|
In your scenario with the climb, have all players forgotten that they could have taken a 20. Add in some rope climbing and the party can succeed on any check that you throw at them. That's just as quick as the party actually having ranks with the skill. That's why their is rope in the equipment section and the ability to take 20. SO you don't have to have the ranks in something to do it. As for the Trickery domain, just because you have 2+Int for skills doesn't mean you couldn't spread your points out enough to make use of those skills.
I'm looking forward to your full analysis of the differences between Pathfinder Alpha 2 w/ 2 and 4 skills per level. But I did have to comment on this.
You cannot take 20 when failure has a penalty. For example, falling. When you take 20 you presume you rolled every other possible roll once. So, you rolled 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, etc. until you finally roll 20 2 minutes later (20 rounds). So, that is not an option.
Taking 10 MIGHT be an option, presuming that they could be successful on a 10 or better. With no ranks, that is unlikely since most climbs have a DC of 15 or so (and some are much higher). If there are a few more skill points to spread around, it is more likely that the PCs won't treat every 40+ foot climb as a major hurdle, involving a major engineering marvel to get them over it.
From a Rise of the Runelords campaign I'm running
Not too long ago, my players were trying to sneak into Fort Rannick. They had acquired a 'spool of endless rope' when I randomly generated a treasure for a small side adventure I put in place between Burnt Offerings and Skinsaw. In any case, having plenty of rope, the party decides that they're going to scale the mountain by Fort Rannick and climb down to the central tower.
This worked out pretty well because I had a certain 'traitor' travelling with them. Just turned out that the marching order had him as the highest person on the rope. It didn't take him long to figure out that assaulting the fort full of ogres was a suicide mission, so he decides to cut the rope. We had determined that the cliff was 800+ feet high, and this made things quite interesting since the fall was more than 1 round... It turned into a very fun encounter. Now, this worked only because the PCs felt that with unlimited rope they could handle the DC of 0 even if things got bad. Even with the Armor Check penalty they were worried about failing, but not by 5 or more.
Now, this encounter, which was really fun, and my players all enjoyed only happened because I had given out a non-core item that made them feel a little more comfortable with the climb. With a few more ranks to spread around, though, it might happen in more games. And that would be cool.
We had the use of feather fall, fly, levitate, and all kinds of interesting attempts to save people. When it was over one PC had landed hard, but survived, barely. The traitor had a gnome wizard dive into his face and had fallen off the cliff and splattered all over the tower top. It was fun. I want to encourage that kind of fun if possible.
|
Ok I see your point Dead. I also have another round of those skills thing posted this time only going to 10 and with some fixes.(Calculating 3.5e skill points is a burden onto itself.) So I also added in some points numbers too.
Fighter Lvl 1
Wearing Scalemail Armor and Heavy Sheild
Str 15 Dex 10 Con 14 Int 13 Wis 12 Cha 8
(3.5e)(#of Points: 2+Int x 4 or 12)
Skills: Climb -2 (2 Ranks, 2 Str, -6 ACP); Jump -2 (2 ranks, 2 Str, -6 ACP); Swim -8 (2 ranks, 2 Str, -12 ACP), Intimidate +1 (2 Ranks, -1 CHa), Spot +3 (4 points for 2 Ranks, +1 Wis)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points: 2+Int or 3)
Skills: Climb +0 (1 Rank, +2 Str, +3 for Class, -6 ACP), Acrobatics -5 (1 Rank, +0 Dex, -6 ACP), Perception +2 (1 Rank, +1 Wis)
(3+Int Alpha 2)(#of Points: 4)
Skills: Climb +0 (1 Rank, +2 Str, +3 from Class, -6 ACP); Acrobatics -5 (1 Rank, +0 Dex, -6 ACP), Perception +2 (1 Rank, +1 Wis), Intimidate +3 (1 Rank, +3 from Class, -1 Cha)
(4+Int 3.5e)(#of Points: 4+Int x 4 or 20)
Skills: Climb +0 (4 Ranks, 2 Str, -6 ACP); Jump +0 (4 Ranks, 2 Str, -6 ACP); Swim -6 (4 Ranks, 2 Str, -12 ACP), Intimidate +3 (4 Ranks, -1 Cha); Spot +3 (4 points for 2 Ranks, +1 Wis)
(4+Int Alpha 2)(#of Points: 5)
Skills: Climb +0 (1 Rank, +2 Str, +3 for Class, -6 ACP), Acrobatics -5 (1 Rank, +0 Dex, -6 ACP); Perception +2 (1 Rank, +1 Wis); Intimidate +3 (1 Rank, -1 Cha, +3 Class); Swim -6 (1 Rank, +2 Str, +3 Class, -12 ACP)
Fighter lvl 5
Wearing +1 Full Plate and +1 Heavy Shield
Str 16 Dex 10 Con 14 Int 13 Wis 12 Cha 8
(3.5e)(#of Points: 2+Int x 8 or 24)
Skills: Climb +1 (4 Ranks, +3 Str, -6 ACP); Jump +1 (4 Ranks, +3 Str, -6 ACP); Swim -5 (4 Ranks, +3 Str, -12 ACP); Intimidate +3 (4 Ranks, -1 Cha); Spot +5 (8 points for 4 Ranks, +1 Wis)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points: 2+Int x 5 or 15)
Skills: Climb +2 (2 Ranks, +3 Str, +3 for Class, -6 ACP); Acrobatics -2 (4 Ranks, +0 Dex, -6 ACP); Swim -3 (3 Ranks, +3 Str, +3 from Class, -12 ACP); Intimidate +4 (2 Ranks, -1 Cha, +3 for Class); Perception +5 (4 Ranks, +1 Wis)
(3+Int Alpha 2)(#of Points: 20)
Skills: Climb +2 (3 Ranks, +3 Str. +3 for Class, -6 ACP); Acrobatics -1 (5 Ranks, +0 Dex, -6 ACP); Swim -3 (3 Ranks, +3 Str, +3 from Class, -12 ACP); Intimidate +6 (4 Ranks, -1 Cha, +3 for Class); Perception +6 (5 Ranks, +1 Wis)
(4+Int 3.5e)(#of Points: 4+Int x 8 or 40)
Skills: Climb +5 (8 Ranks, +3 Str, -6 ACP); Jump +5 (8 Ranks, +3 Str, -6 ACP); Swim -1 (8 Ranks, +3 Str, -12 ACP); Intimidate +7 (8 Ranks, -1 Cha); Spot +5 (8 points for 4 Ranks, +1 Wis)
(4+Int Alpha 2)(#of Points: 25)
Skills: Climb +5 (5 Ranks, +3 Str, +3 for Class, -6 ACP), Acrobatics -1 (5 Ranks, +0 Dex, -6 ACP); Swim -1 (5 Ranks, +3 Str, +3 from Class, -12 ACP); Intimidate +7 (5 Ranks, -1 Cha, +3 from Class); Perception +6 (5 Ranks, +1 Wis)
