (10 Intelligence) (18 Intelligence)
[list]
Level Skill Points
1 12 16
2 24 32
3 36 48
4 48 64
5 60 80
6 72 96
7 84 112
8 96 128
9 108 144
10 120 160
Skill Points for 3.5 Barbarian (10 Intelligence) (18 Intelligence)
1 16 32
2 20 40
3 24 48
4 28 56
5 32 64
6 36 72
7 40 80
8 44 88
9 48 96
10 52 104
Skill Points for Proposed 3.5 Barbarian (10 Intelligence) (18 Intelligence)
1 8 12
2 16 24
3 24 36
4 32 48
5 40 60
6 48 72
7 56 84
8 64 96
9 72 108
10 80 120
Ranger Skill points under 3.5 (10 Intelligence) (18 Intelligence)
1 24 40
2 30 50
3 36 60
4 42 70
5 48 80
6 54 90
7 60 100
8 66 110
9 72 120
10 78 130
Ranger Skill Points Proposed (10 Int) (18 Int)
1 10 14
2 20 28
3 30 42
4 40 56
5 50 70
6 60 84
7 70 98
8 80 112
9 90 126
10 100 140
Obviously a highly intelligent character does not benefit as much from this system as a low intelligence character at low levels, but beyond 10th level, this is better for everyone. Further, since there are more than enough skill points to max out the initial skills, the extra skill points can be spent on appropriate skills to represent getting better at things outside one's area of expertise as a result of adventuring.
For example, using level +5 as the maximum number of ranks, a 15th level rogue with 10 Intelligence would have 180 skill points, with a maximum of 20 ranks in each skill. This would mean that he could have 9 skills 'maxed'. If he had started collected 8 skills as a rouge, he would have an extra skill with maximum ranks. Further, since some skills have been combined, this benefit is enhanced further. And, since I am using a higher cap on skills, the rogue is better at skills than the 3.5 counterpart. Using a max of level +3, the rogue in this example could have 10 skills with maximum rank (2 more than the 3.5 equivalent rogue).
|
|
I see a consistent theme on this thread. Everyone wants to keep the 3.5 skill points system. I agree with this. I don't agree with giving more classes more skill points. Since Paizo is consolidating skills, giving more skill points to a class would be fatal to balance. I vote to stay with the 3.5 way for how many skills per level a class has. Now with that said, I do strongly suggest this addition to those rules. Cross-class skills now cost 1 for 1 rank with a max amount of ranks at 2. I found that the double negatives of cross class was a big hamperer and kept players from truly exploring the different possibilities of a character. People would rather multiclass than the try to use cross-class skills. By making it 1 for 1 players could give their fighter the ability to tumble and not have to take a level of rogue every so often to up the ranks. This player could stay fighter all the way up to 20 and have a good range of skills.
Ex. I am using a Human Fighter with 10 Intelligence for this example as well as my consolidated list of Skills I posted above.
#Points at 1st level: 12
Skills: Athletics 4
Acrobatics 2
Knowledge(Arcana) 2
Knowledge(Nature) 2
Persuasion 2
#Points at 2nd level: 3
Athletics 5
Profession(Guard) 2
#Points at 10th Level: 3
Athletics 9
Acrobatics 6
Knowledge(Arcana) 6
Knowledge(Nature) 6
Persuasion 6
Profession(Guard) 6
Since the fighter didn't have to divide up his skills into Jump, Climb, and Swim, he had an overall gain in skills points available so that he could cross-class and possibly want to. What do you all think? If anything doesn't make sense, let me know.
|
|
I am curious about something. Everyone that wants to keep skill points, is this just from a players perspective? I have not seen many mention anything (I know there are some) about skill points from a GM perspective. Also I do not buy these GM's who say it is easy to stat NPC's and monsters with skill points in 3.5. You have professional designers who think it is a pain (I do too even though I am not a designer), so I do not think you are going help your argument to have a blanket skill points are good attitude. I personally, don't know if Jason does, but I assume he does, want to hear more about simplfying things from a GM perspective while keeping the "wonderful" skill points method for the players. How does one keep it "balanced" and "backwards compatible". Mabye more people should latch onto option 3.
