Posted from the other thread:
Then again I plead, can we get bonus skill points at levels we don't get feats? Please? Pretty please? With sugar on top?
No need to plead. This is a fair idea and one that I have thought of. When I said that the skills system is firm. What I meant was that it will not recieve another complete redesign. Tweaking, however, is still quite possible (and probably likely).
Thank you thank you thank you! for putting skill ranks back in. It was nice to see so many changes in Alpha 2, that were discussed here on the message boards - this change is definitely the most welcome in our group (although the changes to staves also ranks highly).
Can my group put their names down for the above change also?
It was really nice to get something every level and it's the simplest way to kill 'dead levels'. A nice bonus to skills works well next to feats as they are the two building blocks for your character outside of class. There's a great synergy in a skill/feat bonus every level also.
All in all, well done to Paizo and thanks again for letting us be a part of the process!
tfad
Posted from the other thread:
Then again I plead, can we get bonus skill points at levels we don't get feats? Please? Pretty please? With sugar on top?No need to plead. This is a fair idea and one that I have thought of. When I said that the skills system is firm. What I meant was that it will not recieve another complete redesign. Tweaking, however, is still quite possible (and probably likely).Thank you thank you thank you! for putting skill ranks back in. It was nice to see so many changes in Alpha 2, that were discussed here on the message boards - this change is definitely the most welcome in our group (although the changes to staves also ranks highly).
Can my group put their names down for the above change also?
It was really nice to get something every level and it's the simplest way to kill 'dead levels'. A nice bonus to skills works well next to feats as they are the two building blocks for your character outside of class. There's a great synergy in a skill/feat bonus every level also.
All in all, well done to Paizo and thanks again for letting us be a part of the process!
tfad
I agree. As much as I hate skill ranks, I think I can say the bonus skill ranks every few levels would go a long way towards making it up to those of us who liked the alpha 1 system
I don't know about every other level, (SNIP) Also, I like a suggestion posted by Fleck on another thread: replace bonus hit points from favored classes with bonus skill ranks.
But it is the synergy of feat/skills/feat/skills that works so well, at least for our group. Bonus skill points for Favored Class makes more 'real world' sense than bonus HP, but, we liked that synergy. Skills and Feats are the building blocks for your character, within the framework of Class.
And maybe a few extra ranks here and there that can only be spent on occupation-type skills: Craft, Knowledge, Perform, Profession, etc.
In terms of game design, I really think you do not want to go down this route.
Peace,
tfad
|
I like a suggestion posted by Fleck on another thread: replace bonus hit points from favored classes with bonus skill ranks.
Me too.
As for synergy, there was a suggestion floating around in the Alpha 1 threads by Lordzack to rework synergy so it was more like Aid Another, only you would be aiding yourself. Succeed a DC10 skill check with one skill - say Knowledge (nobility) - and get a +2 to your Diplomacy check with the king. I like it because it doesn't affect the calculation of skill ranks, rather it is situational, AND people who don't want to use it can just forget about it without worrying about their stats being wrong.
How about a bonus +1 to your class skills at 2nd level and every 4 so you would never have a dead level
2nd
6th
10th
14th
18th
And all in all you only gain plus 8 to your class skills at the very end
...As for synergy, there was a suggestion floating around in the Alpha 1 threads by Lordzack to rework synergy so it was more like Aid Another, only you would be aiding yourself. Succeed a DC10 skill check with one skill - say Knowledge (nobility) - and get a +2 to your Diplomacy check with the king. I like it because it doesn't affect the calculation of skill ranks, rather it is situational, AND people who don't want to use it can just forget about it without worrying about their stats being wrong.
I am all for this one! A great way of reintroduce synergies without having all those rank calculations and cherrypicking stuff.
As for additional skill points, I really don't know why they are needed anyhow. You already get skill points EACH level! Why do you necessarily need additional ones besides this?!
As for favored classes, I made another proposal here
In short. Everytime you take a level in your favored class (including 1st) you get a number of Bonus-XP equal to 5% or 10% of the XP needed for the next level.
|
How about a bonus +1 to your class skills at 2nd level and every 4 so you would never have a dead level
2nd
6th
10th
14th
18th
And all in all you only gain plus 8 to your class skills at the very end
This idea sounds like it has a lot of merit - and is compatible with the Alpha-2 skill system.
