After convincing my group to switch to Pathfinder campaign setting, we were finaly able to playtest our first PRPG game last Saturday. Most of the game time went to character creation. What bugged them most was the new skill system.
First of all, it's now impossible to be a jack of all trade in many skills. For example, I made a gnome cleric of Desna. Since she's a traveler, I intended to give her several knowledge skills, but specialize her in Profession (Taxonomy) and Knowledge (Nature). My skill selection was limited to 4 trained skills instead, so instead of allowing greater customization, it limited it. In short, there's no generalization anymore, just specialization.
Another problem we saw was that a high level character training a new skill would instantly get specialization. This is especialy true with trained skills. So at level 12, my gnome could pick Knowledge Arcana an get an automatic +18 to her check.
Last but not least is the Rogue's starting trained skills. Under 3.5, he had 8+Int Mod skill points. This was necessary as there was many rogue skills he had to take (at least to look like a 1st or 2nd edition D&D rogue). Now that several rogue skills are regrouped, the thief no longer needs all those extra skill training. My friend made an elven thief/mage with 18 Int and ended up with 12 trained skills. Since Hide, Move Silently, Listen, Search, Spot, Open Lock and Sleight of Hand were "natural" choices for the rogue, and since they are now regrouped in 3 skills, that "leaves" 4 extra trained skills. Way too much skills for our rogue if you ask me.
In conclusion, the skill points system was generaly prefered by my players and I, is more D&D3.5 compatible and has a balanced skill progression system. The regrouping of skills is also a very good idea since when a rogue goes scouting, we never know when to make Move Silently and Hide checks (for example), so merging similar skills together is an excellent idea. And since many skills are merged, some starting skill trained should be adjusted.
- Zorg
|
My group found some somewhat similar things.
We do love the death of skill synergies and the new condensed skill list...but even with some fixes the slot system is losing favor with me.
Instant mastery is a little weird, but the big thing was the loss of specialists who kept certain skills maxed out as their trademark skill (think the rogue who's a master at opening locks and such).
I can see that a hybrid system might be good.
My group reaction was the other side of the coin. they loved the new system.now I always have gave at lest 4 skill points per level no lower. keeping with this all classes have at lest 4 skill slots. now going with at lest 4 yes you can be a jack of all trades. hell even not going with 4 you can still try stuff untrained better then the skill point system.And my new player who took ages to get skill points picked up skill slots in one try.I vote we keep the new system.
|
I believe that the skill grouping of certain things, like Hide and Move Silently, make sense. However, the degree of skill-grouping that happens in Pathfinder 1.1 leaves a LOT less skills, meaning that skill points go a lot further. To far, in my opinion.
I understand the motivation to get rid of less-than-optimal skills, but I would recommend taking some of those skills and giving them better uses (like giving Concentration a use other than casting defensively, such as preventing ANY action that provokes an Attack of Opportunity, or shaking off a condition such as Sickened or Dazed).
Sleight of Hand, Concentration, Jump, Climb, and Tumble I believe deserve to remain separate skills.
Just throwing a thought out there:
What about having to take a feat to get into a certain skill range? This could cut down on the "all of a sudden, I'm awesome at this skill" syndrome.
1-5 ranks Untrained (no need to take a feat to be in this range)
6-10 ranks Trained (need to take the feat Skill Training to get in this range) When you take Skill Training you are able to gain this range in two skills of your choosing. Same would go for Skill Expert and Skill Master.
11-15 ranks Expert (need to take the feat Skill Expert to get in this range)
16+ ranks Master (feat Skill Master)
I think this is somewhat along the lines of the Hybrid skill system that people were thinking of. The issue here is what kind of effect does turning Skill tiers into feats have on skill based characters?
Also what about keeping all the 3.5 skills but adding a feat called:
Skill Combination
For example if you take the feat Skill Combination: Stealth - combine the ranks you have of the skills Hide and Move Silently and divide by 2. You now have a Stealth Skill. Instead of adding skill points to Hide and Move Silently you now may add skill points to Stealth. Any check that involves Hiding or Moving Silently is now resolved through Stealth.
I haven’t thought too deeply about how ability modifiers would come into play when the two skills have different stats attached to them.
Anyway, it was just a quick thought.
