Not sure if this has been asked before, but on looking at th Alpha 3 release I'm wondering...
I know that in the SRD a Wizard's skill points are listed as (2 + Int modifier) x4, and Pathfinder gives a Wizard's skill points as 2 + Int modifier.
Now I know that being the 'skill monkey' is generally the Rogue's shtick and all, but it's always bothered me that the class that is supposed to be, by and large, the most learned and intelligent has such a low allotment of skill points to spend.
Anyone in Dev want to talk about why the Wizard gets so few skill points, when logic would seem to indicate that they would get the most, if not at least equal to the Rogue?
Well considering Wizards primary attribute is intelligence there is a certain synergy here. With Pathfinder this is amplified even more A 1st level wizard will typically have an INT of 18-20 or 6-7 skill points per level, higher than anyone other than a rogue or a ranger with a high INT score. By 8th level his INT is likely 20-22 for 7-8 skill points per level... at 16th level the Wizard is likely have many more skill points than even the rogue.
Even if this were not the case, I would still suggest that the rogue should get more skill points. The wizard spends his time/ energy learning to cast spells. Rogues spend their time/ energy breaking into things and sneaking around.
Would you expect Albert Einstein to be an expert infiltrator, better than a trained operative?
Well considering Wizards primary attribute is intelligence there is a certain synergy here. With Pathfinder this is amplified even more A 1st level wizard will typically have an INT of 18-20 or 6-7 skill points per level, higher than anyone other than a rogue or a ranger with a high INT score. By 8th level his INT is likely 20-22 for 7-8 skill points per level... at 16th level the Wizard is likely have many more skill points than even the rogue.
Even if this were not the case, I would still suggest that the rogue should get more skill points. The wizard spends his time/ energy learning to cast spells. Rogues spend their time/ energy breaking into things and sneaking around.
Would you expect Albert Einstein to be an expert infiltrator, better than a trained operative?
Well no, but I would expect Albert to have some wicked ranks in Knowledge skills, and if he were a wizard, some equally wicked ranks in Spellcraft.
And, maybe I didn't read carefully enough, why are we assuming that with Pathfinder a 1st level Wizard will typically have an Int of 18-20? That's in the Pretty Darned High range.
|
Would you expect Albert Einstein to be an expert infiltrator, better than a trained operative?
That was certainly the case at the start of our SCAP game.
Our rogue 'found' all the traps head first.
I had to climb in and disable them to get him out.
Well no, but I would expect Albert to have some wicked ranks in Knowledge skills, and if he were a wizard, some equally wicked ranks in Spellcraft.
And, maybe I didn't read carefully enough, why are we assuming that with Pathfinder a 1st level Wizard will typically have an Int of 18-20? That's in the Pretty Darned High range.
Keep in mind that a human, half elf, or elf wizard will have a +2 INT racial bonus so getting an 18 in an ability is a lot easier and less expensive using point buy. Even so, I don't think that's an unreasonable point of view, I'm not sure about "Pretty Darned High" but several players in my group don't have 18s in their primary attributes. Would you consider it's reasonable to assume the wizard has a 16 INT? That means he has to roll a single 14 (unless of course you are running a race without an INT bonus which is also possible).
So the 16 INT is gives the wizard +3 INT bonus... We're no longer talking about Albert Einstein, now we're talking about the math professor at UCD. He's a sharp dude but Einstein he ain't.
So he gets 5 skill ranks at first level, more skills than anyone except the ranger and the rogue. He will put a rank into Spellcraft and the rest into knowledge skills. So 4 knowledge skills with 1 rank, +3 for class skill bonus and +3 for INT... +7 in 4 knowledge skills. That's a pretty good knowledge of 3 disciplines outside his primary study.
Keep in mind Wizards are primarily focused on learning about magic, it's their bread and butter. Einstein was a genius in physics and mathematics but was he a zoologist? A botanist? Architecture? An expert on comparative religions?