One of the largest complaints about skills in my circle of gamers (regarding 3.5 OGL) is that characters (such as a cleric for instance) spend their entire career skulking through dungeons, tombs, crypts, fighting creatures - learning tactics, etc, and never truly have a representation in the game mechanics that helps some of the other skills just based on being higher level.
Such a character upon reaching 12th level should naturally have learned to spot better, to listen for creatures better, to simply climb better etc. Or automatically learn how to be more diplomatic by the very nature of dealing with people hiring the adventurers for important missions etc. But as we all know - not only are these cross class skills - the cleric (and many others) simply don't get enough skill points to allocate them to such normal survival skills AND the important class-based skills that are needed to perform their role in the party.
It just never made sense that simply by the very nature of continuing to adventures, most skills shold naturally improve.
It was the one thing that we really liked about Alpha 1 skills - but it leaned too far in that direction and made for too many skill points.
Robert
|
|
How about a bonus +1 to your class skills at 2nd level and every 4 so you would never have a dead level
2nd 6th 10th 14th 18th
And all in all you only gain plus 8 to your class skills at the very end
So your 'class skill bonus' would be:
1st level: +3
2nd level: +4
6th level: +5
10th level: +6
14th level: +7
18th level: +8
[EDIT - for the record, levels 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 because they are otherwise 'dead levels' (no feats, no ability bumps), right?]
Roman suggested something similar somewhere. I like this because it allows the difference between class skills and non-class skills to grow a little as characters increase levels. At 1st level, +1 (ranks) vs +4 (ranks + class skill bonus) matters, but at 20th level, +20 vs. +23 isn't a big deal.
How would this affect backwards compatibility? The first +3 as in Alpha 2 replaces the x4 at first level in 3.5; no problem there. But if we up it at other levels, Pathfinder character will get ahead of 3.5 characters. Not by much, but a little, +5 by 18th level. I guess we'd just have to remember add a little something to the skill check formulas of 3.5 characters.
How about a bonus +1 to your class skills at 2nd level and every 4 so you would never have a dead level
2nd
6th
10th
14th
18th
And all in all you only gain plus 8 to your class skills at the very end
I love the idea to eliminate these dead levels but I would prefer to grant the characters something more consistent than just a +1 to a class skill. I feel it would be a good opportunity to get rid of the skill feats (like Acrobatic, Persuasive, etc...) wich I think are not on par with the other feats in term of balance. So why not grant one of those "Skill Feats" on these levels?
EDIT : Sorry, I just realised that Joey proposed +1 to ALL class skills and not just ONE. It makes more sense indeed and appears a lot more interesting.
[
Roman suggested something similar somewhere. I like this because it allows the difference between class skills and non-class skills to grow a little as characters increase levels. .
Thats where I got it from over at ENWorld but Jason has always said to post things here not on other sites so I brought it over here and also started a thread for this in the new rules proposals
Adding skill points (or bonuses to all checks, which is more or less the same thing) every few levels seems like a big step away from backward compatibility and towards "I want everything!"
Large numbers of skill points are part of the balancing of rogues, rangers, and bards against everyone else -- and do we really need to look for ways to make the bard suck more? I dunno. I'd think VERY hard about it before adding skill points wholesale.
That said, adding maybe 1 skill point/level instead of 1 hp as a "favored class" perk is a neat idea, because it sort of makes sense, in a semi-intutitive way, and it doesn't add enough skill points to totally destroy backward compatibility.
Adding skill points every other level, on the other hand, creates a situation where all Pathfinder characters are vastly more skilled than their 3.5 counterparts, especially as levels increase -- making old Dungeon adventures a lot harder to use as-is, for example. It also re-creates to some extent the Alpha 1.1 scenario, where somebody takes 1 level of rogue (for the Trapfinding ability) and then knows he'll have enough skills thereafter to keep maxing out Perception and Disable Device, and also keep full progression on all his new class skills, without needing to stay a rogue.
