I don't beleive that the skills at current need any further condensing for the most part.
I wouldn't be opposed to a Deception skill which combined Bluff and Disguise.
I understand the reasoning behind the fly skill, as it is supposed to be a counterpart to climb and swim in mobility skills. I do not beleive that it should be wrapped into Acrobatics. Nor do I beleive that Climb, Swim, and Jump be combined into a single skill either.
|
For what it's worth, here is the skill list I'd like to see in PRPG ;-)
Please note that I absolutly don't care about the skill names. What matters to me is wich skills are combined into new ones.-Acrobatics (Dex) = Tumble + Balance + Fly
-Athletics (Str) = Swim + Jump + Climb
-Concentration (Wis) = Concentration + Autohypnosis + Control Shape
So I would separate Concentration from Spellcraft (since you don't have to be a spellcaster to be able to concentrate) and I would tie the skill to Wisdom instead of Con.-Endurance (Con) = a new skill, used to simulate the ability to perform long term physical efforts. It would also allow to remove the feat Endurance from the game since one could emulate its effects with a successful skill check. Additionally, but it's really just a house rule of mine, an Endurance skill check could allow a dying character to stabilize by itself.
-Deception (Cha) = Disguise + Bluff
-Leger demain (Dex) = Sleight of hand + Escape artist (+ Use Ropes but it's already been removed). The perfect skill for the street magician!
-Open lock (Dex) I would not combine it with Disable Device because I don't think the two skills work the same way. I think that Disable Device, Int based, is more a matter of cleverness than an finger agility contest.
-Disable Device (Int) I would keep this skill separated from Open lock for the reason above. Another reason isthat I think, with the removal of Search, that there would be too few Int based skills for rogues.
-Perception (Wis) = Spot + Listen. Perception would not include Search wich was based on Int
-Intimidate (Str) I would make this skill Str based because I think physical intimidation is always easier than subtle intimidation. That said, a feat could allow to swich Strengh for Charisma (in fact that's just the opposite of what appears in the alpha^^)
Concerning the other skills, I would keep the list presented in Alpha 2.
Alright, to comment on some of your skills:
Athletics and Acrobatics - I agree 100% with you there.
Endurance - I initially thought of adding it as a new skill, too, and also folding Concentration into it as well (because it was CON-based in 3E). However, then I considered how it would affect the existing "Ability Check system", and CON-checks specifically -- you could use it for too many things and it would also make all the spellcasters "stamina freaks" (at least if compared to high-CON PCs without this skill). My biggest concern was that it would probably invalidate some uses of the FORT saving throws, which would make it all too useful as a skill. Besides, it would affect the prerequisites for a number of Prestige Classes and without it 'Diehard' is way too easy to acquire.
Concentration - A nice idea, and I like it in theory. This is pretty much of what I had planned to do with a skill I call 'Discipline', but then I thought that Autohypnosis is just way too good to fold into Concentration. Not to mention that if *every* spellcaster (Paladins included) could "memorize" the tiniest details and use the other aspects of Autohypnosis, I think it would be... plain odd? So I'm not sure what to do with it either, but I definitely agree with you that Concentration should be separated from Spellcraft.
Legerdemain - I wouldn't want all pickpockets or jugglers being automatically "stage magicians" or "contortionists" as well. On the other hand, it would work for most PCs pretty well, so I think this idea has merit.
Intimidation - After considering this for a while, I have to agree. Indeed, under the "usual" circumstances, especially in a "proto-medieval" setting, I would imagine most people using the threat of violence to intimidate others instead of subtle and veiled threats.
Open Locks - I definitely partly disagree with you there -- I agree with your points, but I would still merge it into Disable Device or Sleight of Hand just for the sake of ease.
Deception - This was my initial idea, too, but then again I'm not sure whether I want every character who is good at lying being a master at disguises as well -- it doesn't feel realistic (at least if we're talking about NPCs). Yet in 3E Bluff gave you +2 Synergy Bonus on your Disguise Checks (when acting in character), so this idea is not so far-fetched after all. It's just that I'm not sure how many skills you can merge before every character (PC and NPC alike) become unrealistically competent in far too many skills with all too few skill ranks.
NOTE: I wouldn't mind seeing the DCs for some of the ability checks being downplayed, *or* some sort of level-based bonus being added to them, because now it's all too frustrating when your STR 30 character can't break through a normal locked door. I think I can understand why the 4E designers decided to include that +1/2*LVL bonus to all skill and ability checks.
|
|
Does anyone recall which skill governs Astrology/Astronomy in 3.5? I think both of those skills were part of Profession (Astrologer) back in 3.0, but that always felt way a bit odd, because I think it should have been an academic science (i.e. Knowledge) instead of ordinary profession. Did 'Complete Divine' address these skills?