It is also starting to hurt me (I am not trying to make people stop saying this, just telling you how I feel though) every time I read a post about this system or that system not being backward compatible. If there is going to be any type of skill change it is not going to be 100% exactly same result in both systems. There will be rules given out to explain how to get it close, but I very much doubt things are going to convert 1 for 1.
I am curious about something. Everyone that wants to keep skill points, is this just from a players perspective? I have not seen many mention anything (I know there are some) about skill points from a GM perspective. Also I do not buy these GM's who say it is easy to stat NPC's and monsters with skill points in 3.5. You have professional designers who think it is a pain (I do too even though I am not a designer), so I do not think you are going help your argument to have a blanket skill points are good attitude. I personally, don't know if Jason does, but I assume he does, want to hear more about simplfying things from a GM perspective while keeping the "wonderful" skill points method for the players. How does one keep it "balanced" and "backwards compatible". Mabye more people should latch onto option 3.
I GM much more often than I play. I still prefer using v3.5 skill points. It allows me to make more vivid, 3-dimensional NPCs.
I am not sure why everyone thinks it makes the GMs job difficult. I just think some classes should get more skill points.
Well, there's a few posts and threads about simplifying the skill point system for the DM, and I'm quite sure Mr. Bulmahn keeps an eye on those too.
Also...compatibility and convertibility are not the same thing. and a lot of suggestions and "solutions" simply drive Pathfinder away from being compatible with 3.5, and into being convertible into 3.5, which is something a lot of people simply don't want.
And the second problem I have is that I can't playtest a system that most of players (all 3.5 DMs in their own games from time to time) take a look at and go "Nah, thanks, that's what we left behind with 2E proficiencies for good". :/ And worst is that I have to agree...the skill system was one of the nice parts of 3E back when I switched. So...yeah...from a DM's point of view...keep skill points. Simplify, sure. But please don't make me houserule them back in. :)
I see a consistent theme on this thread. Everyone wants to keep the 3.5 skill points system.
no I like the alpha much better really.
I also like the alpha skill system more than the 3.5 skill system.
I like skill points. They are like an old pair of hiking boots that are totally functional (waterproof, in fact), but not really attractive or comfortable.
From a practical point of view, skill points work fine; from an aesthetic point of view, they are fiddly and take too much time to assign, especially in complex situations (multiclassing/stat buffs/acquired templates, etc). When you take into account that most players simply max the same skills each level you begin to wonder if the added options are worth the hassle.
If there is not a more-or-less balanced way of making skills simpler, I'll agree that skill points are a good idea. In the meantime, I'd like a chance to actually playtest some of the above options (and whatever else comes of the errata) before throwing out simplified skills altogether. As stated, I think they are a worthwhile goal that may yet see a fantastic implementation.
I have just finished rereading the Alpha Release for the fifth time.
Regarding the skill system, I am realy happy to see the consolidation of skill (Listen/Search/Spot = Perception). I never understood why they would be seperated. Being better at Listen than Spot seemed more to be the perview of a Feat (Acute Hearing or Acute Vision) than a skill of its own. With this consolidation of several skills, I personally think the Rogue's skill alottment is excessive if one use the primary skill system presented. Rogues become rediculously highly trained while Clerics and Fighters are still shortchanged. Perhaps drop rogues to 8 or 6 (6 being on par with 3.5 Rangers, another class noted for skills).
Overall, I would like to see either skill points remain or an alternate system similar to the hybrid. Perhaps something like:
Untrained - D20 + Ability modifier + misc modifiers
Novice - D20 + 2 + Ability modifier + misc modifiers
Apprentice - D20 + 4 + Ability modifier + misc modifiers
Journeyman - D20 + 6 + Ability modifier + misc modifiers
Expert - D20 + 8 + Ability modifier + misc modifiers
Master - D20 + 10 + Ability modifier + misc modifiers
Grandmaster - D20 + 12 + Ability modifier + misc modifiers
Legenday - D20 + 14 + Ability modifier + misc modifiers
Under this skill system perhaps bump fighters and clerics up to 4 slots or even 6.
There are several feats that grant a +2 to one or two skills. So this could work well, with those feats representing even more focused training. To reach the higher skill levels similar to 3.5 perhaps allow taking those skill Feats up to three times.