If we keep combining more and more skills together, and keep adding more and more skill points, let's jump straight to the logical end point: why not just give all characters max ranks in all skills and be done with it? (In other words, eliminate skills and replace them with a straight level check.) That doesn't appeal to me at all, but might to others.
If more skill points are desperately needed for fighters in particular, for example, it might be better to either (a) combine Climb, Jump, and Swim into Athletics, so they can get all those for 1 skill choice; or (b) give them 4 skill points/level, but keep clerics at 2, barbarians at 4, etc.
As for synergy, there was a suggestion floating around in the Alpha 1 threads by Lordzack to rework synergy so it was more like Aid Another, only you would be aiding yourself. Succeed a DC10 skill check with one skill - say Knowledge (nobility) - and get a +2 to your Diplomacy check with the king. I like it because it doesn't affect the calculation of skill ranks, rather it is situational, AND people who don't want to use it can just forget about it without worrying about their stats being wrong.
The 'synergy' I was referring to was between skills and feats at every other level - I should've used a different word really. Our group loved that you got something every level and alternating between feats and skills was nice because they are the building blocks of characters.
With regard to 'skill synergies', the rule you posted (I quoted) is quite nice. However, I don't think skill synergy is a big deal - most of the time our group includes aid another and circumstance bonuses. These more than make up for them, although if they made a come back we wouldn't be upset. :)
Peace,
tfad
|
Ok, with skill points back, i think that Skill Synergies should come back too. Mostly they are circumstance bonuses as they don't always apply. My bard would use synergies to get out of tight spots making him the "Jack of Trades" he was suppose to be.
Also do think that will see any thing like the Skill Tricks from the Complete Scoundrel? Mabe being able to pick either a special ability, or a skill bonus on dead levels?
What do you think?
|
|
As for synergy, there was a suggestion floating around in the Alpha 1 threads by Lordzack to rework synergy so it was more like Aid Another, only you would be aiding yourself. Succeed a DC10 skill check with one skill - say Knowledge (nobility) - and get a +2 to your Diplomacy check with the king. I like it because it doesn't affect the calculation of skill ranks, rather it is situational, AND people who don't want to use it can just forget about it without worrying about their stats being wrong.
Nifty, sounds nice. Makes more sense too, as you don't automatically know the correct way to deal with the matter. A knowledge (nature) DC 10 to give you +2 to Survival; whether or not you know the type of the terrain or whatnot.
|
|
I posted that synergy idea over in the New Rules forum. If you like/dislike the idea, please post over there to keep the thread alive and hopefully get noticed by Jason.
Thanks.
Adding skill points every few levels seems like a big step away from backward compatibility
Free skill points every other level hurt backwards compatibility.
I understand this, backwards compatibility is Paizo's major design goal and something they have to consider with every change made. Also this is a goal that me and my group believe in - we have stacks of 3.x stuff we want to continue to use/get the chance to use over the coming years and are supporting 3P because we want the system to continue (and because they put out great products).
However, as things currently stand (i.e. Alpha 2) we don't feel that an extra 2 skill points at every other level (opposite feats) will make a negative impact on either game balance or back-compatibility. It is certainly an order of change less than feats every other level, the racial increases, changes to rules etc.
Whilst all of these changes do add up, I'm out here shouting for skill points at every other level (2 is a good number - 10 ranks overall) because it's a step towards a more unified system. With BAB linked to HD, parallel character options being opened up (e.g. druids with domains, sorcerers getting bloodlines like wizards get schools, deadly aim matching power attack etc.), this is where me and my group sees the 3P system going and we like it.
Skill and feat progression running parallel is clean, tidy and intuitive. It also means that every level, regardless of class choice, you'll get something nice (besides HP) without wrecking any chance at backward compatibility. 4 Skill points would have a negative impact here, but 2 wouldn't. And it would give a whole lot of joy to (at the very least) my gaming group.
Hence, I'm repeating myself. Happens when you're passionate about a cause! :)
Peace,
tfad
However, as things currently stand (i.e. Alpha 2) we don't feel that an extra 2 skill points at every other level (opposite feats) will make a negative impact on either game balance or back-compatibility.