Maybe I should include both Astrology and Astronomy in Knowledge (The Planes) and change it into Knowledge (Cosmology)?
I put Astrolgy/Astronomy into Knowledge (The Planes) => Knowledge (Astrology).
I thought it was a nice addition to the old skill.
Another condensing proposal:
Craft & Profession into the skill: Trade (none or INT).
That way the skill list get's just one point more clearviewable.
Just choose a craft or profession and use the normal rules for it.
Does anyone recall which skill governs Astrology/Astronomy in 3.5? I think both of those skills were part of Profession (Astrologer) back in 3.0, but that always felt way a bit odd, because I think it should have been an academic science (i.e. Knowledge) instead of ordinary profession. Did 'Complete Divine' address these skills?
Maybe I should include both Astrology and Astronomy in Knowledge (The Planes) and change it into Knowledge (Cosmology)?
The only thing I know of that addresses it (and I've used it in a Realms campaign) is the Astrological Forecasting feat from MWP's Legends of the Twins Dragonlance book, which allows you to use astrological abilities using a Knowledge (Arcana) check.
One of the Dragon Magazines made it its own skill actually.
|
|
I put Astrolgy/Astronomy into Knowledge (The Planes) => Knowledge (Astrology).
I thought it was a nice addition to the old skill.Another condensing proposal:
Craft & Profession into the skill: Trade (none or INT).
That way the skill list get's just one point more clearviewable.
Just choose a craft or profession and use the normal rules for it.
Yep -- I think Trade would finally remove the "Is it Craft or Profession?"-dilemma. And the funny thing is that quite often it's a matter of perspective, and implementing new subskills may even lead to arguments with players ("No, that's definitely a Profession, because I'm not producing anything and I want to base it on WIS and not INT!"). I've even debated over whether you can take Profession (Soldier) as a skill and what you can accomplish with it (IMO it's not a "viable" Profession in D&D and neither is Profession (Dragonslayer)). Having one skill to govern all sorts of vocations would simplify the system a lot.
BTW, I would base Trade on WIS, since WIS governs memory, "common sense" and intuition (which are, IMO, far more important to a craftsman like a weaponsmith or blacksmith than intellectual capacity).
|
My turn. Here's what I would change ...
Acrobatics (Dex) - Balance + Tumble + Escape Artist, no Jump
Acrobatics could also incorporate Fly if characters have that ability because it is a Dex skill that deals with maneuverability, but should probably stay its own skill because it is a different form of locomotion. And what is Escape Artist used for? To slip bonds and squeeze into tight places, to wriggle. And who can do that better than an acrobat?
Athletics (Str) - Run + Jump + Climb, no Swim
Craft (Int)
[See my description of Profession first.] For me, Craft isn't about a trade; that's Profession. Craft is about making specific items. Profession (blacksmith) covers all the regular blacksmithing stuff but you'd been Craft (bells) or Craft (blades) because those are unusual things for a blacksmith. A person with Profession (weaponsmith) wouldn't need Craft (blades) but she might need Craft (horseshoes). For adventures it would be a way to make or repair certain items without needing to become a professional. A soldier can fix his sword without being a full on blacksmith, a wizard can carve a wand without being a carpenter, etc. Forgeries strike me as one of these unusual creations.
Deception (Cha) - Bluff + Disguise + Gather Information, no Disguise, no Forgery, no Sense Motive
Deception (I like the name) would work for lying, feinting, sending secret messages, etc. Disguise is a little different but doesn't get used enough to merit its own skill. Sense Motive would remain separate skill and Forgery would become Craft (forgery). Because a person could reasonably use deception to wander around town and ask questions, pretending to be someone they're not or just generally being sly, I would add Gather Information skills to Deception without taking it away from Diplomacy.
Diplomacy (Cha) - Diplomacy + Gather Information
Both function as in Pathfinder Alpha 1, however, being diplomatic isn't the only way to gather information. I would add Gather Information to Deception and Intimidate as well.
Discipline (Wis) - Concentration + new stuff
This would almost be like Will save, the skill. It could represent training or just personal focus. There is a role for Concentration outside of Spellcraft; a skillful mage could still balk under pressure. And rogues or anyone else trying to perform a skill in combat or under pressure should still have to see if their concentration holds. I'd love a trance-like mechanic where a fighter could get 'in the zone' and pick up some benefits, like a +1 to hit or unlock some ability. Finally, Discipline would be a great skill for NPCs to help determine when they break ranks and run or accept brides or do something else against their orders.