Fighter Lvl 10
Wearing +2 Full Plate and +1 Heavy Shield
Str 17 Dex 10 Con 14 Int 13 Wis 12 Cha 8
(3.5e)(#of Points: 2+Int x 13 or 39)
Skills: Climb +4 (7 Ranks, +3 Str, -6 ACP); Jump +4 (7 Ranks, +3 Str, -6 ACP); Swim -2 (7 Ranks, +3 Str, -12 ACP); Intimidate +5 (6 Ranks, -1 Cha); Spot +7 (12 Points for 6 Ranks, +1 Wis)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points: 2+Int x 10 or 30)
Skills: Climb +3 (3 Ranks, +3 Str, +3 for Class, -6 ACP); Acrobatics +4 (10 Ranks, +0 Dex, -6 ACP); Swim -3 (3 Ranks, +3 Str, +3 from Class, -12 ACP); Intimidate +6 (4 Ranks, -1 Cha, +3 for Class); Perception +11 (10 Ranks, +1 Wis)
(3+Int Alpha 2)(#of Points: 40)
Skills: Climb +7 (7 Ranks, +3 Str. +3 for Class, -6 ACP); Acrobatics +4 (10 Ranks, +0 Dex, -6 ACP); Swim -1 (5 Ranks, +3 Str, +3 from Class, -12 ACP); Intimidate +10 (8 Ranks, -1 Cha, +3 for Class); Perception +6 (10 Ranks, +1 Wis)
(4+Int 3.5e)(#of Points: 4+Int x 13 or 65)
Skills: Climb +9 (12 Ranks, +3 Str, -6 ACP); Jump +9 (12 Ranks, +3 Str, -6 ACP); Swim +3 (12 Ranks, +3 Str, -12 ACP); Intimidate +11 (12 Ranks, -1 Cha); Spot +7 (12 points for 6 Ranks, +1 Wis), Craft +6 (5 Ranks +1 Int)
(4+Int Alpha 2)(#of Points: 50)
Skills: Climb +10 (10 Ranks, +3 Str, +3 for Class, -6 ACP), Acrobatics +4 (10 Ranks, +0 Dex, -6 ACP); Swim +4 (10 Ranks, +3 Str, +3 from Class, -12 ACP); Intimidate +12 (10 Ranks, -1 Cha, +3 from Class); Perception +11 (10 Ranks, +1 Wis)
Now I only stopped at 10 because going on from their seemed kinda fruitless as well as making my eyes cross. I did notice a few things while doing this.
For one, Alpha 2's system for skills is so easy to use. Any mistakes that I may have made would be easily double checked by just figuring out what your total ranks should have been as compared to the 3.5 method.(Which I have listed)
Second, 4+Int works very well in 3.5e. It gives you a catch up for your class skills while you actually cross-class(Hence why I picked on Skill). 4+Int in Alpha 2 had relatively the same effect but it made the character more skillful than his 3.5 counterpart.
Third, I did put in a 3+Int system and I liked how it works. It made the character more skillful but it doesn't take away from the other classes that would still have 4+Int. It gives a good amount of choice while not allowing the character to become too skillful.
Fourth, I don't like jump being a Dex skill. That much is obvious from this test.
Now I will go off and run up a Barbarian and show the differences to this test and then go Rogue using the same system.
|
|
The Barbarian took me no time at all. Here is what I have.
Barbarian Lvl 1
Wearing Masterwork Breastplate
Str 15 Dex 12 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 13 Cha 8
(3.5e)(#of Points: 4+Int x 4 or 16)
Skills: Survival +5 (4 Ranks, +1 Wis); Listen +5 (4 Ranks, +1 Wis); Spot +3 (4 points for 2 Ranks, +1 Wis); Intimidate +3 (4 Ranks, -1 Cha)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points: 4+Int)
Skills: Survival +5 (1 Rank, +3 from Class, +1 Wis); Perception +5(1 Rank, +3 from Class, +1 Wis); Intimidate +3 (1 Rank, +3 from Class, - 1 Cha); Climb +2 (1 Rank, +3 from Class Skills, +2 Str, -3 ACP)
Barbarian Lvl 5
Wearing +1 Breastplate
Str 16 Dex 12 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 13 Cha 8
(3.5e)(#of Points: 4+Int x 8 or 32)
Skills: Survival +9 (8 Ranks, +1 Wis); Listen +8 (7 Ranks, +1 Wis); Spot +5 (8 points for 4 Ranks, +1 Wis); Intimidate +6 (7 Ranks, -1 Cha); Climb +2 (2 Ranks, +3 Str, -3 ACP)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points:4+Int x 5 or 20)
Skills: Survival +9 (5 Rank, +3 from Class, +1 Wis); Perception +9(5 Rank, +3 from Class, +1 Wis); Intimidate +7 (5 Rank, +3 from Class, - 1 Cha); Climb +8 (5 Rank, +3 from Class Skills, +3 Str, -3 ACP)
Barbarian Lvl 10
Wearing +2 Breastplate
Str 16 Dex 12 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 14 Cha 8
(3.5e)(#of Points: 4+Int x 13 or 52)
Skills: Survival +14 (12 Ranks, +2 Wis); Listen +13 (11 Ranks, +2 Wis); Spot +8 (12 points for 6 Ranks, +2 Wis); Intimidate +10 (11 Ranks, -1 Cha); Climb +6 (6 Ranks, +3 Str, -3 ACP)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points: 4+Int x 10 or 40)
Skills: Survival +15 (10 Rank, +3 from Class, +2 Wis); Perception +15(10 Rank, +3 from Class, +2 Wis); Intimidate +12 (10 Rank, +3 from Class, - 1 Cha); Climb +13 (10 Rank, +3 from Class Skills, +3 Str, -3 ACP
Observations:
First, I find the ability to make a Barbarian concept in 3.5e way too hard. I wanted a scout but Spot was not a class skill and I wanted to climb but it became a dump skill kind of because of spot being cross-class. In 3.5 games, if you were going to bump up the 2+Int guys, you definatlely need to bump up the 4+Int guys.
Second, Alpha's system is great for making the same character concept and makes him able to excel at it. I actually could be the party scout in Alpha as compared to 3.5.
Third, I didn't have to do too much calculation for any of the proposed fixes because they leave the barbarian unchanged. 2 to 4 system leaves behind the Barbarian as I stated above while the 3/4/5/6 system leaves him able to remain a skillful character with 10 Int. If I had gone Orc and taken a -1 on my skills, I would have been able to do as much as a fighter in that system which makes sense to me. In the proposed 2 to 4 system, that orc would be skillful but not on the lines of a fighter. But that also depends on the build and one of the reasons I left out race. It affects how you place stats.
Up next is the Rogue. Lots to see there.
|
|
Additional observations
Between my builds for these classes, I noticed that the Alpha system keeps up with the 3.5e skills points.