Hmmm... I've got to look at the numbers here. Bear with me; let's see how it comes out.
At 20th level, a 10 Int elf cleric now gets 2 x 20 = 40 skill points.Under your proposal, he'd get (2 x 20) + (2 x 10) = 60 skill points.
But remember that half the people on this thread are also demanding a 4/level minimum, bringing the same elf cleric to (4 x 20) + (2 x 10) = 100 skill points -- or two and half times his 3.5e counterpart's. That, to my mind, is a substantial impact on back-compatibility.
On the other hand, a 12 Int, 20th level human rogue would now have 200 skill points. Adding ranks every other level, he'd have 220 skill points; the difference is insignificant (+10%, instead of +150% or +50% if clerics start with 2/level). That's an almost insurmountably negative impact on class balance, in my opinion.
Adding skill ranks every other level is 5 times as good for clerics as it is for rogues. And clerics hardly need a boost with respect to rogues, in terms of class balance. Epic Meepo might have hit on a reasonable compromise: he'd give you the extra skill points, but you'd be required to spend them on "fluff" skills like Craft and Perform and Profession.
As I've mentioned elsewhere, I definitely think any bonus skills granted on even levels should be limited in some way to skills that have less of a direct impact on adventures - Craft, Knowledge, Perform, Profession.
Epic Meepo - can I call you Epic? :) - I have to ask, why do you think these skills should be limited? I'm curious to know.
My arguments against this are three fold.
It makes no sense to have some skill points that can be spent on some skills but not others. It's not much fun being awarded something and then being told what to do with it. I suppose you could draw parallels with telling the party what they can and cannot spend their loot or feats on. It should be their choice. It is rather messy in terms of rules also. Either you have to differentiate between how those skill points are earned, or you have to call them something else, like secondary skills and as much as I love 2nd Ed. that is a real step backwards.
Also this:
skills that have less of a direct impact on adventures
is VERY subjective. Also it can change within a single group based on the adventure being run. Knowledge skills are a no brainer and it's obvious how they can have a huge impact on an adventure. Ditto for Perform skills - if the group includes a performer then will likely want to use it. Perhaps as a distraction (which they would need to succeed as well as Bluff - if it's not a good show then the guards will not be interested), or as a way to ingratiate themselves with an important (or not) NPC. Craft too. For example the PC could be planning to forge a powerful weapon from materials quested for. Perhaps for the king to use in battle against an evil force, or perhaps to stave off their own execution.
These are just quick examples, off the top of my head. And whilst you have got me for Profession, it seems rather silly to force the PCs to learn a profession at every other level. They're HEROES and may not either want or have any way of learning a secondary skill like Profession (Weaver) after leveling up through adventuring. My players take and use these skills, esp. Knowledge, Perform and Craft, and we like them. But I cannot see any value in forcing players to take them as a part of an already arbitrary and abstract level based game.
I'm keen to hear your thoughts!
Peace,
tfad
Hmmm... I've got to look at the numbers here. Bear with me; let's see how it comes out.
At 20th level, a 10 Int elf cleric now gets 2 x 20 = 40 skill points.
Under your proposal, he'd get (2 x 20) + (2 x 10) = 60 skill points.
Thanks for doing the number crunch! :) Yeah, this looks about right to me. It's nice to see it spelled out though. I think that this is a good number. Remember with the Alpha 2 rules on cross class skills this will give the party more options as a group. E.g. The [non-thief] can take some sneaking and awareness skills so they will be able to join in on what used to be those 'solo runs'. I don't think this harms back-compatibility as all it does is open up options. PCs may get more skill points but they can still only attempt (about) one of those skills at a time.
More skills doesn't break things, how many adventures have come to grinding halt because no-one took [X] skill? What (IMHO) breaks things would be changing the DCs around or shifting the skill caps drastically.But remember that half the people on this thread are also demanding a 4/level minimum,
I'm not one of them. :) The system could use one or the other, both (at once) would break backwards compatibility, at least in some respects. I prefer (along with my group) every other level boosts rather than flat boosts for classes as it ties in nicely with feats every other level. It's more unified - and that's what I'm trying to champion!