Fly (Dex)
Most people will never use this so why should itbother them to keep it separate? Different forms of locomotion should be kept separate.
Heal (Wis)
I like the new Treat Deadly Wound use in Alpha 2.
Intimidate (Str) - Intimidate + Gather Information
First, change Intimidate to a Str skill; we already have several ways to influence people's behavior based on Cha, now giving someone else a way to influence people. Intimidation is a nice fit for ugly, uncharismatic brutes. I would also add a feat called "Clever Interrogator" that gives a +2 bonus and allows characters to use Int instead of Str (somewhat similar to Intimidating Prowess in Alpha 1). Second, because a person could reasonably use intimidation to wander around town and ask questions, threatening folks or just being a bully, I would add the Gather Information skills to Intimidate without taking it away from Diplomacy.
Knowledge (Int) - Knowledge + Decipher Script
I like the knowledge versus technical skills relationship with Knowledge (arcana) and Spellcraft. I would assume clerics have something similar between Knowledge (religion) and Spellcraft. Rogues have Knowledge (local). Instead of Decipher Script as a separate skill or part of a new skill called "Linguistics," just make "Knowledge (linguistics)" that helps characters identify unknown languages, know who speaks them, and try to decipher them.
The other half of Linguistics - learning languages - has always been a problem for me. It's just too easy to learn languages in 3.5. I would suggest pulling languages out of skills entirely. Characters already have opportunities to learn languages at level one with their Int bonus and if they increase their Int as they advance in levels, they can add more. If people really want to learn a new language, make each language a feat. Feats are a lot closer to the level of commitment required to learn a language than 1 skill point.
Open Locks (Dex)
This is one of rogues' signature skills. With all those skill points, rogues can afford to spend points on both Disable Device and Open Locks. And if someone is cross-classing to get these skills, I don't want them getting both abilities so cheaply. But I suppose I can live with it merged into Disable Device :(
Perception (Wis) - 6 sense - Search
I would a little intuition to Perception. I think there's room for a bit of 6th sense, kind of a tingling Spider-sense that's a little DM initiated ("She tells you her story - roll a d20 - but you get the feeling she's leaving something out.").
Profession (Int or maybe Wis?)
To a certain degree, you could just Profession everything and call it a day; Profession (fighter), Profession (cleric), Profession (wizard), etc. For the adventuring classes, it's worth it to separate out their individual skills, but for a farmer or a baker, it's probably not worth it. One skill, Profession (farmer), contains all the knowledge and the skills needed for a farmer to do whatever farmers do. Nothing else is really needed unless the farmer is good at some un-farmerly things. So maybe Profession stays really general - "everything a __ knows and can do" - and is a non-class skill for everyone except Experts (Commoners could take profession ranks, but would be slowed way down, as they should be). Because it's mostly non-adventurey stuff, PCs could take a few ranks for flavor, but it wouldn't really help them much in a dungeon.
Search (Int)
I strongly believe Search needs to stay separate from Perception. Perception seems to me to be mostly passive, what characters notice. But Search is active, "I search the room for clues," or "I search the library for a book on demons." It is also based on Int. A smart person can search well, even if she isn't particularly perceptive, because she can figure out clues and patterns and recognize when things are out of place.
Sense Ruse (Wis) - Sense Motive
I would rename it "Sense Ruse" because it doesn't just deal with motives anymore; it counters lies and bluffs and disguises, etc. This is too useful a skill to lump in with Perception or Deception, and not everyone who is good at those things is going to be good at spotting lies or deceit.
Sneak (Dex) - Stealth
Spellcraft (Int) - Spellcraft, no Concentration
I would keep Concentration separate.
Survival (Wis)
My only other thought is that it would be interesting to see different environments taken into consideration in Survival. Surviving in the arctic is different than surviving in the desert. Maybe with each rank a character could add an environment to their list. They take a -5 penalty when trying to use their survival skills in an unknown environment (kind of like the -5 penalty you take for trying to ride an unsuitable mount).
Swim (Str)
Not all athletes are swimmers and not all swimmers are athletes. Different forms of locomotion should be kept separate.
Thievery (Dex) - Sleight of Hand +
I actually like the Theft skill for Alpha 1 because it is like the rogue's Spellcraft. No Open Locks but picking pockets, palming small objects, shell games, hiding things on you person, legerdemain, etc.