The fighter in 3.5e has 39 points and though you have 30 Ranks in Alpha, I still end up with an equivalent of 39 points though distributed a little differently.
The barbarian in 3.5e has 52 points and has 40 ranks in Alpha but combined with class skill bonuse gives him the equivalent of 52 points.
I may experiement with that some more but I can definately say Alpha is a far superior system over that of 3.5e.
I may experiement with that some more but I can definately say Alpha is a far superior system over that of 3.5e.
am with ya 100% there.
yes I would also like to thank you for takeing time to do this. 3.5 skills are just awful to work with stating up high level npc's. It is always nice to have things like this written out thanks.
I too appreciate all the work you are putting into this.
|
|
And finally the Rogue. Now I'm not 100% that I got it all down right but I'm willing to change whatever needs to be done.
Rogue Lvl 1
Wearing Masterwork Studded Leather
Str 8 Dex 15 Con 10 Int 14 Wis 13 Cha 12
(3.5e)(#of Points: 8+Int x 4 or 40)
Skills: Search +6 (4 Ranks, +2 Int); Disable Device +6 (4 Ranks, +2 Int); Open Lock +6 (4 Ranks, +2 Dex); Move Silently +6 (4 Ranks, +2 Dex); Hide +6 (4 Ranks, +2 Dex); Spot +3 (3 Ranks, +1 Wis); Listen +4 (3 Ranks, +1 Wis); Tumble +6 (4 Ranks, +2 Dex); Bluff +4 (3 Ranks, +1 Cha); Sleight of Hand +6 (4 Ranks, +2 Dex); Climb +0 (1 Rank, -1 Str); Jump +0 (1 Rank, -1 Str); Swim +0 (1 Rank, -1 Str)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points: 8+Int or 10)
Skills: Stealth +6 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Dex); Perception +5 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Wis); Disable Device +6 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Int); Bluff +5 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Cha); Sleight of Hand +6 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Dex); Swim +3 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, -1 Str); Climb +3 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, -1 Str); Acrobatics +6 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Dex); Linguistics +5 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Int); Disguise +5 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Cha)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points: 6+Int or 8)
Skills: Stealth +6 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Dex); Perception +5 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Wis); Disable Device +6 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Int); Bluff +5 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Cha); Sleight of Hand +6 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Dex); Acrobatics +6 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Dex); Climb +3 (1 Rank, +3 from Class, -1 Str); Swim +3 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, -1 Str)
Rogue Lvl 5
Wearing Mithril Chain Shirt
Str 8 Dex 16 Con 10 Int 14 Wis 13 Cha 12
(3.5e)(#of Points: 8+Int x 8 or 80)
Skills: Search +10 (8 Ranks, +2 Int); Disable Device +10 (8 Ranks, +2 Int); Open Lock +11 (8 Ranks, +3 Dex); Move Silently +11 (8 Ranks, +3 Dex); Hide +11 (8 Ranks, +3 Dex); Spot +8 (7 Ranks, +1 Wis); Listen +8 (7 Ranks, +1 Wis); Tumble +11 (8 Ranks, +3 Dex); Bluff +8 (7 Ranks, +1 Cha); Sleight of Hand +11 (8 Ranks, +3 Dex); Climb +0 (1 Rank, -1 Str); Jump +0 (1 Rank, -1 Str); Swim +0 (1 Rank, -1 Str)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points: 8+Int x 5 or 50)
Skills: Stealth +11 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Perception +9 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Wis); Disable Device +10 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Int); Bluff +10 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Cha); Sleight of Hand +11 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Swim +3 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, -1 Str); Climb +3 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, -1 Str); Acrobatics +11 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Escape Artist +11 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Appraise +10 (5 Ranks, +3 for Class, +2 Int); Linguistics +10 (5 Ranks, 3 for Class, +2 Int); Disguise +6 (2 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Cha)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points: 6+Int x 5 or 40)
Skills: Stealth +11 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Perception +9 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Wis); Disable Device +10 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Int); Bluff +9 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Cha); Sleight of Hand +11 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Acrobatics +11 (5 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Climb +3 (1 Rank, +3 from Class, -1 Str); Swim +3 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, -1 Str); Escape Artist +10 (4 Ranks, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Linguistics +7 (4 Ranks, +3 for Class, +2 Int)
Rogue Lvl 10
Wearing +1 Mithril Chain Shirt
Str 8 Dex 17 Con 10 Int 14 Wis 13 Cha 12
(3.5e)(#of Points: 8+Int x 13 or 130)
Skills: Search +15 (13 Ranks, +2 Int); Disable Device +15 (13 Ranks, +2 Int); Open Lock +16 (13 Ranks, +3 Dex); Move Silently +16 (13 Ranks, +3 Dex); Hide +16 (13 Ranks, +3 Dex); Spot +13 (12 Ranks, +1 Wis); Listen +13 (12 Ranks, +1 Wis); Tumble +16 (13 Ranks, +3 Dex); Bluff +13 (12 Ranks, +1 Cha); Sleight of Hand +16 (13 Ranks, +3 Dex); Climb +0 (1 Rank, -1 Str); Jump +0 (1 Rank, -1 Str); Swim +0 (1 Rank, -1 Str)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points: 8+Int x 10 or 100)
Skills: Stealth +16 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Perception +14 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Wis); Disable Device +15 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Int); Bluff +14 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Cha); Sleight of Hand +16 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Swim +3 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, -1 Str); Climb +3 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, -1 Str); Acrobatics +16 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Escape Artist +16 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Appraise +15 (10 Ranks, +3 for Class, +2 Int); Linguistics +10 (5 Ranks, 3 for Class, +2 Int); Disguise +14 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Cha); Use magic Device +7 (3 Ranks, +3 from Class, +1 Cha)
(Alpha 2)(#of Points: 6+Int x 10 or 80)
Skills: Skills: Stealth +16 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Perception +14 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Wis); Disable Device +15 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +2 Int); Bluff +14 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +1 Cha); Sleight of Hand +16 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Acrobatics +16 (10 Rank, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Climb +3 (1 Rank, +3 from Class, -1 Str); Swim +3 (1 Rank, +3 for Class, -1 Str); Escape Artist +15 (9 Ranks, +3 for Class, +3 Dex); Linguistics +10 (5 Ranks, +3 for Class, +2 Int); Diplomacy +8 (4 Ranks, +3 for Class, +1 Cha)
Observations:
First, The Rogue has way to many skills and points/ranks to distribute. Lucky for me that Alpha is so easy to advocate. I would have spread my skills out a little more for 3.5e but the math would just take me to long to see if it was correct so I just dumped the idea. I love skill monkeys and make them seem like such but as you will see, 8+Int Rogues just have too much math involved and wasted abilities.