Another aspect I have thought over is connected to the increased Hit Die of several classes and linking the Hit Die to the Base Attack Bonus...perhaps link the skill points or skill slots to this as well. It has often seemed to me that Wizards are shorted quite a bit in 3.5 and in the primary method proposed in Pathfinder, considering these are supposed to be highly educated men and women with knoweldge in many fields.
Thoughts and criticism on any of the above more than welcome.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
|
|
I DM far more often than I play.
I like the 3.5 skill system, but I think it is too difficult to assign skill points to complex monsters. I want a simple system that is similar to 3.5 - essentially, I want an easy to use skill point system.
I like the flexibility of skill points, and I like the idea of being able to make different characters. I don't think that once a skill is chosen you should automatically continue to increase in that skill.
There have been plenty of examples. A character like Elminster (not that I'm a realms fan) apparently started out as a rogue and then became a wizard. Under the Alpha rules, he would be the world's greatest thief, even though he hasn't picked anyone's pocket in like 200 years. I see that as a problem.
In general I want a system that is easy and flexible. The Pathfinder Alpha system is fairly simple, but is inflexible. Everybody gets the same thing. Skills are a primary method of 'customizing' a character. A fighter that uses jump and climb frequenly in combat can have a very different feel from one that uses ride... Now, skills aren't the only way to distinguish characters, but I have yet to see a system proposed that does not use skill points that is superior to the 3.5 system. While the 3.5 system involves more work on my part as the DM, it is the demon I'm used to, and I know the advantages. For Pathfinder to work, it has to convince me that the system is better than 3.5. So far, it is not. It is quicker - but that is not the sole purpose of design. If we simply wanted easy we would eliminate skill choices altogether and every rogue would simply get a static bonus to certain class abilities that work like skills do now. Thus, a rogue would have a chance to open locks or climb walls the same as every other rogue of his level. I've played that system. I'd like forward progress, thank you very much.
And progress is more flexibility and more simplicity. Together. Not one at the expense of the other.
I am curious about something. Everyone that wants to keep skill points, is this just from a players perspective? I have not seen many mention anything (I know there are some) about skill points from a GM perspective. Also I do not buy these GM's who say it is easy to stat NPC's and monsters with skill points in 3.5. You have professional designers who think it is a pain (I do too even though I am not a designer), so I do not think you are going help your argument to have a blanket skill points are good attitude. I personally, don't know if Jason does, but I assume he does, want to hear more about simplfying things from a GM perspective while keeping the "wonderful" skill points method for the players. How does one keep it "balanced" and "backwards compatible". Mabye more people should latch onto option 3.
I'm primarily a GM, and I like skill points in theory, but I also want them to be fast and flexible. This is why I support the simplifications I talked about upthread.
3.5 as written is doable, but tends to give me a headache unless I use something like E-Tools. But without Code Monkey's support, E-Tools is rapidly falling apart and I'm going to have to go back to paper soon, which is why I'm so eager to simplify.
-The Gneech
I think the best solution for a simple and flexible system is to simply drop the notion of cross-class skill like True20 or Mutants and Masterminds skills system...
At first level you pick a number of skills equal to the table 5.1: First Level Skill Choices.
You got Character level+3 (4) ranks for all those skills (or you can also houserule to distribute 4x number of skills in ranks if you wish as in the current 3.5 OGL rules).
After that you gain a number of skills points equal to the number of skill in table 5.1: First Level Skill Choices. You can distribute them as you wish (and can decide to maximize them if you want to keep it simple).
To create high-level character, it's pretty simple... you only have to add the total number of skills pts gain at each level and distribute them as you wish up to (Character level+3) ranks.
And if you want to keep the notion of class vs cross-class skills, you can simply add a class bonus (+2) to all your Class-Skills. This bonus is a simple incitative to choose appropriate skills for your class and roles. In fact, this bonus replace the synergy bonus you could have gain with 3.5 OGL (and it's a lot simpler to remember). You can also rules that you can only apply this bonus to skills that have at least 4 ranks.
So, For exemple I create a Elf Rogue 3/Figther 5 with Int 12.