Adding skill ranks every other level is 5 times as good for clerics as it is for rogues.
Agreed. Mathematically you are correct, but I don't think that this hits backwards compatibility or game balance hard. I think what we want is more skill points. What we're discussing is the best way to dish them out.
Epic Meepo might have hit on a reasonable compromise: he'd give you the extra skill points, but you'd be required to spend them on "fluff" skills like Craft and Perform and Profession.
See my other post - I'd love to see some counter arguments!
Thanks for the great discussion all!
Peace,
tfad
Mathematically you are correct, but I don't think that this hits backwards compatibility or game balance hard. I think what we want is more skill points. What we're discussing is the best way to dish them out.
I'll say this much -- your proposal has a LOT more going for it than the 4/level and 6/level only" crowd's. Instead of doubling the cleric and hamstringing the rogue, you add a modest number, requiring levels to obtain. On another thread it was proposed that levels in your favored class give you +1 skill point each instead of +1 hp, which I was in favor of; over 20 levels, that's mathematically the same as your proposal. Giving clerics 4 skill points/level has twice as much of an impact, and hurts the rogue that much more. (Fighters are a special case; I can see 4/level for them because they do kind of deserve a boost).
In short, mathematically (both in terms of class balance and in terms of backwards compatibility) your system is superior to many of the "give every class 4 skill points per level, and screw the rogue!" suggestions.
Because I want rogues and bards to be exceptionally skilled, not just a smidgen more skilled than everyone else.
This is a valid point - but however you do it, adding skills to anyone or everyone else is going to impact this.
It also makes no sense that I can go through life adventuring, but never learning any knowledge about monsters; crafting magic items, but never learning anything about crafting non-magic items; and interacting with NPCs, but never learning how to interact with NPCs in a professional setting.
I totally understand what you're saying with this one too. Although I don't really agree that this sort of set up has a place in a level based game. What I'm seeing from your argument is something like Morrowind. If you try to implement something like this into 3.x, the results would be similar to everyone having a 'bardic knowledge' skill for everything they're doing. It could work. Level checks?
My party can't spend loot on things that aren't available in the marketplace and can't take feats whose prerequisites they don't meet.
I understand what you're saying. And:
You're already differentiating how those skill points are earned.
I get where you're coming from. But I have to stick with my argument. Either they should be skill points and you should be able to spend them on whatever you want, or they should be something else entirely and I don't think that'll work/is necessary.
Secondly, I'd rather see the PC's get a little bit more information for free than have to run yet another adventure where hours get wasted on players having no freakin' clue what they're supposed to do next. I'd rather avoid the tedious rigmarole of waiting for the party to explain how they go about learning X piece of information upon which the plot hinges and just skip to the part where the characters get to do something interesting.
Thirdly, most published adventures have tons and tons of cool background information that gets completely wasted on parties where no one has ranks in Knowledge (obscure). Giving characters more Knowledge skills lets them know in-character how all the pieces fit together
I have to say, my group does not have these problems and I think these issues are not going to be solved with skill point freebies. The players sometimes need a shove in the right direction. If the games comes crashing to a halt then it's usually the DM's fault (or a disruptive player/s).
There is some cool background info for published adventures (every RotRL for a start....) and you're right - it often needs to get to the players to either make the adventure make sense or get them looking in the right places. However these both fall under the responsibility of the DM. If you know your group has no Knowledge (Nobility) skills and the adventure calls for them, then give them a freebie! How about a knowledgeable NPC or better yet, a way they can figure it out themselves e.g. a book in the library with the information in it etc. Published adventures are never going to fit your groups' skill/class choices perfectly and a good DM will read the adventure first and be prepared.I have to admit though, that we don't have these problems and my group loves knowledge and craft skills. Perhaps another way to tackle this problem could be based on what it says in the 2nd ed. DMG. If your party isn't taking the skills you, as DM, think are necessary then give them incentives to take those skills. E.g. Add a tome of Knowledge (X) to the treasure trove. Tell the players that if they put any skill points into that skill whilst studying the book they can get 2 for the price of 1 ranks etc.
