Hi all,
New to the site but know Paizo products.
The one issue which I can see is that of the characters starting skills.
The Rogue gets a massive starting bonus on skills ( 8+int x 4= minimum of 32) whilst many of the other core classes ( fighters,clerics,wizards) all still start with very limited skill points (only 2+int points x 4= minimum of 8), a difference of 26.
Previously with Rogues needing to cover up to 12 skills(spot, listen, Hide, move silently, Search, Open Locks, Disable Device, Gather info plus possibly Climb, Swim, tumble and Jump) he needed these skill points.
As there is only Six skills (Stealth, Perception, Disable Device, Diplomacy, Climb, Swim ) he shouldn't need the 8 Skill points anymore and should be down to 6.
As I have seen in many games any character who is going to Fighter turned Rogue is inhibited as follows:-
Rogue turned Fighter Gets All the Weapon & Armour Proficiencies, lots of skills( from being a 1st level Rogue).
Fighter Turned Rogue gets all the Weapon & Armour Proficiencies but much less skill points.
Personally I was tempted to give ALL characters 4 skill points plus intelligence x 3 to build the character with at 1st level with no hinderence as to class and cross class then 1 levels worth of class skills.
What do people think? Please mail me at prossersteve@hotmail.com or just follow my thread.
|
To go one step further, a Fighter 1/Rogue 1 now has as many skill points as a Rogue 1/Fighter 1 (8+Int+2+Int) or (2+Int+8+Int). There is one minor issue where a character with rogue 2nd could choose to advance some 'rogue skills' by 2 ranks, having 4 skills with +2 ranks, while the level 1 rogue must have 8 skills with +1 ranks... But that is a minor issue and for the most part, the new skill point system in Alpha 3 works very well.
Since you're in the PRPG thread, you should be made aware that under PRPG there is no 1st level x4 multiplier. Rogues get 8+Int, Fighter gets 2+Int. All Class skills get +3 bonus, even when you multiclass.I'm just getting into the rules and still trying to find the changes that are being made, and nowhere near understanding them yet. With a few exceptions, I'm loving it so far.
So, with that said, what was the reason for dropping the times four? If it isn't a straight forward, easy answer, links in the right direction would be just as welcome. This isn't a change I disagree with, just one I don't understand well enough to have an opinion on.
Thanks.
I believe the reason for dropping the x4 is twofold.
1. With fewer skills, due to condensing, a balance must be kept with the # of skills vs. the # of skill points. getting rid of the x4 kept the balance. Otherwise characters would have way too many points to use on too few skills.
2. Ease of use. Calculating skills for high level NPC's and the # of max ranks was a pain and took too long. Distributing points for NPC's was by far the longest, weariest part of NPC creation. Dropping the x4 and making the max ranks = to lvl, means less calculations and less referencing to charts. It's Quick, clean and easy now!
|
So, with that said, what was the reason for dropping the times four? If it isn't a straight forward, easy answer, links in the right direction would be just as welcome. This isn't a change I disagree with, just one I don't understand well enough to have an opinion on.
The idea is to make creating characters and NPCs easier. They eliminated both the x4 and the cross class skill penalty to raising skills. Instead you get a +3 class skill bonus on any class skill you take ranks in. So a first level character with ranks in all class skills has the equivalent of 4x skill ranks.
1) Leveling up you just add a rank to anything which is nice
2) NPCs or PCs can be made quickly by giving the ranks equal to character's level in x+INT bonus skills then adding the +3 class skill bonus where appropriate.
3) No more 1/2 ranks!
There are so many threads on this I don't know where to put this! So I chose this one first!
I like the combining of skills but I'm no so
sure about eliminating the Skill Point system. The
Pathfinder System makes it essentially so that you are
maxed out in skill points in any skill you choose. So
essentially any PC on the same level as another PC
with the same Class Skill are equal except for their
ability score modifier. So in other words a Rouge with
Stealth at 1st level has a 18 DEX. Well what Rouge
does not have a maxed DEX? So every other Rouge at 1st
Level has the same exact modifiers? Same with every
other level. That is fine, I play fighters a whole
lot, but it makes Skills look a lot like Feats.
Skills - Ability Scores: The new Skill system seems to
make DEX a necessity (i.e what about all those DEX =
12/+1 fighters in full plate?) There is only one STR
related Skill; Climb. Combining the skills also means
making the "best" choice on what ability score to tie
to the new combined skill but I think its worth
talking about.