Last but not least is the Rogue's starting trained skills. Under 3.5, he had 8+Int Mod skill points. This was necessary as there was many rogue skills he had to take (at least to look like a 1st or 2nd edition D&D rogue). Now that several rogue skills are regrouped, the thief no longer needs all those extra skill training. My friend made an elven thief/mage with 18 Int and ended up with 12 trained skills. Since Hide, Move Silently, Listen, Search, Spot, Open Lock and Sleight of Hand were "natural" choices for the rogue, and since they are now regrouped in 3 skills, that "leaves" 4 extra trained skills. Way too much skills for our rogue if you ask me.
With an 18 Intelligence, and a class designed to do lots of stuff, I see this as equally balanced. Just how many skills SHOULDN'T a genius-level rogue have? It's like saying that Hawking is too smart- we should do something to dumb down his intellect a bit. It's an 18! Rogues START with 8+ skills. It's like bemoaning an 18-Strength Fighter. I see nothing wrong with those high number of skill points. What, however, was the trade-off to put the 18 in INT over...Wisdom, say? That's where role-playing comes into play...
How about this idea?
Keep the current skill system with skill points and such, but change it in the following way:
1) Get rid of the current class/cross class concept. You gain 1 rank per skill point spent, period. It doesn't matter what class you are or what skill it is.
2) Limit the max number of ranks you can have in a given skill by your level.
3) A "class skill" is now defined as follows: A character who trains in a class skill gains a +3 class skill bonus to to his skill checks in that skill.
Another idea is to just get rid of the 2 for 1 point cost of a cross-class skill and make it a 1 fo 1 cost. You could still cap the maximum number of ranks in a cross-class skill equal to half your level.
I think there are only 2 real problems with the current skill system:
1) the 2 for 1 cost of cross-class is confusing
2) there are some skills that aren't very useful (consolidating has helped this)
I would also like to see a couple of new skills such as one to assess a situation or opponent, like the idea presented in Complete Adventurer for the Sense Motive skill.
Concentration should be made useful for all classes, for instance it could be used to suspend the effects of certain mind affecting spells for a round: as a standard action you may make a concentration check to avoid the effects of a spell such as "confusion" for the current round.
Just some thoughts anyway...
nope I want them gone.over 8 years I as a dm and a plyer have grown to see them as more trouble then there worth really.and sorry I dont buy into the lack of customization thing. 2 or 3 ranks in a skill at 15th level is not better then untrained really.They were a good ideal at the time but really need to go I think.Its not a that big of a change but will help alot of folks games.Also makes dming so much easier I found.
With an 18 Intelligence, and a class designed to do lots of stuff, I see this as equally balanced. Just how many skills SHOULDN'T a genius-level rogue have? It's like saying that Hawking is too smart- we should do something to dumb down his intellect a bit. It's an 18! Rogues START with 8+ skills. It's like bemoaning an 18-Strength Fighter. I see nothing wrong with those high number of skill points. What, however, was the trade-off to put the 18 in INT over...Wisdom, say? That's where role-playing comes into play...
Then again, a Wizard spend years in training and get a meager 2 trained skills at first level (+ int modifier). For someone who spends his time in books, a mere 6 trained skill is insignificant next to a street rat's 12 trained skills.
If we consider multi-classing, it's everyone's advantage to start as rogue, since they'll get much more trained skills at first level, and those will automatically increase whenever the character goes up a level in the other class.
- Zorg
AS I have said many times every one should have 4 skills at first with the bard,ranger and rogue having 6 I have never liked 2 skill points per level just dumb . I always use a min of 4 no less.
Then again, a Wizard spend years in training and get a meager 2 trained skills at first level (+ int modifier). - Zorg
Oh- and the ability to blow-up stuff with awesome magic, charm people, raise ded, and that stuff, too. I spent 6 years for two degrees and an MBA- I just make sure Wal-Mart gets its Drain-O on time.
nope I want them gone.over 8 years I as a dm and a plyer have grown to see them as more trouble then there worth really.and sorry I dont buy into the lack of customization thing. 2 or 3 ranks in a skill at 15th level is not better then untrained really.They were a good ideal at the time but really need to go I think.Its not a that big of a change but will help alot of folks games.Also makes dming so much easier I found.
As I a player I truly disliked the SAGA skill system. In that system it seemed too much like you had to run "builds", you had to decide at character creation what the character was going to look like for the entire life of the character. Now I have no problem with running builds versus a more "organic" design, but I dislike being basically forced into one camp or the other. Sometimes as a player I might decide to change midstream to another set of skill priorities and I like to have the option to do that.
