|
I like that races get bonuses on certain skills to match each race's flavour, but what if every character would also get those skills as class skills? For example, if you want to invest your ranks in Perception, your elven fighter would get the class skill bonus on it, even though Perception is not a class skill for fighters. Any thoughts?
If you mean, instead of adding more skill points to everyone, I'd say, "YES!"
Unfortunately, when I suggested "free" ranks in racial skills to the people demanding more skill points, I received extremely negative reactions.
Those who prefer combat and wish to keep 3.P as much like 3.5 as possible oppose the increase of skill points, and generally the condensing (mangling) of the skills themselves.
Those who want 3.P to OUTSHINE 3.5 have been trying to fix the most broken parts of 3.5. I'll admit to being a cross between a power gamer and a roleplayer. I'd be just happy to blur the lines between paladin and fighter/cleric.
But I'm getting off topic for this thread. If you throw in racial class skills, then you might as well add class skills to backgrounds, like so:
[Background Name]
[Flavor Text]
[Stat Mods, maybe +1/-1]
[List of Feats, choose 1]
[List of Class Skills, choose X]
For example, all of the background feats in CotCT involve being a childhood slave of the guy with a gator. I should probably learn his name... Anyway, by the system I propose, they would all fall under a single background.
I'm not even that adamant about the stat mods, and maybe they should be Feat choices.
Back on the topic of racial class skills, I think you should choose from a list rather than flat assignment. That, or skills that benefit their favored classes. And don't forget to add more skill stuff to humans, also.
For that matter, I also support stretching the racial benefits out over level rather than as a flat starting package. This way, UnNatural Beauty could be added back to elves at a level where it didn't disrupt the game. (I'm thinking if Leadership is a 6th level feat, this is the minimum for consideration.)
Those who prefer combat and wish to keep 3.P as much like 3.5 as possible oppose the increase of skill points, and generally the condensing (mangling) of the skills themselves. Those who want 3.P to OUTSHINE 3.5 have been trying to fix the most broken parts of 3.5. I'll admit to being a cross between a power gamer and a roleplayer.
I'd say it's the opposite, in my case. Too much combat bores us to death; skills are where our game is focused. So why would I oppose more skill points? Because in a skills-heavy game, if everyone has as many points as they want, the game after 1-2 sessions isn't fun anymore (we've tried it).
Also contrary to what you'd expect, I don't oppose most of the merging; most of it makes sense to me (Stealth, for example).
I'd like for 3.P to "outshine" 3.5e in terms of usefulness and fun, but not if "outshine" means "make all the characters a lot more powerful so that we get a nifty rush the first time we use them but then realize that all our 3.5 adventures are useless without conversion." THAT would totally bum me out.
|
|
I like that races get bonuses on certain skills to match each race's flavour, but what if every character would also get those skills as class skills? For example, if you want to invest your ranks in Perception, your elven fighter would get the class skill bonus on it, even though Perception is not a class skill for fighters.That makes racial skill bonuses way too good, since it essentially turns a +2 racial bonus into a +5 bonus for the cost of 1 skill rank.
Well, rogues or bards are probably the only ones that could abuse this system. And that +5 is not actually a lot, especially if you consider that your fighter only gets 2 ranks per level. If you want to keep raising your "racial class skills", then the other class skills are neglected. But this system would give you the option to get +5 on some skills, if you want to spend ranks in them.
|
|
Unless you are a bard, ranger, or rogue, your class is not the sole determining factor in determining your skill points. For many characters, Intelligence bonus is the single biggest factor determining skills per level. So most characters with a high Intelligence score would be able to magnify their already considerable Intelligence-based skill advantage by exploiting the proposed system.
Not to mention races that get Intelligence bonuses. And races without Intelligence bonuses or racial skills that get further weakened by this rule. The proposed rule is essentially kicking the half-orc when he's down.
I'm not really concerned over characters being able to abuse skills -- not even in "extreme" cases. And that's probably the difference between us -- you're worried that giving extra skill ranks would result in certain characters being able to abuse the system, while I'm worried that the PCs at the other end of the "spectrum" with a low number of skills (i.e. fighters, sorcerers and clerics with INT 10) excel only in *two* skills or end up being "sucky" at everything.
Don't forget that Alpha 1 pretty much gave you 1/2*LVL ranks in *ALL* "untalented" class skills, which meant +10 at 20th level. And I feel that would have "freed" everybody to pick more cross-class skills, too.
I'm gonna give you a concrete example here. In 3E, we once had a TPK when *All* the 4th level characters (a sorcerer, wizard/rogue and fighter) failed their DC 15 climb checks. In fact, none of them had a single rank in Climb or Swim (wizard/rogue succeeded in Tumble had reduced the fall by 10 ft., which didn't help at all). Why was that? Because none of them had any INT bonus (not even the sorcerer, because he had invested in CON) and even the rogue had pretty much spent his points in Knowledge and Craft skills (and the fighter had his ranks in Survival and Spot). Using the PF Alpha 1 skill system, both the rogue and fighter would actually have succeeded (both failed by 1, if I recall correctly). So it was bad luck, too, but the thing is that in PF Alpha 2 and 3E certain class concepts end up being "two trick skill ponies" or "unskilled" in everything.
I can certainly understand why they decided to give you +1/2*LVL bonus to all your skills and ability checks in 4E.
Getting a faster feat progression that allows you to take extra Skill Focus feats already does this without undermining the significance of class skill lists. Also, Jason has said that he will be adding racial feats, and presumably, these too will give options to boost racial skill bonuses. There are already plenty of ways to boost cross-class skills, and since the +3 bonus is now the only difference between class and cross-class, I say it needs to stand firm.
I wonder if any players will actually spend those extra Feats in Skill Focus. I wouldn't be surprised if my players just say: "Cool! Now I can have some extra Combat/Item Creation/Divine Feats to make my guy even more powerful!". Think about it -- if you get to pick between getting +10 to BAB/AC/Saves or getting +50 ranks to your skills, how many players actually choose the latter?
|
|
I don't have the link handy, but Jason has already posted that he plans on keeping the Alpha 1 skill system as an optional rule. So changing the Alpha 2 skill system to be more like the Alpha 1 skill system would be redundant.
Oh, that's nice to hear! I think I'll personally try the Alpha 1 skill system, because my players are very excited about it.
I need not think about it. There is no rule in any d20 game I've ever seen that ever requires the choice you describe here.
I was referring to Feats -- namely, the choice between taking 'Skill Focus' or 'Talented' (+2/+2) ten times (i.e. having +30 or +40 bonus on your skills) or taking Feats which affect your BAB/AC/Saves (the latter two can be boosted with +10 points by taking Feats from 3E Splat Books). Now that you get many more Feats, I don't still think most of the players will invest in "Skill Bonus"-feats -- they will probably just pick those "maximizing" Feats to further heir BAB/AC/Saving Throws. Anyway, that's my pessimistic view on things. :)