As for the concentration threads out there - I agree; it needs to be kept. It is, at least, an essential mechanic for spellcasters and those attacking spellcasters (one of my favorite hobbies when delving into combat).
The obvious options are to housefule some stuff, stay
with the "old" D&D v3.5 Skill system or just use what
Pathfinder has.
These issues certainly are not make or break for me
but I thought them worth noting for the conversation.
I like the combining of skills but I'm no so
sure about eliminating the Skill Point system. The
Pathfinder System makes it essentially so that you are
maxed out in skill points in any skill you choose.
The system you're describing was in Alpha version 1. If you haven't yet downloaded the latest Alpha 3 you should (same download link as the first). There is no more auto-maxing, Skill ranks are back.
"Essentially" any character of the same level could have the same number of ranks in a skill, if they both put in that many points. The characters with it as a class skill get +3. Rogues will probably be more varied than ever before, as the benefit for spreading out their points increases (that +3 class skill bonus, and removal of cross-class penalty). By third level a Rogue could have +6 in 8 skills, or +4 in almost 24 skills (all their class skills, plus a couple)
Skills - Ability Scores: The new Skill system seems to
make DEX a necessity (i.e what about all those DEX =
12/+1 fighters in full plate?) There is only one STR
related Skill; Climb. Combining the skills also means
making the "best" choice on what ability score to tie
to the new combined skill but I think its worth
talking about.
You may be looking at the Pathfinder Character sheet which has some errors on this - Swim is also a strength skill, and spellcraft is Int. There were only three strength skills to begin with, the one removed is Jump, now included in Acrobatics (Dex).
As for the concentration threads out there - I agree; it needs to be kept. It is, at least, an essential mechanic for spellcasters and those attacking spellcasters (one of my favorite hobbies when delving into combat).
The mechanic is still included in Spellcraft mostly. Casting on the defensive has been left out - reason unknown (error or intent).
Welcome!
|
Dropping the x4 and making the max ranks = to lvl, means less calculations and less referencing to charts. It's Quick, clean and easy now!
On page 52, it says "These skill ranks can be spent on any skill, but
you can only invest a number of ranks into a specific skillequal to your total Hit Dice."
Does that statement assume a PC with no level adjustment? I'm assuming so since I can't find "ECL", "effective character level", or "level adjustment" anywhere in the document. So for all of us who play level-adjusted PCs, the tail end should read "...equal to your ECL." Correct? Or did PF hose level-adjusted PCs?
|
|
On page 52, it says "These skill ranks can be spent on any skill, but
you can only invest a number of ranks into a specific skill
equal to your total Hit Dice."Does that statement assume a PC with no level adjustment? I'm assuming so since I can't find "ECL", "effective character level", or "level adjustment" anywhere in the document. So for all of us who play level-adjusted PCs, the tail end should read "...equal to your ECL." Correct? Or did PF hose level-adjusted PCs?
It has always been the case that you use actual class levels/hit dice to determine max number of skill ranks not ECL. I believe the only times a character’s ECL affects anything is in determining the experience the character earns, the amount of experience the character must have before gaining a new level, and the character’s starting equipment. So no, it should not read "...equal to your ECL."
|
|
The SRD states "Your maximum rank in a class skill is your character level + 3."
Yep, your class level, not your effective class level.
On the Wizards site:
Effective Character Level (ECL)
When a character has a level adjustment, add her racial Hit Dice, class levels, and level adjustment to get her effective character level. Use effective character level instead of actual character level when determining the experience award the character receives for defeating a monster, the experience the character needs to reach her next class level, and for determining how much cash and equipment the character should have. Also use effective character level to decide when the character can select epic feats and when it gains an epic attack and save bonus (see page 209 in the Dungeon Master's Guide).
And:
When a character has a level adjustment, use the character's ECL (character level plus level adjustment) to determine the character's starting equipment and how the character earns and benefits from experience, as noted on page 172 of the Dungeon Master's Guide. Use the actual character level for just about everything else.
The SRD states:
To determine the effective character level (ECL) of a monster character, add its level adjustment to its racial Hit Dice and character class levels.