For example, in a game I am currently playing a cleric of war and destruction. We picked up a special breed of dog that is extremely vicious and hard to handle. I love the dog for my character, so I've been taking Handle Animal for the last couple of levels. I'll get Handle Animal up to an acceptable level (skill total of 5 to 10) and then I'll stop putting points to go back to some other skills or try another new one.
Now Alpha fixes this to an extent, by allowing you to max out another skill every 2nd level. But to me that seems too much like eating your cake and having it too.
With an 18 Intelligence, and a class designed to do lots of stuff, I see this as equally balanced. Just how many skills SHOULDN'T a genius-level rogue have? It's like saying that Hawking is too smart- we should do something to dumb down his intellect a bit. It's an 18! Rogues START with 8+ skills. It's like bemoaning an 18-Strength Fighter. I see nothing wrong with those high number of skill points. What, however, was the trade-off to put the 18 in INT over...Wisdom, say? That's where role-playing comes into play...
Then again, a Wizard spend years in training and get a meager 2 trained skills at first level (+ int modifier). For someone who spends his time in books, a mere 6 trained skill is insignificant next to a street rat's 12 trained skills.
If we consider multi-classing, it's everyone's advantage to start as rogue, since they'll get much more trained skills at first level, and those will automatically increase whenever the character goes up a level in the other class.
- Zorg
Well, not that this really has anything to do with the topic at hand (I just find it interesting) But the street rat probably has real world skills from needing to survive. Not to mention the dim witted street-rat has a similar number of skills as the booksmart genius...and they would both be massively overshadowed by the genius-level street rat, who would start out with 12 skills at first level.
Oh- and the ability to blow-up stuff with awesome magic, charm people, raise ded, and that stuff, too. I spent 6 years for two degrees and an MBA- I just make sure Wal-Mart gets its Drain-O on time.
LOL...that's the funniest thing I read all day.
I think the biggest reason for the change (especially the new skill every even level) is that most classes in 3.x are starved for skill points. Except for the bard (6 + Int mod), ranger (6 + Int mod), rogue (8 + Int mod), and possibly barbarian (4 + Int mod) and druid (4 + Int mod), the classes mostly lack the skill points to do what they should be able to do. The wizard may come close, but only because it needs a high Int anyway.
If the skill points for cleric, fighter, paladin, sorcerer, and wizard are raised from 2 + Int to 4 + Int and the skill points for monk are raised from 4 + Int to 6 + Int, along with skill consolidation similar to the Alpha Release and possibly reducing the number of or eliminating the half-cost mechanic while keeping the lowered max (or perhaps keeping the half-cost while eliminating the lowered max) for cross-class skills, then most of the problem would dissapear, IMO. You'd have one class with 8 + Int mod skills, three classes with 6 + Int mod skills, and everyone else has 4 + Int mod skills, instead of one 8+, two 6+, three 4+, and five 2+. The optional OGL/SRD Maximum Ranks, Limited Choices system for assigning skill ranks could be referenced for those who don't wish to bother with tracking each skill point.
I think skill points should stay, but the shortcut to maximize skills should be stressed, letting folks who are making high level characters (or DM's making NPCs) can quickly put them together.
That lets the dabblers have their way, and DMs can cut down on the nightmare of skill-spread. As long as synergies go away, I'll be happy.
I'm somewhat iffy on the skill consolidation, mostly due to backwards compatibility. A lot of 3.5 monsters and old NPCs will be under-optimized, which while I don't think it will be gamebreaking, it will be annoying. I've been working on a skill-grouping system for my own game*, but I don't know how well it would fly.
* It puts several skills under one group, kind of like how Craft, Knowledge and Profession are set up. You still put points in subgroups, but you get half the ranks in the associated skills. For example, Persuade consists of Persuade (Diplomacy), Persuade (Intimidate) and Persuade (Gather Information). If you put 6 ranks in Persuade (Diplomacy), you would be treated as if you had 3 ranks in Persuade (Intimidate) and Persuade (Gather Information).
Well, not that this really has anything to do with the topic at hand (I just find it interesting) But the street rat probably has real world skills from needing to survive. Not to mention the dim witted street-rat has a similar number of skills as the booksmart genius...and they would both be massively overshadowed by the genius-level street rat, who would start out with 12 skills at first level.