Second, The Rogue in Alpha now has too many skill ranks to deal with. Some skills are nice to max and others you only want a few ranks in them as I demostrated above.(Those are my choices and definately vary between players.) When I reached those maximized skills ranks, I found that there was really no place to put those left over ranks so I just sank them into abilities that didn't make sense. Disguise and UMD are just wasted skills for me.
Third, Dropping the Rogue down to 6+Int is great! I didn't have so many wasted skills, I had plenty of points to still distribute, and The character developed a little better in my mind. I chose Diplomacy because the Rogue along the way became quite skillful in dealing with nobility and didn't really see a need to lie all to often. Now his ranks in that skill may not be maxed out but a +8 in a stat is commendable at 10th level.
Fourth, Now I still hold the point that 3/4/5/6 is not my solution to solving the underskilled characters but as I have shown, It works nicely for making characters more skilled and those that are too skilled more along the lines of their creation. I can tell you this, before I go and look up some math, the Alpha Rogue is definately more skillful than the 3.5e version.
That's it for me right now, I really can't handle doing anymore of these for a few days but I can answer questions that you may have. I don't know if I proved anything with this experiment but I do know that I feel like 3/4/5/6 is a step in the right direction to solving all these concerns that people have.(BTW, I think this is the Star Wars Saga Edition numbers that characters use for skills. From my experience from that game, which is limited, I feel that it helps those that are less skillful be skillful enough and those that are too skillful reeled in a bit. Great balance. But that may be a bias on my part?)
|
I'm watching this with intrigue. We all agree, that a fighter with only 2+int skill points makes the character dull, a generic warmachine with nothing else to do. With the condensing of skills improves the capabilities as well, which is a good sign.
Although this thread is not about condensing skills, I'll make a quick suggestion about taking Jump off from Acrobatics (Balance & Tumble), and making Athletics ([Climb] & Jump & Swim).
I'll possibly help you out by making the bard myself. I'm pretty handy with the 3.5 skill points myself. Then again, it isn't necessary, so I can use my "powers" on something else. Dumdidum.
fliprushman,you sir have taken one for the team and I thank you.
I still am in favor of 4 bing the min but 4/6 looks good for now the rouge just has to many points.
|
|
I would agree that 8 may be too many with the current status of combined skills. My hope is that when it is playtested, it is found that we can 'uncombine' some skills and keep the ranks at 4/6/8 and have it work out nicely.
Adding skills is easy, taking them away is harder. With some of them combined, there may already be a lot of work. I sort of feel that we're trying to work on two different things - the arrangement of skills per level and the list of skills.
Doing one without the other is kinda hard. I guess I'll make a new thread for it.
My eyes crossed from all those numbers.
Okay few things.
First on the Barbarian and Rogue you used the status quo ability distribution as prescribed in the DMG. But on the Fighter you gave him 12 Int instead of a 10 as shown in the DMG. This kinda skews your results as you purposefully gave him a higher intelligence.
Now you don't have to go back and recalculate, the simple thing is that if you drop it back to the prescribed 10 or bump the barbarian up to 12 you find that they are exactly on par. The barbarian doesn't suffer, and the fighter doesn't out do the barbarian. They are just on par. And I do not see this as a problem.
You also note that your observations with 3+Int modifier reflect this infact with the fighter.
There's your calculations right there . As with its increased higher Intelligence the total equals 4, which is exactly what you get with a 10 Int (the status quo most fighters) at 4+Int.
So by your own logic 4+Int mod is perfect for the average fighter.
Note: Great work by the way.
And yes I realize that it isn't exactly like the distribution but the only distribution that matters in ability scores when it comes to skills is Intelligence.
|
|
Building these characters the way I had was to show you all how I would build a character using the various systems. I never play a fighter with less than a 13 bonus because I like having the option of taking Combat Expertise for the Improved feats it offers. With the proposed 4+Int, Going Human fighter, I would end up with 6 Ranks for my skills every level. That's a bit much in my opinion because he doesn't really have anything useful enough to spend those extra points in. But that's just my opinion.
I also still stand by the idea that if you up the Fighter, you would still need to up the other classes because it's unfair to them that they are getting shafted on their skills. The fighter/cleric/sorcerer just became more skillful but the Barbarian/Druid/Monk are being left out. That's why I suggest something happen along the lines of 3/4/5/6. With the consolidation of skills, I think converting monsters to this system would be simple. Since most monsters will have spot and listen becoming Perception, right there it's reduced down by 1 and if that monster has Move Sil and Hide that's another 1.
And that's fine, your build that is, I'm a fan of Combat Expertise myself...or I was now its utterly useless but that's a completely different issue. I've also seen some strange builds from point buy of people upping some stats from 8 to 9...
But to come to the conclusion that 4+Int mod is too much based on an above average Intelligence build of one class compared to an average Intelligence build of another class is just ridiculous. And not only that but to say another class is being shafted because of it is your higher build...
As I said if you had built an average Intelligence Fighter with the 4+Int mod your results would equate to the 3+Int which you stated was perfect.
But the thing is, I don't think the Barbarian should have more skill points than the Fighter, or the Druid more skill points than the Cleric. I could see the Monk possibly having more skill points, but even that I'm not sure about.
|
|
But the thing is, I don't think the Barbarian should have more skill points than the Fighter, or the Druid more skill points than the Cleric. I could see the Monk possibly having more skill points, but even that I'm not sure about.
Well look at it this way. The fighter is a cadet while the Barbarian and Druid live in the real world developing their skills for survival reasons so it would be a faster curve than the Fighter whom is learning the basics of fighting.
That is just silly, to view the fighter as a cadet. The learning curve is no different the difference is in what and how they learn not the rate in which they learn. The speed at which someone learns is based on individual intellectual levels not methods. How these classes learn is the difference between College and University. (Practical and Academics)
But the thing is, I don't think the Barbarian should have more skill points than the Fighter, or the Druid more skill points than the Cleric. I could see the Monk possibly having more skill points, but even that I'm not sure about.Well look at it this way. The fighter is a cadet while the Barbarian and Druid live in the real world developing their skills for survival reasons so it would be a faster curve than the Fighter whom is learning the basics of fighting.
No that's a member of the Warror NPC class you're talking about. A Fighter is more exceptional, and may include noble scions, knights, officers, thugs, ect. who will likely be quite skilled. Even a soldier turned adventurer is likely to know more than an normal member of the warrior class. At least that's how I see it. And besides a Fighter would also be learning his skills for survival reasons, if you don't work you don't eat, and you'd need stuff like Climb, Jump, Perception, Survival and Intimidate to do well as a soldier.
Was thinking about this last night. The easiest "fix" for too few skill points is to play a human (for 3 skill points/level). That, coupled with the combined skills, +3 effective ranks for every class skill past the 2nd you take, and double "bang for your buck" when taking x-class skills, makes a base 2/level class far more skilled than it would first appear. Combining Climb and Swim (and possibly Jump) into Athletics saves most Fighter-types a skill or two as well, and is a step I completely endorse for that reason.