Use/Disable Magical Device (Cha) - Use Magic Device + magical traps
I added the word "Disable" because it seems like in many adventures, PCs have to shut down the eldritch device before it's too late. Mostly they use magic stuff, but sometimes they want to sabotage it as well. If a rogue were trying to disable a magical trap, I would make them use this skill instead of the regular Disable Device. Even if the word "Disable"? isn't in the skill title, I think a bit about disabling in the skill description would be nice. Plus, "Use/Disable" goes nicely with the next one ...
Use/Disable Mechanical Device (Int) - Disable Device - magical traps, no Open Locks
Characters may run into enough complex mechanical devices that a skill check would be useful. Mostly this is a way to expand Disable Device into something more than just foiling traps without adding Open Locks. It includes foiling traps, but also sabotaging clockworks and rigging non-magical machines to malfunction. As noted above in Use/Disable Magical Device, I would pull disabling magical traps out of here and add it there.
One other thing. LongreachJones posted this back in the Alpha 1 forums. I thought it was brilliant. It's from the Player's Guide to Arcanis and applies to Perform, but I also think it has bearing on Knowledge and maybe Craft/Profession.
1 - Generalize
Say you placed 5 ranks in Perform(Dance), this has the advantage of giving you the ability to perform any kind of dance with at least a modicum of skill. If you were asked to perform any kind of ballroom dance, you could probably do it, but because of your generalized education in dance, the DC might be 5 higher or 15 using my statement above. If instead you were asked to perform the classic ballroom dance called the Tango, this is a very specific request and would probably warrant a DC20 check.2 - Specialize
Consider instead maybe having those 5 ranks in Perform(Dance:Ballroom). With this specialized training, Ballroom dancing is now a simple DC10 and to recall the specific knowledge to do the Tango with precision, you are now looking at a DC15 which is much easier to do than with generalization. On the down side however, of you were requested to do any non-ballroom dance, the DC would also be 15 as your specialized training locks you into certain patterns. The same is also true of being asked to do a specific dance from another discipline, you are probably going to be left out with another DC20.3 - Subspecialize
Now somewhere out there, there is probably some rosethorn poisoned purist who has 5 ranks in Perform(Dance:Ballroom:Tango). In the examples given, he would have to make a DC15 for any non-tango ballroom dance and a DC20 if he were asked to dance something that did not come from a ballroom setting. On the other hand, if the task of dancing the perfect tango is the order of the day, this is probably your man.
Make Concentration seperate from Spellcraft again and roll in Autohypnosis and Control Shape? Agree! (Although I think it should remain based on Constitution.)
Keep Sense Motive seperate from Bluff? Agree! (I was one of the strogest supporters of this.)
Add Swim and Jump into Athletics? Agree!
Add Spellcraft and Use Magic Device together? Agree!
Add Sleight of Hand and Escape Artist together for Legerdemain? Agree!
Make a new Knowledge skill (Cosmology) covering the Planes, Astronomy and Astrology? Could Work!
Fly is a special case for me... our group hasn't had a chance to playtest this yet, but I kind of like the idea behind it. You know, being able to temporarily increase your speed or perform aerial maneuvers. I'll drop back in we had a chance to test it.
Make Concentration seperate from Spellcraft again and roll in Autohypnosis and Control Shape? Agree! (Although I think it should remain based on Constitution.)Um, I think Autohypnosis should definitely be based on WIS -- being good at memorizing stuff, for instance, makes no sense based on CON.
Dang it, your right. I was thinking mainly of Concentration and Control Shape. Hmmm. It's debatable.
I don't know about the rest of the forum, but I'd like to see the skills condensed a little bit more (I'd especially like to see the skills that were separated in Alpha 2 re-condensed). I liked thieving and deception a lot (a liar can usually spot a liar).
I know they aren't particularly related, but could swim possibly be merged with climb? Swim seems like a little bit silly of a skill because, in most games I've played, nobody buys it, or they buy one rank in it just to say that they know how to do it. same with climb. If they were merged, they'd at least sort of approach being worth taking. with all the magic in the game, it's not like it's a balance issue.
What do the rest of you think? Anything else that should be merged? Agree/Disagree?
I disagree completely, as a matter of fact, im not even in favor of alpha 1 skill condensation. I think it detracts from the customization of the game, and i dont think certain skills exactly relate to themselves so much, i really dont see an issue with skills and wish people would stop messing with them.
Concentration/Autohypnosis/Control Shape would all work very well with WIS, SINCE: Wisdom incorporates Willpower, and that's all about.
One of the Dragon Magazines made it its own skill actually.Do you remember which issue?