This observation came from the player who plays a rogue/mage in my campaign. He's a first level rogue, ready to multi-class mage, with an intelligence score of 18, and he himself think that the new merging of skills makes his character's skills closer to a true munchkin.
I've always been a rogue player myself, and with the new skills merged, I think that a PRPG rogue with 4+int mod skills trained would be as efficient as a 3.5E rogue with 8+int mod skill points.
- Zorg
I admit I've not followed the skill debate too closely, but it seems to me that each class should have certain specific skills that they should just automatically be good at (maxed ranks) - for rogues, this could be broken out into specific "packages". For example, each class could pick some number of skills to be maxed. And then they might get extra discretionary skills that they can allocate however they like.
So like a rogue could pick 8 skills to be their maxed out skills, and then maybe a number of skills equal to their int mod that they can also assign to skills.
furthermore, you could alter what you consider to be class or cross-class with such a system.
On the simple question of skill points per class, and the consolidated skill set, I'm more and more in favor of adjusting these from 3.5.
While for backwards compatibility I like keeping the 2,4,6,8 skill points per level, it's rather inconsistent with the strength of the new skills. Adjusting it to 3,4,5,6 would give a boost to the lowest (plus the boost of consolidation), and nudge down the 8's a bit who gained the most from the consolidation.
Does this leave too little difference between classes? Does it make an Int bonus too strong? I don't know.
I agree with Zorg - the instant mastery of all skills, including any new ones you pick up, is just too much. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it", which for me, means leave the skill points as per 3.5 and let players allocate them as they see fit, choosing to specialise or generalise according to what they are looking to achieve. Merging some skills, and changing the mechanics a bit, is OK.
Well, not that this really has anything to do with the topic at hand (I just find it interesting) But the street rat probably has real world skills from needing to survive. Not to mention the dim witted street-rat has a similar number of skills as the booksmart genius...and they would both be massively overshadowed by the genius-level street rat, who would start out with 12 skills at first level.
This observation came from the player who plays a rogue/mage in my campaign. He's a first level rogue, ready to multi-class mage, with an intelligence score of 18, and he himself think that the new merging of skills makes his character's skills closer to a true munchkin.
I've always been a rogue player myself, and with the new skills merged, I think that a PRPG rogue with 4+int mod skills trained would be as efficient as a 3.5E rogue with 8+int mod skill points.
- Zorg
This combination with a PrC has always been somewhat troubling, because they always had some bonuses in common. Without a PrC like the Arcane trickster this isn't really an issue due to the massive power-drop from taking classes that don't offer spell progession, but the problem is they simply share some traits in common that can be useful to both classes. Both are helped immensely by a strong DEX and INT, neither are overtly reliant on armor, and both benefit from avoiding a "stand and deliver" type of combat for something more sneaky. This was the case before and will be the case now because these are already two solidly strong classes mixed into one that share similar traits, with PrC options that provide a synergy to some abilites. Unless they start banning some PrC's which I doubt they will do...if anything they will just come up with new ones that are more viable.
And yes, the skill system will be more viable one way or the other due to consolidation...but all players will be more effective with their relative skills, not just the rogue.
I'm sorry, but the idea that this reduces your ability to generalize is ridiculous. Getting 12+ skills at level 20 at the equivalent bonus of what would have been max skill ranks before is a huge boon, it lets you pick up a variety of abilities without sacficing the abilities you already use.
If anyone really wants to specialize, they can take advantage of the increased number of feats, and take skill focus. I don't feel like the skill system needs unneccessary complication just so some people can be subpar at some of their skills for RP effect.
This combination with a PrC has always been somewhat troubling, because they always had some bonuses in common. Without a PrC like the Arcane trickster this isn't really an issue due to the massive power-drop from taking classes that don't offer spell progession, but the problem is they simply share some traits in common that can be useful to both classes.
IMO, that's the whole point of certain PrCs: The ability to advance simultaneously in two disciplines (arcane spell use, combat, divine spell use, etc.). Apart from bard (arcane spells, skills) and ranger (combat, skills), there are no real "hybrid" classes in the PHB (the minor spellcasting of paladins and rangers is not enough to be considered a hybrid).
PHB casters (+1 CL per level): bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, wizard
PHB experts (6+ Skill Points): bard, ranger, rogue
PHB warriors (+1 BAB per level): barbarian, fighter, paladin, ranger
Note that the PHB monk fits in none of these categories.