Racial Skills
But that leaves non-humans with 2/level. What if they each got an extra skill point/level, but it could be spent only on "racial skills" (kind of like class skills)? This allows for more skilled characters, but puts a limitation on it.
Elves: Perception, Knowledge (nature), Spellcraft, Survival
Dwarves: Craft (any), Knowledge (dungeoneering), Knowledge (engineering), Profession (mining)
Half-Orcs: Athletics (climb/swim/jump?), Intimidation, Knowledge (dungeoneering), Survival
Halflings: Acrobatics, Diplomacy, Perform, Stealth
Gnomes: Craft (any), Perception, Knowledge (nature), etc.
(etc.)
Humans and half-elves would have Racial Skills: Any.
This also has the effect of making race a little bit more important than a "darkvision or low-light vision?" decision. The rogue could also then be reduced to 6/level (if necessary) without too much hindrance, because so many skills are class skills for them, and because elf rogues could use their racial skill for Perception.
|
|
That is just silly, to view the fighter as a cadet. The learning curve is no different the difference is in what and how they learn not the rate in which they learn. The speed at which someone learns is based on individual intellectual levels not methods. How these classes learn is the difference between College and University. (Practical and Academics)
If that was the case, all classes would have the same amount skill ranks per level. The idea for the varying Ranks for each class is because some classes would use skills more often and have more training to use them than others. That's the way it's been since 2nd edition with Weapon and nonweapon Proficiencies.
I also still stand by the idea that if you up the Fighter, you would still need to up the other classes because it's unfair to them that they are getting shafted on their skills. The fighter/cleric/sorcerer just became more skillful but the Barbarian/Druid/Monk are being left out. That's why I suggest something happen along the lines of 3/4/5/6. With the consolidation of skills, I think converting monsters to this system would be simple. Since most monsters will have spot and listen becoming Perception, right there it's reduced down by 1 and if that monster has Move Sil and Hide that's another 1.
(Now I've got to retype this because the site keeps logging me out)
Alright the idea that increasing the 2s to 4s somehow inherently weakens the already 4s is just ridiculous. Barbarian, Druid, and Monk aren't being left out and they do not need a increase. Because currently with 4+Int mod they have enough to not only focus in primary class skills but can also branch out a bit.
This is not true of the Fighter, cleric, or sorcerer whom can barely focus in their primary class skills let alone branch out.
Also by your own logic about learning curve, by that statement the sorcerer should have 4+Int mod since their abilities are mostly innate and they spend the majority of their time "in real world experience". And the monk should have 2+Int mod.
AND the idea that Fighters and Clerics are shelled up in academies or monasteries in the entirety of their training is silly as well.
If your looking for the equivilant of a "cadet" look towards the Warrior not the Fighter.
If that was the case, all classes would have the same amount skill ranks per level. The idea for the varying Ranks for each class is because some classes would use skills more often and have more training to use them than others. That's the way it's been since 2nd edition with Weapon and nonweapon Proficiencies.
A good point, and I most certainly don't beleive that they should, but I do beleive that Fighter, Cleric, Druid, Barbarian, Sorcerer, and Monk should be on par. Because their is no difference in the amount of use they need to get out of their skills.
No that's a member of the Warror NPC class you're talking about. A Fighter is more exceptional, and may include noble scions, knights, officers, thugs, ect. who will likely be quite skilled. Even a soldier turned adventurer is likely to know more than an normal member of the warrior class. At least that's how I see it. And besides a Fighter would also be learning his skills for survival reasons, if you don't work you don't eat, and you'd need stuff like Climb, Jump, Perception, Survival and Intimidate to do well as a soldier.But the thing is, I don't think the Barbarian should have more skill points than the Fighter, or the Druid more skill points than the Cleric. I could see the Monk possibly having more skill points, but even that I'm not sure about.Well look at it this way. The fighter is a cadet while the Barbarian and Druid live in the real world developing their skills for survival reasons so it would be a faster curve than the Fighter whom is learning the basics of fighting.
Exactly right.
|
|
By my own statement, The Sorcerer should get 4+Int because they should be able to do more than a wizard whom is shelled up in his books but the game designers didn't do that.(And I don't understand why they limited it's skills) But after my tests, I can honestly say, a Fighter in Alpha 2 does not need 4+Int. I don't know why people think that Int and Cha are a fighter's primary Dump stats when they need Int to get the most use out of their Bonus Feats. Every Fighter according to that would have 5-6 skills while the Barbarian would still only have about 4-5 skills on average. The fighter just became more skillful. Why should the fighter be more skillful than a barbarian?
Was thinking about this last night. The easiest "fix" for too few skill points is to play a human (for 3 skill points/level). That, coupled with the combined skills, +3 effective ranks for every class skill past the 2nd you take, and double "bang for your buck" when taking x-class skills, makes a base 2/level class far more skilled than it would first appear. Combining Climb and Swim (and possibly Jump) into Athletics saves most Fighter-types a skill or two as well, and is a step I completely endorse for that reason.
Racial Skills
But that leaves non-humans with 2/level. What if they each got an extra skill point/level, but it could be spent only on "racial skills" (kind of like class skills)? This allows for more skilled characters, but puts a limitation on it.Elves: Perception, Knowledge (nature), Spellcraft, Survival
Dwarves: Craft (any), Knowledge (dungeoneering), Knowledge (engineering), Profession (mining)
Half-Orcs: Athletics (climb/swim/jump?), Intimidation, Knowledge (dungeoneering), Survival
Halflings: Acrobatics, Diplomacy, Perform, Stealth
Gnomes: Craft (any), Perception, Knowledge (nature), etc.
(etc.)
Humans and half-elves would have Racial Skills: Any.This also has the effect of making race a little bit more important than a "darkvision or low-light vision?" decision. The rogue could also then be reduced to 6/level (if necessary) without too much hindrance, because so many skills are class skills for them, and because elf rogues could use their racial skill for Perception.
This suggestion on the other hand most certainly takes away from the humans as the main and only draws for the race are the extra skill ranks and the bonus feat. Whereas the other races all have other abilities that make them viable. What would the other races be giving up if this was instituted or what would the human be gaining.
This is different from raising base skill ranks gained as upping cleric, fighter, sorcerer, and wizard do not infringe on other classes viability as classes.
I don't like the idea of "racial skills". I also don't endorse the idea of the Athiletics skill.
By my own statement, The Sorcerer should get 4+Int because they should be able to do more than a wizard whom is shelled up in his books but the game designers didn't do that.(And I don't understand why they limited it's skills) But after my tests, I can honestly say, a Fighter in Alpha 2 does not need 4+Int. I don't know why people think that Int and Cha are a fighter's primary Dump stats when they need Int to get the most use out of their Bonus Feats. Every Fighter according to that would have 5-6 skills while the Barbarian would still only have about 4-5 skills on average. The fighter just became more skillful. Why should the fighter be more skillful than a barbarian?