Took some searching, Dragon Issue #140
I'm sorry that should be Dragon Issue #340 not 140...
The idea of integrating Gather Information into Diplomacy, Bluff/Deception and Intimidate.
I've actually divorced Gather Info from all of those and have rolled it in with Knowledge (local) -- which used to give it a synergy bonus, you'll recall -- into a "Streetwise (Cha)" skill. Likewise, I've combined Concentration with Autohypnosis, and merged Spellcraft with Knowledge (arcana) (I was never clear on the "flavor" difference, and again, they were a synergy pair anyway).
Ok, I'll give it a try:
1) Craft/Profession. I think a distinction is unnecessary. Make it one skill called Trade, and let the players be creative about taking specializations. As a DM, don't let it be too general or "too useful" (i.e. any proposal from the old two skills is ok).
The Trade skill should be for earning money when maintaining a shop or some other similar thing. While a craft skill might be more useful from time to time, this is perfectly ok, I guess.
2) I would still call it Concentration (WIS), since Discipline might also sound like being usefull against fear effects, intimidations or interrogations, and this shouldn't be.
3) Spellcraft and Knowledge (Arcana) should always be separated. Spellcraft is about activily using/interfering with magic (thus you need to be a spellcaster), while Knowledge (Arcana) is "just" an academical skill about history, creatures and theories of magic (every scholar could learn this).
But I see the point in merging those, since PF already mixed them a bit (which I don't like actually).
I solved this in merging Detect Magic into Spellcraft and only allowed magical active characters to actually train this skill.
4) While I like the merging of Diplomacy and Gather Info, I more and more come to the point to make those two skills again. As you already said, there are various ways to gather informations. You could go around spend some drinks and asks some questions, grap some low-lives in the backalley and scare the infos out of them or fast-talk somebody for the infos without them realizing they said anything interesting.
Actually, Gather info shouldn't be a skill, but a general option usable by any of the three "main-interaction" skills. Maybe each with a little different approach and outcome (aka different rules).
|
|
3) Spellcraft and Knowledge (Arcana) should always be separated. Spellcraft is about activily using/interfering with magic (thus you need to be a spellcaster), while Knowledge (Arcana) is "just" an academical skill about history, creatures and theories of magic (every scholar could learn this).
I agree with this.
4) While I like the merging of Diplomacy and Gather Info, I more and more come to the point to make those two skills again. As you already said, there are various ways to gather informations. You could go around spend some drinks and asks some questions, grap some low-lives in the backalley and scare the infos out of them or fast-talk somebody for the infos without them realizing they said anything interesting.
Actually, Gather info shouldn't be a skill, but a general option usable by any of the three "main-interaction" skills. Maybe each with a little different approach and outcome (aka different rules).
Now this is a totally cool idea, having 'gather information' be a function of Bluff, Diplomacy or Intimidate!
I agree that Concentration should remain named such. DracoDruid's reasoning is sound. And I have been sold on changing it to be based on WIS.
I think that the reason that they based it on CON originally is just so that they could have something based on that ability. (And I kind of want at least one skill per ability, too.)
Mabye an Endurance skill isn't such a bad idea. It could allow you to take full actions at 0 hit points without risk... or allow you to stay conscious at negative hit points. Someone suggested being able to use it to stabalize yourself; an idea I like. Most of the difficulties involved would probably rather high, though. (Except taking full actions at 0 hit points- I can see that at DC 10.)
Knowledge (Arcana) and Spellcraft should always remain seperate? Agree!
Make Gather Info a function of the three "social skills" (Bluff, Diplomacy and Intimidate)? Could Work.
I think that Diplomacy should remain the most effective, though.
|
|
Knowledge (Arcana) and Spellcraft should always remain seperate? Agree!
Make Gather Info a function of the three "social skills" (Bluff, Diplomacy and Intimidate)? Could Work.
I think that Diplomacy should remain the most effective, though.
I've told players on several occasions that they could use one or another skill, but the DC would be different.
Walk into a room and have a chance to Spot something odd about the mirror on the wall? DC 25 or higher, depending on lighting and position.
Actively Search for something 'suspicious' in the room? DC 20-ish to notice something hinky about the reflection in the mirror.
Specifically checking the mirror out with the Search skill or attempting to Appraise it? DC 15 or so to notice that the glass isn't glass...
|
|
I know my skill list post above is really long, but if anyone has a chance, can I get some feedback on two things:
1) My Craft/Profession distinction.
2) The idea of integrating Gather Information into Diplomacy, Bluff/Deception and Intimidate.