Use ECL instead of character level to determine how many experience points a monster character needs to reach its next level. Also use ECL to determine starting wealth for a monster character.
and:
Feat Acquisition and Ability Score Increases
A monster’s total Hit Dice, not its ECL, govern its acquisition of feats and ability score increases.
and:
Level Adjustment
This line is included in the entries of creatures suitable for use as player characters or as cohorts (usually creatures with Intelligence scores of at least 3 and possessing opposable thumbs). Add this number to the creature’s total Hit Dice, including class levels, to get the creature’s effective character level (ECL). A character’s ECL affects the experience the character earns, the amount of experience the character must have before gaining a new level, and the character’s starting equipment.
|
|
Personally, I don't get why some game designers keep trying to fix what's not broken. If we eve went with this version of the game we'd have to put skillpoints back to the way it is in 3.5 since this version causes infinately more work down the road than a silly x4 mod takes at first level. Seriously, what idiot can't handle simple multiplication that gets done only once in a character's carreer.
By getting rid of it, your causeing much more work by having to do several reoccuring calculations when checking to see if you qualify for prestiege classes. They took something that worked nicely and messed it up royally.
If they are so blindly insistant on dropping 4x mult that they don't care how much work the cause down the road, then start everyone at 4th level and be done with it, similar to d20 modern.
As long as the skill system insists on multiplying our work, there is no way my group will not want to even try playing with it.
Since you're in the PRPG thread, you should be made aware that under PRPG there is no 1st level x4 multiplier. Rogues get 8+Int, Fighter gets 2+Int. All Class skills get +3 bonus, even when you multiclass.
In that case NO ONE should get only 2 skill points when the illiterate Barbarian gets 4! And the Wizard (scholarly educated types) should get more than 4 even.
I agree with forgotten prince on this one. I have never understood why a wizard/cleric is given the absolute lowest skill points of any character class when they are supposed to be the most educated.
I have played wizards for awhile and even when my int score was jacked up by books and anything else I could get my hands on the problem of NEEDING my knowledge skills to help the party figure stuff out or me being able to take a skill like spot or listen or ride for heavens sake.
I think that wizards and clerics should be given at least 4 per lvl + int.
I think some of the recent posts are missing one rationale behind the limited skill points of some characters. Barbarians have more skill points than clerics, fighters, wizards, and paladins because they have less of their education tied up in their main class powers. Clerics and wizards, in particular, have a lot bound up in the rituals and incantations they need to know to cast their spells. Fighters have devoted their time to mastering sophisticated fighting styles (as in feats). And paladins have their efforts bound up in mastering their powers (spells, smites, and all).
Look at things that way, lower skill points compared to the other characters is pretty reasonable.
Similarly, looking at the character classes as class designs, it's not unreasonable at all since the characters have a lot of their powers derived from those powerful abilities and other classes shift more toward skills driving their abilities.
I'll admit that there are some issues with the system. A few extra skill points might not really track well as a balancing factor for not having 9 levels of spell power. Druids seem to be misplaced with 4 skill points compared to the cleric and wizard. And having 2 skill points, when you're not a wizard and getting a buttload of bonus points due to high Intelligence, make skill buying a bit anemic.
So, for all characters other than the wizard who natually compensates, I'm all for raising the minimum skill points to 4. I'd limit the cleric, druid, fighter, paladin, and sorcerer to 4. I'd bump the monk up to 6. Leave the bard and ranger at 6 and leave the rogue at 8. At least, that's what I'd do in the regular 3.5 game. Quite frankly, I'd probably do the same even with the Pathfinder skill system (though the monk might not warrant the 2 point jump so much then).
But I'd be making that change not because one class should be more educated than another. That additional education can be declared to be bound up in driving their main class abilities.
The skewed skill point allocation is something that I've found to be in need of fixing since 3.0 and I was disappointed to see its been carried over into pathfinder. Rather than harp on things that have already been said I'll present a recommendation for consideration/discussion.
Each class would get a base 2-6 skill points that can be spent according to the current pathfinder setup (getting rid of the cross class skills is a huge improvement in my book), Then depending on the type of class there would be additional skills that could only be spent on physical or mental skills. The intelligence modifier would no longer have any impact on how many skill points you got.
So for example, a rogue would get 4 base skill points and an additional 4 physical skill points per level. the 4 base could be spent on anything but the 4 physical would be spent on skills modified by str, dex, and con to reflect the training and use of those skills the rogue would employ as part of their training.
In turn wizards would get a base of 4 skill points plus an additional 6 mental skill points to account for the endless hours they spent sitting on their butt pouring over books in their research and education.
And classes like the druid that are a bit of both, might have 6 base skill points with none limited to physical versus mental.