Knowledge (Arcana) is probably the closest thing in the D&D world to a PHD in Physics. I expect a wizard should be good at that, and have a smattering of knowledge elsewhere... that's pretty much what you've got.
Well no, but I would expect Albert to have some wicked ranks in Knowledge skills, and if he were a wizard, some equally wicked ranks in Spellcraft.
And, maybe I didn't read carefully enough, why are we assuming that with Pathfinder a 1st level Wizard will typically have an Int of 18-20? That's in the Pretty Darned High range.Keep in mind that a human, half elf, or elf wizard will have a +2 INT racial bonus so getting an 18 in an ability is a lot easier and less expensive using point buy. Even so, I don't think that's an unreasonable point of view, I'm not sure about "Pretty Darned High" but several players in my group don't have 18s in their primary attributes. Would you consider it's reasonable to assume the wizard has a 16 INT? That means he has to roll a single 14 (unless of course you are running a race without an INT bonus which is also possible).
So the 16 INT is gives the wizard +3 INT bonus... We're no longer talking about Albert Einstein, now we're talking about the math professor at UCD. He's a sharp dude but Einstein he ain't.
So he gets 5 skill ranks at first level, more skills than anyone except the ranger and the rogue. He will put a rank into Spellcraft and the rest into knowledge skills. So 4 knowledge skills with 1 rank, +3 for class skill bonus and +3 for INT... +7 in 4 knowledge skills. That's a pretty good knowledge of 3 disciplines outside his primary study.
Keep in mind Wizards are primarily focused on learning about magic, it's their bread and butter. Einstein was a genius in physics and mathematics but was he a zoologist? A botanist? Architecture? An expert on comparative religions?
Knowledge (Arcana) is probably the closest thing in the D&D world to a PHD in Physics. I expect a wizard should be good at that, and have a smattering of knowledge elsewhere... that's pretty much what you've got.
I'll grant you all that, and it makes sense. But you have to admit, just looking at the wizard entry and seeing skill points that low for "The Brainy" class is slightly jarring. :)
I'll grant you all that, and it makes sense. But you have to admit, just looking at...
Well the new skill system effectively helps characters that want to spread skillpoints around a lot because every new class skill you take gives you 3 class skill bonus points. By 2nd level the 16 INT wizard will have 7 ranks in most Knowledge skills. Every time his INT goes up by 2 he gets a new pool of skill points go up significantly.
If the 16 INT wizard drops his bonus attribute into INT each time at 8th level he will be INT 18 and get his normal 5 skill ranks plus 8 additional skill ranks because his INT went up, then at 9th level he gets 6 ranks. Same thing will happen at 16th level, 6 skill ranks plus 16 for the INT increase.
I'll grant you all that, and it makes sense. But you have to admit, just looking at...Well the new skill system effectively helps characters that want to spread skillpoints around a lot because every new class skill you take gives you 3 class skill bonus points. By 2nd level the 16 INT wizard will have 7 ranks in most Knowledge skills. Every time his INT goes up by 2 he gets a new pool of skill points go up significantly.
If the 16 INT wizard drops his bonus attribute into INT each time at 8th level he will be INT 18 and get his normal 5 skill ranks plus 8 additional skill ranks because his INT went up, then at 9th level he gets 6 ranks. Same thing will happen at 16th level, 6 skill ranks plus 16 for the INT increase.
In RAW, you do not gain retroactive skill points (or languages) for Int increases. At 8th level, that wizard gains 6 skill points (2 + 4), not 13 (2 + 3 + 8). Likewise, at 16th level, the wizard only gains 7 skill points (2 + 5), not 22 (2 + 4 + 16). DMs will sometimes do so when building NPCs to simplify the task, but it shouldn't apply to PCs.
A rogue with a 10 Int, who never increases it, has 160 total skill points at 20th level. A wizard who starts at 16 Int and puts all his increases into it on leveling has (7 x 5) + (8 x 6) + (5 x 7) = 118 skill points at 20th level; respectable, and on par with a bard or ranger with 10 Int (120 skill points), but not enough to put the rogue out of a job.