Thanks,
Mosaic
2) That's actually a pretty good idea, and one that I've also wrestled with. I think I would allow it in situation in which interaction is possible and you have the opportunity to get that information from a specific individual (i.e. you either bluff, coerce or intimidate the person to give what you want). However, for some reason I'm a bit reluctant to have three different CHA-based skills to achieve the same end, although I'm well aware that Gather Information, as a skill, is little else but a way to advance the plot. Especially as you can get that same result also from using your Knowledge skills (e.g. History or Local could very well provide you with pretty much the same facts). I also nurtured the idea of a new skill called 'Intrigue', which would merge Gather Information and Disguise, but I gave up on it (it would work for a "spies only"-type of campaign, though). Another possibility would be 'Streetwise', which would merge Knowledge (Local) and Gather Information, but then again I think that Knowledge (Local) has its own place in the system (i.e. it represents "common knowledge" that everyone may know about their local region). However, I think 'Streetwise' and Knowledge (Local) would be too similar to exist simultaneously, so I'm not so sure about this either. So I'm a bit undecided on this matter, but I'm leaning towards your method. :)
|
|
By the way, do you think that seducing someone should fall under Diplomacy or Bluff or both? In True20 you can use Bluff to "lie" that you care about someone, but why couldn't you also charm him/her with Diplomacy? It would seem reasonable to me.
Having said that, maybe it would be best if all of these CHA-based social skills would be categorized/"tagged" as "Interaction skills" that enable you to achieve the same kinds of results (in most situations) but just with different methods and different kinds of consequences? For example, you could use any of these skills to prompt a commoner mob to action -- either by lying to them (Bluff), inspiring or reasoning with them (Diplomacy) or frightening/threatening them (Intimidation)? Just as you could try to bargain or negotiate with someone with any of them. Let's say I choose to use Bluff, and I'm going to "aid" my check with Intimidate (i.e. a roll against DC 10 to get the +2 synergy bonus) which would mean that I'm using trickery and lies to get what I want, with less-than-subtly veiled threats -- whatever the long-term consequences will be in the story, I might succeed in my immediate goal just as well as I had used Diplomacy.
Of course, there should probably be a table that would list some examples of which skill would qualify in different kinds of social situations... (e.g. you couldn't use Intimidation to seduce someone).
Feel free to comment, people! :)
|
Of course, there should probably be a table that would list some examples of which skill would qualify in different kinds of social situations... (e.g. you couldn't use Intimidation to seduce someone).
Feel free to comment, people! :)
Regarding Intimidate - you can certainly use it to have people be intimate with you. In the workplace, it is a major concern that someone in authority will try to ask for sexual favors in order for the employee to keep their job.
So, pretty much any Interaction skill could be used in any interaction, but you are correct, the long term effects probably differ. For example, using Intimidate might work the first time, but the person would likely avoid you, and while they may 'act friendly', they won't be. They'll be working at getting you killed if possible. And that pretty much would be true for any type of 'intimidate' to get what you want.
|
|
Of course, there should probably be a table that would list some examples of which skill would qualify in different kinds of social situations... (e.g. you couldn't use Intimidation to seduce someone).
Feel free to comment, people! :)
Regarding Intimidate - you can certainly use it to have people be intimate with you. In the workplace, it is a major concern that someone in authority will try to ask for sexual favors in order for the employee to keep their job.
That's true, but that (using Intimidate for such purposes) is closer to rape than what I actually meant (seducing as in "making someone fall for you" -- not just making someone have sex with you).
|
|
I suppose that is mostly true, some psycology aside.
I guess the way that Intimidate works, having someone *act* friendly for a period of time is the way I think it should work. For example, you could be really nice to the nerd at your school and he might do your homework, or you could threaten to beat him up and he might do your homework. In the first case, he might later save you from a burning building. In the second case, he might set a building on fire hoping you'll burn.
But either way he does your homework, so it's just a question of whether you're really afraid of him. (Assuming that it was about getting what you wanted in the first place, rather than just being a generally good person).
|
|
I agree that picking up new languages has become too easy. In my 3.75 skill playtest we used the following (sorry if you have read it elsewhere in a similar post)...
Language (INT)
Common Languages: You start play knowing Common and your native language plus an additional number of known languages equal to your starting Intelligence bonus. For every 5 ranks in this skill, a character can add an additional known language. A character is not required to make skill checks with a known language. A character is considered literate in any known language (with the exception of the Barbarian class; they must spend an additional 2 ranks in this skill to be considered literate).