Again your assuming the average is 12-13 for a fighter when it is usually 10-11. The average fighter is going to have a 10 that is the assumed base as Intelligence is not important for a fighter, just as Charima is not because of the lack of uses for the class. The average fighter is going to 4-5 just like the average barbarian.
|
|
I don't know where you are getting your average from but from most of the people I play with(On forums and IRL), they all chose a fighter with atleast a 12-13 Int. It's just not viable to not have something along those lines. But once agains, even with the 10, that Barbarian is still being shafted. He may have a good number of skills but he isn't reflecting his wilderness upbringing while the fighter is just being bumped to show...what? He is mechanically viable?
By my own statement, The Sorcerer should get 4+Int because they should be able to do more than a wizard whom is shelled up in his books but the game designers didn't do that.(And I don't understand why they limited it's skills) But after my tests, I can honestly say, a Fighter in Alpha 2 does not need 4+Int. I don't know why people think that Int and Cha are a fighter's primary Dump stats when they need Int to get the most use out of their Bonus Feats. Every Fighter according to that would have 5-6 skills while the Barbarian would still only have about 4-5 skills on average. The fighter just became more skillful. Why should the fighter be more skillful than a barbarian?
Again your assuming the average is 12-13 for a fighter when it is usually 10-11. The average fighter is going to have a 10 that is the assumed base as Intelligence is not important for a fighter, just as Charima is not because of the lack of uses for the class. The average fighter is going to 4-5 just like the average barbarian.
Edit: And even with an increase to base skill ranks a sorcerer will never be on par with the wizard, the wizard even at 2+Int mod blows 2 base classes and 4 base classes out of the water due to his key ability being Intelligence. At 2+Int mod a wizard is generally on par with the Ranger. At 4+Int mod he becomes more on par with the Bard, an more Intelligence keyed class than Ranger. At 4+Int mod combined with the retroactive Intelligence rules he becomes on par with the Rogue as one of the key skill monkeys.
|
Why should the fighter be more skillful than a barbarian?
Why should the Fighter be *less* skillful than the Barbarian? Not every Barbarian is a self-reliant hunter, some are just foul-tempered berserkers who are treated like loaded weapons and housed with the dogs by their tribesmen, while some Fighters have spent their youth tilting at lists and learning to recognize battlefield signals and studying about prominent historical battles and memorizing the various titles and curtsies required for the various wannabe nobles he's been assigned to escort around at one point or another.
Neither Barbarian nor Fighter is any more or less needful of skills, no matter where they grew up.
I support the idea of 4+ skill points minimum. Bards and Rogues or other skill-heavy classes (or whose core class abilities, such as Bardic Music or Trapfinding, depend on skill rolls) can have 6+ or even more, perhaps (although skill consolidation makes 8+ skill points / level a bit unnecessary).
2 skill points / level isn't awful if you've got a Human Fighter with an Int 13+, which is hardly a common choice. But it does get pretty dire if you're playing a much more common Int 8 non-Human Fighter, and have all of 1 skill point / level...
|
|
I guess then I'm the only one arguing that those classes that are not getting an increase are somewhat shafted. I strongly agree that 2+Int guys need a boost but going straight to 4 is just too much. It worked in 3.5e because the amount of skills available but with consolidation, bumping it up in Alpha would just be bad.
By my own statement, The Sorcerer should get 4+Int because they should be able to do more than a wizard whom is shelled up in his books but the game designers didn't do that.(And I don't understand why they limited it's skills) But after my tests, I can honestly say, a Fighter in Alpha 2 does not need 4+Int. I don't know why people think that Int and Cha are a fighter's primary Dump stats when they need Int to get the most use out of their Bonus Feats. Every Fighter according to that would have 5-6 skills while the Barbarian would still only have about 4-5 skills on average. The fighter just became more skillful. Why should the fighter be more skillful than a barbarian?
We have different opinions on which skills a fighter needs. I usually have ranks in stealth, knowledge skills, survival and a few others.
If the Barbarian and the Fighter has the same Int, then they would have the same number of skill points per level.
Originaly, the skills were skewed for game balance. For no other reason. The flavor was added as an in-game justification.
If you want to follow thru a bit on your example about training vs real world experience, well, in military college, you spend a lot of time learning everything about fighting, including survival skills. A barbarian should not be proficient will all martial and simple weapons, but only ones that are used in their tribe, so I would guess no more than 4 different weapon types. I don't think that that would be fun to play.
I guess then I'm the only one arguing that those classes that are not getting an increase are somewhat shafted. I strongly agree that 2+Int guys need a boost but going straight to 4 is just too much. It worked in 3.5e because the amount of skills available but with consolidation, bumping it up in Alpha would just be bad.
You may be :)
But I don't view it as the other classes gettign shafted if it goes to minimum of 4+int. I view it as the classes that have been shafted for years are now getting their due.
As I have said, I have used 4+int as a minimum for years now, with no problems.
I can say, most barbarian builds I have noticed usually use two-handed weapons usually of the Axe family or Large Blade. So I could say that it would be an easy fix to say they only gain tribal weapons to balance that.
THat's what I usually see as well. Its mainly to take advantage of their prodigious strength for damage.
There are always exceptions, I'm currently building a dexterious barbarian.
The problem with the limitation to "Tribal weapons" is the assumption that Barbarian characters all come from tribes.
|
|
Barbarian background as per the PHB: Barbarians come from Uncivilized lands or from Barbaric Tribes on the outskirts of civilization. A barbarian adventurer may have been lured to the settled lands by the promise of riches, may have escaped after being captured in his homeland and sold into "civilized" slavery, may have been recruited as a soldier, or may have been driven out of his homeland by invaders. Barbarians share no bond with each other unless they come from the same tribe or land. In fact, they think of themselves not as barbarians but as warriors.
Fighter background as per the PHB: Fighters come to their profession in many ways. Most have had formal training in a noble's army or at least in the local militia. Some have trained in formal Academies. Others are self-taught-unpolished but well tested. A fighter may have taken up the sword as a way to escape the limits of life on the farm, or he may be following a proud family tradition. Fighters share no special identity. They do not see themselves as a group or brotherhood. Those who hail from a particular academy, mercenary company, or lord's regiment, however, share a certain camaraderie.
That doesn't appeal to me in the least. The synonmy often ascociatied with Barbarian the class and barbarian as term to describe a people made no sense. Especially since using barbarian to describe a people is very subjective. As two equally "civilized" cultures could view each other as barbaric cultures.
And besides the excerpt in the book, the class on a whole does not reflect this flavour. In general the barbarian is a beserker, and they could come from many places. Especially now with the illiteracy removed from the class. Nevermind that if your playing in a medieval setting the vast majority of people would have be utterly illiterate anyways. Except for nobles, clergy, and scholars.