What you are describing are Bluff and Diplomacy checks, not Perform checks. Outside of bard abilities and house rules, ranks in Perform do not allow you to distract or win favor with NPCs. At best, they let you feel good about putting on a good show, and earn a few gold pieces.
But it needs to be a good performance for the guards to be interested enough to leave their post. E.g. "What's going on over their Burt?"
"It's some fool juggling knives." or"This guy is doing some amazing knife tricks! You've got to see this!"
There are other skills involved in this scenario, but one of them would be Perform. Perhaps if things like this are not permitted by the DM, this could be reason the players are not taking those skills. The players should always get a chance for the skills they have chosen to have a meaningful impact on the game. I firmly believe this.
The same thing is accomplished whether the PC does it or hires an NPC to do it. The item doesn't get any more powerful by virtue of a player having spent skill points on the Craft skill.
No, the item doesn't get more powerful, but the same thing is not accomplished. Either the HERO does the forging and saves the day, or he pays someone else to do it. I think the players would rather be the heroes and do their own forging if something important is at stake, so I can see your argument for giving them these skills. But it's important that the players choose their own skills and be allowed to use those skills they have chosen to save the day.
They aren't being forced to learn a profession every other level; they are being given totally free bonus skill points they otherwise wouldn't have to be spent any one of several versatile background skills, each of which affords them more ability to interact with the game world between combat encounters instead of focusing purely on min-maxing.
I see this as the core of your argument and I understand where you're coming from. I guess I am just lucky enough to have a group who enjoys taking these skills to enable them to interact as you describe. I think a group 'focusing purely on min-maxing' is an issue with the group and not the game system. I'm sticking by everything I said in my previous post. :)
I'll say this much -- your proposal has a LOT more going for it than the 4/level and 6/level only" crowd's. (SNIP) In short, mathematically (both in terms of class balance and in terms of backwards compatibility) your system is superior to many of the "give every class 4 skill points per level, and screw the rogue!" suggestions.
Thank you! That's exactly why I'm being so vocal on the issue - for those who don't know me I'm usually quite quiet on these boards. I want to shout loud enough to be heard and share, with everyone, what I believe to be the best option in terms of back-compatibility and game balance. I just hope my signal gets through!
Praise everyone here on the boards!
Praise Paizo!
Peace,
tfad
Tallforadwarf-
Sorry, I've been following the back and forth but I've kinda' lost what your original proposal was, the one Kirth says has merit.
Can you repeat it please.
Thanks
:)
+2 Skill Points at every other level. For all classes and at the levels you don't get feats.
:)
tfad
The original idea of +2 per even level strikes me as just plain silly. It's virtually identical to just providing a +1 at every level all classes.
I am also, quite unfortunately, against the idea of using the favored class mechanic as a boost to skill points instead of hit points. While this is a delightfully sensible mechanic in thought, in practice it means Humans (and half-elves) become utterly more skillful than most other races, with racial bonuses to skills, and the ability to choose their favored class. Every Dwarven Ranger, Gnome Druid, and low-Int Elven Rogue out there would gain nothing. ["Hi there Iconics!"]
*This* suggestion however is frighteningly sensible.
&This solves:How about a bonus +1 to your class skills at 2nd level and every 4 after.So your 'class skill bonus' would be:
1st level: +3
2nd level: +4
6th level: +5
10th level: +6
14th level: +7
18th level: +8[EDIT - for the record, levels 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 because they are otherwise 'dead levels' (no feats, no ability bumps), right?]
Roman suggested something similar somewhere. I like this because it allows the difference between class skills and non-class skills to grow a little as characters increase levels. At 1st level, +1 (ranks) vs +4 (ranks + class skill bonus) matters, but at 20th level, +20 vs. +23 isn't a big deal.
How would this affect backwards compatibility? The first +3 as in Alpha 2 replaces the x4 at first level in 3.5; no problem there. But if we up it at other levels, Pathfinder character will get ahead of 3.5 characters. Not by much, but a little, +5 by 18th level. I guess we'd just have to remember add a little something to the skill check formulas of 3.5 characters.
- Class and "non-class" skills being too close at higher levels.