Decipher Language (Trained Only): You can attempt to communicate with a target whose language is not known by you. The difficulty varies depending on the complexity of the idea or concept you are trying to communicate. The base DC is 15 for simple messages, while a more complex idea may be DC 30. If the check succeeds, you are able to briefly communicate with the target.
Decipher Script (Trained Only): You can decipher writing in an unfamiliar language or a message written in an incomplete or archaic form. The base DC is 20 for the simplest messages, 25 for standard texts, and 30 or higher for intricate, exotic, or very old writing.
If the check succeeds, you understand the general content of a piece of writing about one page long (or the equivalent). If the check fails, make a DC 5 Wisdom check to see if you avoid drawing a false conclusion about the text. (Success means that you do not draw a false conclusion; failure means that you do.) Both the Decipher Script check and (if necessary) the Wisdom check are made secretly, so that you can’t tell whether the conclusion you draw is true or false. Deciphering the equivalent of a single page of script takes 1 minute (ten consecutive full-round actions).
For an explanation of what defines a "trained" skill...
Trained vs. Untrained
A character that has 5 or more ranks in a given skill is considered trained in that skill. Certain skills have applications that can only be used if a character is considered trained.
Try it if you like it.
|
|
2) I think I would allow it in situation in which interaction is possible and you have the opportunity to get that information from a specific individual (i.e. you either bluff, coerce or intimidate the person to give what you want). However, for some reason I'm a bit reluctant to have three different CHA-based skills to achieve the same end...
I've always preferred Intimidate based on Str for exactly that reason, something not based on Cha.
Oh, and my wife assures me that there should be a skill called Flirt, because getting someone to fall for you isn't exactly Diplomacy (sounds too much like negotiation) but it isn't a Bluff either.
|
|
Oh, and my wife assures me that there should be a skill called Flirt, because getting someone to fall for you isn't exactly Diplomacy (sounds too much like negotiation) but it isn't a Bluff either.
Well, Rolemaster has skills for Adrenalin Control, Perspiration, every single fighting style and whatnot -- I wouldn't want to go that far in the PF skill system, so some level of compromise has to be made between simulation and playability. And every skill in Harnmaster is affected by three different abilities (including all the senses -- e.g. attacking with a dagger is derived from your Touch, Agility and Dexterity, if I remember correctly). So I would not add a new skill called 'Flirt' into the game. ;)
|
|
I've always preferred Intimidate based on Str for exactly that reason, something not based on Cha.
I would rather see it as a STR or CHA. You have to admit there are different ways to intimidate, and strenght-based (showing your raw strength as an imminent threat to your well-being) and charisma-based (describing the most horrific fate you are about to witness) are the ones.
|
|
I imagined a feat called Clever Interrogator or something that would make Intimidate a class skill if it isn't, give a +2 bonus, and allow characters to use Int instead of Str as the base ability score.
I think what you describe could be Int instead of Cha, or there could be a similar feat to make it Cha (maybe called "Very Persuasive).
IN general, I like feat that allow you to use different key ability scores, although that's a pretty weak feat. Maybe as a skill trick?
Hey, what about that? Someone suggested a +2 skill point bonus to fill dead levels (2,6,10,14,18 - no feat, no ability bump but not really 'dead'). What about a free skill trick at those levels. Skill tricks aren't quite feats but they allow you to use old skills in a new way or tweak it somehow ... like switching the key ability!
I say - Skill Tricks in Pathfinder!
|
|
I don't know if they're 'core' or not. If they're not open content, I don't know how they'll 'fit'.
I'm pretty sure they are not. They came out in Complete Scoundrel, so that means they are not OGL. But they could be re-invented quite easily - call'em Knacks or Skill Variations or Skill Applications or something.
I too think that being "well-build" is more benefitting than being charming or influental.
So I would rule Intimidate as a STR skill too (remember the MAIN part will be the skill rank, so it's not that big deal).
And about Flirt: I use the True20 version and there it's a part of Bluff (called Seduction). Actually quite fitting, not?
|
I can agree with a certain level of condensing, but it should be simple and easy to follow from an outsider perspective. If something disappears, it should be obvious where to find it (ie - jump as acrobatics)
Quick thoughts:
1) The Rogue is the "skill" class. Condensing too much takes away that appeal. You should never be able to make a spymaster with a wizard as easily as a rogue.
2) If we have appraise and craft, do we need profession? Do you need to take a skill to represent that your character is a good accountant? For that matter, why isn't appraise tied to craft? Shouldn't a character with Craft(jewelry) be able to appraise them?
3) If we combine bluff and disguise, can we seperate Feint from Bluff? It seems odd to me that a combat move tied to ducking and weaving is based on a linguistic skill.