Anyways back to our regularly scheduled debate about skills...
|
|
So you can see why I say flavor and mechanics need to go hand in hand. I don't think just uping the fighter 4+Int is enough but it needs to be justified by it's background as it is necessary for the Barbarian. From those backgrounds, Living in an Uncivilized land would require one to develope more skills than a fighter living under a noble's regiment or one living in an academy or even the Farmboy turned fighter.
|
|
Barbarian background as per the PHB: Barbarians come from Uncivilized lands or from Barbaric Tribes on the outskirts of civilization. A barbarian adventurer may have been lured to the settled lands by the promise of riches, may have escaped after being captured in his homeland and sold into "civilized" slavery, may have been recruited as a soldier, or may have been driven out of his homeland by invaders. Barbarians share no bond with each other unless they come from the same tribe or land. In fact, they think of themselves not as barbarians but as warriors.
Meh. I hate flavor text that limits player choice. At least it's just that, flavor, and not part of the rules in the SRD, so the rest of us are free to play hateful dark elven 'Barbarians' who were raised in bear-baiting cages, sent into constant gladiatorial combats to 'train' and turned into raging, foaming-at-the-mouth, ranting-to-themselves berserkers, and then unleashed upon the enemies of the Drow. Or Gnomish 'Badger-Warriors' who go into a frenzy to defend the tunnels of their more even-tempered and less animalistic kinfolk. Or Dwarven 'Battleragers,' who drink their nasty concoctions of 'gutshaker' and wade howling into battle, beard-braids a-flying and greataxe soaked in the blood of their enemies.
None of this 'Barbaric Tribes' gobbledigook that wouldn't apply to many of the races that are listed as having Barbarians among them.
So you can see why I say flavor and mechanics need to go hand in hand. I don't think just uping the fighter 4+Int is enough but it needs to be justified by it's background as it is necessary for the Barbarian. From those backgrounds, Living in an Uncivilized land would require one to develope more skills than a fighter living under a noble's regiment or one living in an academy or even the Farmboy turned fighter.
Edit: Again no it wouldn't require the barbarian learn more skills than the Fighter only each would have to learn a different skill set. Which is the realm of class skills.
Yes often it does, but choice of flavour is more important and 2+Int mod lacks cutomizeability for the classes that have it (exception Wizard, said that probably 20 times now in this thread ^^;). And there have been many in this thread that have countered your arguements with flavour counters, just as I have been arguing from a mechanical standpoint. And as has been pointed out the flavour of the classes don't justify the lower skills and in fact limits the ability to flush out those flavour concepts. Nor does raising the ability points of those limited currently encroach upon the flavour of the classes that the increase would put them on par with.
|
|
So you can see why I say flavor and mechanics need to go hand in hand. I don't think just uping the fighter 4+Int is enough but it needs to be justified by it's background as it is necessary for the Barbarian. From those backgrounds, Living in an Uncivilized land would require one to develope more skills than a fighter living under a noble's regiment or one living in an academy or even the Farmboy turned fighter.Edit: Again no it wouldn't require the barbarian learn more skills than the Fighter only each would have to learn a different skill set. Which is the realm of class skills.
Yes often it does, but choice of flavour is more important and 2+Int mod lacks cutomizeability for the classes that have it (exception Wizard, said that probably 20 times now in this thread ^^;). And there have been many in this thread that have countered your arguements with flavour counters, just as I have been arguing from a mechanical standpoint. And as has been pointed out the flavour of the classes don't justify the lower skills and in fact limits the ability to flush out those flavour concepts. Nor does raising the ability points of those limited currently encroach upon the flavour of the classes that the increase would put them on par with.
But you all keep speaking of what players want for flavor and not of what the book as set up as the flavor. That's what I'm pointing out. The mechanics and book flavor are set up one way and what players do with it is a completely different thing. Flavor is transmutable but the current system doesn't allow for that. That's why people house rule things, to make the game their own.
As for classes being on Par with one another, that's different matter. Giving the Fighter a 4+Int skill ranks is putting him on par with the skill system and not the other classes. The other classes are not gaining anything for the abilities they lost to have those higher skill ranks.
Edit: Again no it wouldn't require the barbarian learn more skills than the Fighter only each would have to learn a different skill set. Which is the realm of class skills.
Once again, if this was the case, all classes should have the same amount of skill ranks, just different choices. Though overall, I see a gain with this type of system, it's not backwards compatable and still doesn't put the classes on par with one another, just the skill system.
One of the stated goals of Pathfinder RPG is to encourage people to play characters that stay in the same class. I believe that the example includes comments about why no one plays rogues past 2nd, or fighters past 4th.
Adjusting the skill systems a touch, will help make fighter more attractive.
I do believe that we have already desmonstrated that most, if not all, of the classes that you keep says are going to lose by this, have gained due to skill condensation. The fighter has not.
The flavor in the text can easily be adjusted in PFRPG when it comes out. It most likely will be adjusted to reflect the changes in the mechanics of the game.
This suggestion on the other hand most certainly takes away from the humans as the main and only draws for the race are the extra skill ranks and the bonus feat. I don't like the idea of "racial skills". I also don't endorse the idea of the Athiletics skill.
First, thank you for your reply; also, for the clarity of your responses. You have made it clear to me that concerns regarding game balance do not sway you, and that any attempt at compromise of any sort is doomed to failure -- when attempts are made, they're rejected outright, and counter-proposals are not offered. Obviously, there is no reasoning with you regarding this particular point -- apparently you will be satisfied only if your demands for a 4/6 system (with no counterbalancing) are completely met. Fortunately, Mr. Bulmahn has proven that he's able to see both sides of any issue, so I feel I can trust him to sort this out. Unfortunately, you and I are apparently unable to.
Oh sure it will let me post here. If we wanted a lack of flexibility in the system for our character concepts we'd switch to 4e or play video games. And if the staple is the be all and end all, then your fighter should have had a 10 Int instead of a 12 for your examples because that's what's expected.
As for the 4s needing more if the 2s go up, again its ridiculous because the 2s increase does not put them above par mechanically or flavourfully over the current 4s.
|
|
Oh sure it will let me post here. If we wanted a lack of flexibility in the system for our character concepts we'd switch to 4e or play video games. And if the staple is the be all and end all, then your fighter should have had a 10 Int instead of a 12 for your examples because that's what's expected.
As for the 4s needing more if the 2s go up, again its ridiculous because the 2s increase does not put them above par mechanically or flavourfully over the current 4s.
Expected by who, Everyone? I'm not arguing for the sack of backwards compatability but to find a better compromise than just giving 2+Int class a boost to 4+int. I know what you mean when you say you can't build what you like on a 2+Int diet. I have built a few clerics in my time and have felt ashamed because they couldn't measure up to what I had planned for them. But if I went 4+Int, I could do that but at what cost to the other classes in the game? That's what I'm saying, what did the other classes lose to have those Higher skill Ranks. I'm also deplore the 4e and Video game stance but something like 3/4/5/6 is a better alternative than just bumping 2 to 4. Try to find a compromise, not just stand your ground and expect others too fold.