At first level I choose 9 skills at rank 4 (or distribute 36 skills ranks). For the other level I simple add 33 skills ranks (2*9 for rogue class + 5*3 for fighter class) in wathever skills I choose up to a maximum of 11 ranks each(character level +3). I then simply add +2 to all the class-skill i've already choose (from the rogue and fighter class).
Simple, versatile and similar to the the current 3.5 OGL.
What do you think! I think this one is really good :-)
|
1. Pathfinder: The system presented in Skills chapter of the Pathfinder RPG
This is my favourite. It is simple and easy to apply to monsters and NPCs. Horray for no skill synergies!
I like the way that as you gain levels your number of skills increases without reducing the effectiveness of your previous skill choices. The addition of of a new skill every even level encourages taking cross-class skills, which creates well-rounded characters and interesting role-playing opportunities.
I could see reducing the number of skills granted to 1st level characters decreasing, to compensate for combining many skills.
Some of the other options have some promise but they don't match the simplicity and ease of use.
Honestly, at first I didn't like it, but I have to say that I want to stick with 1. Pathfinder.
Skill points are fairly easy to explain, and they are the default. But they do take up a lot of time and micromanagement. The pathfinder system is easy to grasp and quick to deal with. I have one, maybe two players whose eyes would gloss over as I tried to explain the hybrid systems presented.
Although I do like a sidebar on maybe having a way to have a basic level grasp of skills, like a permanent +2 that doesn't go up showing a background skill from the character's past.
Just out of curiosity, what would people think of your class or cross class skills going back and forth based on your current class? So if you were, for example, Elminster, and your recent levels are all in wizard, your old rogue skills drop back to being cross class.
On one hand, you could be good at something one level, then be not quite as good at it next level, which isn't a perfect solution (though if you didn't practice that skill while training, its not completely beyond the bounds of suspension of disbelief), it definitely puts the kibosh on cherry picking to max out your skills.
|
|
Use OGL skill points, but...Cost per rank in any skill = 1 skill point
Maximum rank any skill = character level +3Skill check (class skill only) = 1d20 + ability modifier + rank
Skill check (cross-class skill) = 1d20 + ability modifier + rank/2Notice that, for single-classed characters, this produces the exact same results as standard 3.5. The characters have twice as many ranks in cross-class skills, but these ranks add half as much to skill checks.
This is not equivalent to 3.5.
If I am a fighter, and I take 5 ranks in Tumble (using 10 skill points) my bonus is 1d20+5+Dex mod. Let us say I roll a 10 and my Dex mod is +2 = my skill result is 17.
Under your cross class system my roll is 1d20 (10) + 10 (rank) + 2 (ability modifier) /2. 22/2 = 11.
This means that even though you are giving me 1/2 the bonus for my cross class skills you are also giving me half the bonus for my d20 roll and my ability modifier.
I do truly believe the system lies in having simple skill points, and I've seen several variations that give exactly that.
I know it is early in the design process, and I don't want to be the one screaming 'THIS ISN'T D&D', but there is a very specific and difficult design challenge here. The Pathfinder RPG has to appeal to the disaffected gamers that aren't going for 4.0. Now, for myself personally, I'm not too worried about direct compatability with 3.5 - but I am concerned about a natural evolution. If you change the way feats work completely, change the way skills work completely, change the way classes work completely - at the end of the day you have something that is a clean break with the predecessor - and that IS NOT something I'm okay with.
I agree with Jason's introduction. Improve the game, Add options, Retain Compatability. When choosing not to retain compatability something must be MUCH better.
I don't mind more feats or more skills - they're easy to add in - but taking things out is a problem. The Alpha Skills do just that - they make it so that unless the PC/NPC I'm converting maxed out skills, I likely have to give up skills - unless the character is high enough level that those skills could be acquired through the extra skills. I do like the idea of characters gaining more skills over time, but I don't like the idea of characters suddenly getting +20 to a skill that they've never used because they ran out of 'good choices' for their skill choice.
(I'll try to edit some parenthesis into my earlier post to make that more obvious, but the boards aren't letting me edit my post at the moment!)
It won't. You can only edit a post within an hour after posting.