The point? Find out where it makes sense, but don't condense for the purpose of merely reducing the number of skills, as it makes for a whole range of changes that need to be made to keep the balance.
You are mentioning some good points here.
1) Right. Rogues should be build around skills. But since all other classes have special abilities for their main purpose, rogues should define themselves for being "skill-monkey" via unique class features (aka. skill related abilities. At least more than combat related!)
F.e.: Why the F*CK is skill focus no rogue talent?!
2) As I mentioned. Craft and Profession should just be one skill (Trade). With the appraise use for appropriate goods build inside. The actual appraise skill should be about appraising unknown treasures and their approximatly value on the (black) market. I thought about renaming this skill into Knowledge (Treasures & Antiquities)
3) Yes and yes. Bluff and Disguise make a formidable Deception skill (I will roll Forgery (Documents) into it too). Feint should finally be made a combat maneuver since it's much more helpful to be a decent combatant than just a good lyer! (I know bluff is about bodylanguage too, but it changes nothing)
I too think that being "well-build" is more benefitting than being charming or influental.
So I would rule Intimidate as a STR skill too (remember the MAIN part will be the skill rank, so it's not that big deal).
The scariest person I ever met was in the army: a small, wiry guy of no great musculature. But he never smiled -- except his eyes lit up a bit when he was cleaning weaponry. His voice always sounded like it was rusty from disuse. He intimidated WAY better than a roomful of body builders. STR? I disagree, actually. CHA? Hmmmm... not as good a fit, either. I just don't know about this one.
But would he'd be even scarries with the muscles too?
I think this guy just had A LOT ranks in intimidate. And maybe a feat?
But would he'd be even scarries with the muscles too?
No; they would have just gotten in the way when he pulled a weapon. If he were unarmed and you braced him, I have a feeling he'd just wait until evening and then poison your mess.
I think this guy just had A LOT ranks in intimidate. And maybe a feat?
He was 18 years old. He had no ranks, I think. He had no feelings, either. You looked in his eyes and realized that there was no one home. Killing you or not killing you would be a matter of almost total indifference.
Like there should be an alignment modifier, instead of a stat one. But that doesn't work well in D&D, so we're back to Str vs. Cha, I guess.
|
|
I came across an old character sheet (3.0) and that PC had a skill called 'Profession (Gambler)' -- it reminded me that I don't think any other skill would cover gambling? Bluff definitely not (it should give synergy bonus to it) but I don't think I've ever seen any rulebook mentioning any skill related to games of chance? Correct me if I'm wrong. :)
I came across an old character sheet (3.0) and that PC had a skill called 'Profession (Gambler)' -- it reminded me that I don't think any other skill would cover gambling? Bluff definitely not (it should give synergy bonus to it) but I don't think I've ever seen any rulebook mentioning any skill related to games of chance? Correct me if I'm wrong. :)
I used to use Bluff, if they're playing poker, but eventually went with Profession (Gambler). It's a tough call, because all the PCs feel like they should be good gamblers, but none of them want to spend the skill points on it.
|
|
I came across an old character sheet (3.0) and that PC had a skill called 'Profession (Gambler)' -- it reminded me that I don't think any other skill would cover gambling? Bluff definitely not (it should give synergy bonus to it) but I don't think I've ever seen any rulebook mentioning any skill related to games of chance? Correct me if I'm wrong. :)I used to use Bluff, if they're playing poker, but eventually went with Profession (Gambler). It's a tough call, because all the PCs feel like they should be good gamblers, but none of them want to spend the skill points on it.
Tell me about it -- the character in question was a Dwarf Fighter who had WIS 7 and CHA 8 (and no ranks in Bluff or Sense Motive). Needless to say that he sucked at gambling... once even losing half the party's "utility" magic items in a game! :D
Tell me about it -- the character in question was a Dwarf Fighter who had WIS 7 and CHA 8 (and no ranks in Bluff or Sense Motive). Needless to say that he sucked at gambling... once even losing half the party's "utility" magic items in a game! :D
The big gambler in our 3.5 group turned out to be the wizard -- with his Int, he had skills to burn, so he took ranks in Profession (gambler), Profession (minining engineer), and Craft (winemaking) just to spite the rogue (who had to keep Search, etc. maxed out).
That's why I have a problem with general INT-bonus skill points. For Knowledge skills, no problem, but if a wizards starts a career as brewer, gambler, mechanic and IDK hunter/survivalist and athlete, BESIDE stuying MAGIC! That's just not fitting...