But if I went 4+Int, I could do that but at what cost to the other classes in the game? That's what I'm saying, what did the other classes lose to have those Higher skill Ranks. Try to find a compromise, not just stand your ground and expect others to fold.
Yes; see my post just above it as well.
We've offered:
1. With consolidated skills and higher skill purchase efficiency, 2/level skill points in 3.PF go a lot further than 2/level in 3.5e (argument rejected);
2. Add 2 skill points at every even level, and either restrict them to Knowledge/Craft/Profession, per Epic Meepo, or leave them open (suggestion ignored);
3. Bump 2/level to 4/level, but provide balancing mechanisms for the 4/6/8 classes -- bonus feats for rogues, or more points for barbarians, or whatever (suggestion rejected);
4. Consolidate more skills, e.g., Athletics, specifically in order to benefit low-skill classes (suggestion rejected);
5. More recently, give nonhuman races an extra point/level, but restrict their usage, unlike for humans and half-elves (suggestion rejected).
I'm out of ideas.
This suggestion on the other hand most certainly takes away from the humans as the main and only draws for the race are the extra skill ranks and the bonus feat. I don't like the idea of "racial skills". I also don't endorse the idea of the Athiletics skill.First, thank you for your reply; also, for the clarity of your responses. You have made it clear to me that concerns regarding game balance do not sway you, and that any attempt at compromise of any sort is doomed to failure -- when attempts are made, they're rejected outright, and counter-proposals are not offered. Obviously, there is no reasoning with you regarding this particular point -- apparently you will be satisfied only if your demands for a 4/6 system (with no counterbalancing) are completely met. Fortunately, Mr. Bulmahn has proven that he's able to see both sides of any issue, so I feel I can trust him to sort this out. Unfortunately, you and I are apparently unable to.
Really mate calm down. The difference between everybody getting extra skill points for race and an increase on the subpar base class skills to higher number is the importance in the overall design.
Except for the exceptional skill monkey classes (Ranger, Bard, Rogue, whom remain such even with the lower bar being raised one rung), skills are a tertiary ability in a classes overall design. Whereas the human's bonus skill ranks are a primary ability used in balance against other races.
A human recieves, bonus skills, bonus feat, bonus wpn prof.
A dwarf recieves, darkvision, stonecunning, keensenses, greed, hearty, weapon familiarity, hatred, defensive training, Stability
An elf recieves low-light vision, keen senses, elven immunities, elven magic, unnatural beauty, weapon familiarity.
And so it goes down through the rest...
In your proposal, everyone receives bonus skills...so now it looks like...
A human recieves, bonus skills, bonus feat, bonus wpn prof.
A dwarf recieves, darkvision, stonecunning, keensenses, greed, hearty, weapon familiarity, hatred, defensive training, Stability, bonus skills
An elf recieves low-light vision, keen senses, elven immunities, elven magic, unnatural beauty, weapon familiarity, bonus skills
So forth.
A human loses the advantages of bonus skills effectively because all races have this now.
So now what do human gain to make them a viable option in comparison to
A dwarf's darkvision, stonecunning, keensenses, greed, hearty, weapon familiarity, hatred, defensive training, Stability
An elf's low-light vision, keen senses, elven immunities, elven magic, unnatural beauty, weapon familiarity.
Or what do dwarves, elves, halflings, gnomes, half-orcs, or half-elves lose to place the balance back among the races?
Would they lose any skill based bonuses like keen senses. Or would a human gain a customizeable new feature like an undesignated keen senses that players can choose two senses to boost by +2.
The racial bonus skill ranks idea would be a way to fix the issue with the subpar skill gain of the classes. But it inbalances the races.
Which creates a great deal more work than the simple increases proposed.
|
|
Other classes have gained.
The rogue went from a d6 to a d8 HD. So did the bard. The ranger went to a d10 HD. The way rage works is different now, and it can be argued that the barbarian gained for customability.
The 'flavor' in the PHB is somewhere between 'completely wrong' and 'completely boring'. I want the rules to allow my creative players to build their character concepts. I do want the characters to be balanced against each other, and that's what I count on the PHB to provide.
So, if you think that the balance is upset, show me how a fighter with 4 skill points/level is better than a barbarian with 4 skill points/level, and how the barbarian is equal to the fighter with 2 skill points/level.
I don't see it.
Skill points aren't likely to change the balance of the characters. Skill points are an important way to allow you to create a character capable of interacting with the world in a manner other than combat. There are a certain minimum number of skills required to function in any society, whether real or fantasy fiction. In the modern world it doesn't really matter if you spent a skill rank on learning to ride the bus or learning to drive a car (and you don't have to max out ranks learning every route in the country for buses or how to drive in F-1 racing) to function - but you do need a variety of skills. Fighters and barbarians both need skills to 'fit in' to the fictional world. The barbarian gets skills like Survival - they allow him to interact with his environment in a meaningful way. The fighter has no skills that allow him to interact with his environment. He isn't good at talking to people, and he isn't good at knowing who the people who might hire him are or what they're doing in terms of politics. But, if he comes to a cliff, he can climb it. WTF? Does it make sense that fighters who live in an Urban environment can climb but not Gather Information? I think the Alpha 2 is very close to the perfect system. It certainly allows flexibility in choice. Now, to make that meaningful, it has to give a few more skill points to a few more classes.
I'd like to use the Cleric with the Trickery domain as an example. I've seldom been able to play a smart cleric. It is a lot of work to get a 12 in that score since I really do need a high Wisdom and Strength, and Con and Cha are both important too. I can dump Dex (but I hate having a penalty) and then my second lowest score is pretty much saved for Int. But let's say I'm a Cleric with the Trickery Domain and I have a 12 Intelligence. With 3 skill points/level (concentration, knowledge religion and heal or spellcraft) I'm never going to take Move Silently or Bluff. Pathfinder has adjusted that with different Domain abilities. Personally, I'm not entirely sold on a spell list without a granted power, but whatever. In 3.5 the 2 skills didn't work. The combination of skills in Pathfinder 2 isn't enough to fix that.
Four skill points needs to be a minimum because that's what it really takes to make a 'real' character. Sure, different classes may not choose to spend those skills in the same place, but they're going to use them to define the character and make sure that he 'fits in' in the world. That's important, and a whole bunch of classes lack that ability. I'm for giving it to them. Now, I don't think that the classes who already were getting enough skill points need more. They don't. I don't think they need 'something else' either, but if they do, I'd rather see them get it than continue to see the fighter to get screwed through another decimal of an edition.
4 Skill Points/level needs to be a minimum. With that in place, I'm very happy not allowing characters to gain more skill points without a feat (which I think should work like Improved Toughness - +1 Skill Point/level).