If skill points are increased for all of the 2 + Int classes (cleric, fighter, paladin, sorcerer, and wizard), which is a fairly common request for most of them in Beta, the wizard ends up with 158 skill points at 20th vs. 160 for a 10 Int rogue. The wizard, master of knowledge and learning, ends up with about as many skill points as a street-rat with average smarts.
To the one point, I do favor a base of 4 skill ranks per level due to the fact that they have the higest level of education of all of the classes. The four base ranks could represent the following standard courses of study every wizard would receive: Knowledge (Arcana), Linguistics, Spellcraft, and one elective, either Appraise or an additional Knowledge skill.
That being said, I also favor the idea of Wizards only receiving a base of 2 skill ranks per level for the following reason: The study of magic takes an incredible devotion of time and energy. Most of the wizard's base course work deals with this study (the two base ranks represent their standard coursework of Knowledge (Arcana) and Spellcraft). The only reason they would have time for other courses is due to their high intelligence, which plays out in these rules as is.
Unfortunately, whether it is two or four probably depends upon the specifics of each campaign, so there may well always be disagreement. I would say this would be a valid house rule decision.
|
In RAW, you do not gain retroactive skill points (or languages) for Int increases. At 8th level, that wizard gains 6 skill points (2 + 4), not 13 (2 + 3 + 8). Likewise, at 16th level, the wizard only gains 7 skill points (2 + 5), not 22 (2 + 4 + 16). DMs will sometimes do so when building NPCs to simplify the task, but it shouldn't apply to PCs.
It may interest you to know that this is not the case.
Ability bonuses with a duration greater than one day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.
Emphasis mine.
Firstly:
Wizards also get the relatively huge bonus of their int to the knowledge checks.
A rogue may get more skill points overall but the Wizard is likely to have a much higher actual skill check than his rogue counterpart. (especially since the rogue is having to bump dex/int/con while the wizard is mainly just int/con).
Secondly:
Rogues Are skill points.
That is what they do. It's their schtick. SA is just a 3rd edition method of giving them some use in combat. (without it they'd be useless in combat). Skills is what rogues are.
If you bump wizards up to being equivalent then you've taken the rogues main schtick and given it to the class that needs it the least- a primary caster.
Wizards schtick is not skills. Wizards schtick is spell casting. They already get spell casting. WIth their 2 skills a level they can get the 2 skills they need. Spellcraft and Arcana. They don't really need the others.
They get them anyway though because no wizard has a 10 int. (at least.. I hope not..) Wizards take base 14 at minimum, probably 16 or 18 if they can get it. an 18 gives +4 skills at first level giving them the vast majority of the skills they really need to get through the game.
(with rogues taking more active skills and clerics generally not having high int, it'll fall to the wizard to get all the knowledge skills for the traditional 4 man party).
The point?
They don't need extra skill points to do what they do. Extras would just put them over the top, especially when combined with the rule, as quoted above, that folks get retroactive skill points.
(and wizards of the world rejoice at that!)
-S
In RAW, you do not gain retroactive skill points (or languages) for Int increases. At 8th level, that wizard gains 6 skill points (2 + 4), not 13 (2 + 3 + 8). Likewise, at 16th level, the wizard only gains 7 skill points (2 + 5), not 22 (2 + 4 + 16). DMs will sometimes do so when building NPCs to simplify the task, but it shouldn't apply to PCs.
In 3.5 this is true in PRPG it is no longer the case. As Shusumo pointed out, in PfRPG skill ranks are always equal to X+INT Bonus. If you INT goes up your skill ranks do. This is also supported by the description of ability drain on the second to last paragraph of page 148. Unfortunately I don't know that it's said expressly in the alpha that when you increase your INT every 4 levels skill ranks go up. Certainly if long term magic item use increases skill ranks permanent ability increases will as well.