- The non-4th even levels being "dead".
- The loss of synergy bonus 2nd level skill spikes (as in Tumble going from +4 (base ranks) to +7 with Jump Synergy at 2nd level)... (not sure if that actually counts as a problem, but...)
- The need to maintain class balance: while providing for more skill points to some classes, also comparatively increasing the high skill classes
I *highly* agree this is a strong power boost, particularly for multi-classers. I'm already imagining the changes to my own 9-classed (only one prestige!) 30th level character - he might actually be effective for once! Hard to justify him getting +11 to something like 40 skills (that's almost as many skill points as he has total).
It does make a *lot* of sense though. A conflict would be whether to include this bonus in the "Prestige Skills" section. I would tend towards "no", but since those rules are rather clunky already, I'm not that worried about it.
Okay, thanks. I actually stuck a version of that over in a summary thread I'm trying to create. I attributed it to someone else, though. Sorry.
No worries - could we get a link to the summary thread? :) Thanks!
The original idea of +2 per even level strikes me as just plain silly. It's virtually identical to just providing a +1 at every level all classes.
Hey! :) The main difference though is how unified this makes the game. As well as solving issues now, 3P needs to be looking forwards to new players and the future. A nice, clean, tidy and unified approach (such as tying HD and BAB together) really is the way to go. The 'feat/skills/feat/skills' progression is simply put, more elegant.
I am also, quite unfortunately, against the idea of using the favored class mechanic as a boost to skill points instead of hit points. While this is a delightfully sensible mechanic in thought, in practice it means Humans (and half-elves) become utterly more skillful than most other races, with racial bonuses to skills, and the ability to choose their favored class. Every Dwarven Ranger, Gnome Druid, and low-Int Elven Rogue out there would gain nothing.
I agree, that's why I'm championing the other idea. I will be heard! ;)
*This* suggestion however is frighteningly sensible.
I have to disagree for two reasons, both based around the issue of backwards compatibility. Firstly, like you describe, it requires monkeying around with at the very least all of the core skill DCs. That's a big job and has carry over effects to other products. I would then need to adjust all of the DCs in my Psionics Handbooks, Rise of the Runelords AP etc. This is a change that fails at backwards compatibility in a big way. Secondly, again as you describe, it gives a whole load of extra freebies to multiclass characters. As you diversify your skill set through multiclassing you should be getting variety instead of straight power/competency. Not only does this system damage backwards compatibility but now it leans in the direction of breaking the 3.x multiclassing rules. Not a good start.
It might be able to work, if seen with new multiclassing or skill rules, but again this would be an even bigger step away from back-compatibility.Re: your comments on skill synergy, I don't see this as a problem. Either keeping with the initial skill synergy rules (updated to fit the 3P skill list) or using the rather nice 'aid myself' rule posted and linked to above, this is not an issue.
Peace,
tfad
|
|
I am also, quite unfortunately, against the idea of using the favored class mechanic as a boost to skill points instead of hit points. While this is a delightfully sensible mechanic in thought, in practice it means Humans (and half-elves) become utterly more skillful than most other races, with racial bonuses to skills, and the ability to choose their favored class. Every Dwarven Ranger, Gnome Druid, and low-Int Elven Rogue out there would gain nothing.
Maybe the skill-point-for-favored-class rule could subsume and replace the free skill point humans and half-elves get at every level, i.e., their versatility is demonstrated by being able to choose their favored class and would still get +1 at every level as long as they stuck with that class.
Effects: Multi-classing would result in a loss of the +1 skill point, so they might end up with a few less skill points; other races who also stayed within their race's favored classes would receive bonuses equal to that of humans; over all, humans would be a little less skillful and a little less advantaged, their uniqueness would be in being able to favor any class - does that outweigh the loss of a few skill points?
This might appeal to folks who feel humans are too appealing a choice because of all their freebies.
No worries - could we get a link to the summary thread? :) Thanks!Skill system "tweaks" summary thread
Thanks!
There's not a lot going on over there at the moment, but if it picks up I'll chime in, supporting "Virgil's Every-Other-Level Bonus". He has ideas remarkably like my own! ;)
tfad