Regardless, even with 5 skill ranks per level wizards ARE by far the knowledge skill kings. Rogues have a ton of skill ranks so they can invest them in... skills, things like stealth, climb, acrobatics, etc, Rogues don't generally have skill ranks to invest in knowledge skills. Rangers, same thing. Bards? Maybe bards are the #1 competitor to the knowledge skill king but shouldn't that be the case? Even so, most bards invest ranks in several non-knowledge skills plus their generally moderate INT keeps their ability modifier lower than the wizards.
To be honest wizards are a huge benefactor of the Paizo skill rule changes, perhaps even more so than the rogue.
In RAW, you do not gain retroactive skill points (or languages) for Int increases. At 8th level, that wizard gains 6 skill points (2 + 4), not 13 (2 + 3 + 8). Likewise, at 16th level, the wizard only gains 7 skill points (2 + 5), not 22 (2 + 4 + 16). DMs will sometimes do so when building NPCs to simplify the task, but it shouldn't apply to PCs.In 3.5 this is true in PRPG it is no longer the case. As Shusumo pointed out, in PfRPG skill ranks are always equal to X+INT Bonus. If you INT goes up your skill ranks do. This is also supported by the description of ability drain on the second to last paragraph of page 148. Unfortunately I don't know that it's said expressly in the alpha that when you increase your INT every 4 levels skill ranks go up. Certainly if long term magic item use increases skill ranks permanent ability increases will as well.
Huh. I missed that.
I don't think I approve, though. It may make it easier to build NPCs and higher level characters, but it causes more headaches with normal leveling and ability drain. You also run into the situation of high level characters suddenly gaining 12, 16, or 20 ranks in a skill they've never had any aptitude with; they go from untrained to expert, BAM!
Even granting the "skills should be the rogue's thing" argument, it would take a genius (18 Int + 4 ability increases) wizard to even equal the average (10 Int) rogue (and if you have wizards running around with 20 Int at 1st level, the rogue in the party is probably going to have more than 10 Int).
While that's true in sheer ranks, it isn't true in what wizards actually specialize in: which are knowledge skills.
Even if the rogue and the wizard take the same knowledge skills, a wizard of any given level is gonna *blow* the rogue to pieces on the skill check- because of the high int.
While it's true that it takes a genius to match the sheer number of skills known, both classes have quite different fields that don't really overlap that much.
Rogues are masters of the mundane and wizards are masters of the arcane, and of the book. They are very different roles and each class performs its role to perfection.
Unless a wizard completely neglects a knowledge skill while the rogue maxes it out, the wizard will always win the contest of "what does that monster do?" while the rogue will always win the contest of sneaking past the bad guys. (sans spells, of course).
(wizards should still get 4 skill points though.. but so should everyone, imo. )
Unless a wizard completely neglects a knowledge skill while the rogue maxes it out, the wizard will always win the contest of "what does that monster do?" while the rogue will always win the contest of sneaking past the bad guys. (sans spells, of course).
Yes, it's most effective if the wizard concentrates in Int based skills. However, it's possible for a Pathfinder wizard to be very effective with other skills, also.
Even assuming a "well-rounded" wizard with Appraise, Craft (Alchemy), Knowledge (Arcana), Knowledge (Planes), Linguistics, Spellcraft, and Use Magic Device, a skill like Stealth would be a very attractive option (especially if playing a specialist with Illusion as a prohibited school). A focused genius wizard with just Knowledge (Arcana) and Spellcraft as "core" skills actually ends up just as flexibile as a focused 10 Int rogue with just Disable Device and Stealth as "core" skills. The rogue is more likely to gain the +3 bonus for class skills, but a +3 is not huge at high level play.
Yeah,
Rogue with 1 rank of Knowledge other than Local == +1 through +3
Wizard with 1 rank any knowledge skill == +7 through +9
Class skill bonus is generally relevant throughout the career because at higher levels skill checks are generally higher. Granted that difference isn't near as significant as it is under 3.5 where the XC skill would be 1/2 the class skill
I like giving all classes 4 skill points. I hear some argument that this would make the rogue less special. Why not increase the rogue skill ranks by two also? Why does eight have to be the 'cap'?