|
The more I think about this thread, the more I think that maybe the right choice is to up the bard to the rogue's 8 skill points/level. I've been VERY resistant to the idea of skill creep (in particular to the fighter, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, and other 2/level classes), but unlike most other classes... the bard really IS about skills. Beyond Perform even. The bard is the scholar and the diplomat and the voice; he's the one that collects lots of lore about stuff and who knows how to look for information and so on. His Class Skill list is quite robust.
Upping the bard to 8 skills/level would help address concerns that he's already "forced" to spend at least 1/level on a Perform, and I don't think it'd really step too much on the rogues toes since the rogue has lots of powers and sneak attack to balance out against the bard's spells and bardic performances.
Basically, that'd give us two variants on the skill-monger class.
The rogue is the skill-monger who's a pretty good combatant (with his sneak attack, evasion, and rogue tricks).
The bard is the skill-monger who's a pretty good spellcaster/party buffer.
They'd have similar amounts of skills (Intelligence being equally important to them), but wouldn't really be stepping on each other's toes because they'd be mostly doing different things with those skills.
I'm all for this. I'm all for upping the 2+ guys up too. Having a few more skill points is never really overpowering thanks to the level caps. The worst that will happen is they'll be more versatile and maybe even invest in skills like Profession and Craft!
I'd love to see more variant bardic music abilities based on different concepts. Different trees for Singing, Comedy, Dancing, Oratory, Percussion Instrument, Wind Instrument, String Instrument and every level that you could gain an ability you have to both choose one and meet the skill prereq in that perform category.
Might make the PHB a bit thick to add all that, but totally worth it!
|
The more I think about this thread, the more I think that maybe the right choice is to up the bard to the rogue's 8 skill points/level. I've been VERY resistant to the idea of skill creep (in particular to the fighter, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, and other 2/level classes), but unlike most other classes... the bard really IS about skills. Beyond Perform even. The bard is the scholar and the diplomat and the voice; he's the one that collects lots of lore about stuff and who knows how to look for information and so on. His Class Skill list is quite robust.
To be Honest I think its a bad idea to do this since your opening a whole can of worms over skill points. Especially in the all class min 4 skill points crowd. You cant really tell them that 2 skill points min is okay then go and up another class from 6 to 8.
The more I think about this thread, the more I think that maybe the right choice is to up the bard to the rogue's 8 skill points/level. I've been VERY resistant to the idea of skill creep (in particular to the fighter, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, and other 2/level classes), but unlike most other classes... the bard really IS about skills. Beyond Perform even. The bard is the scholar and the diplomat and the voice; he's the one that collects lots of lore about stuff and who knows how to look for information and so on. His Class Skill list is quite robust.
Upping the bard to 8 skills/level would help address concerns that he's already "forced" to spend at least 1/level on a Perform, and I don't think it'd really step too much on the rogues toes since the rogue has lots of powers and sneak attack to balance out against the bard's spells and bardic performances.
Basically, that'd give us two variants on the skill-monger class.
The rogue is the skill-monger who's a pretty good combatant (with his sneak attack, evasion, and rogue tricks).
The bard is the skill-monger who's a pretty good spellcaster/party buffer.
They'd have similar amounts of skills (Intelligence being equally important to them), but wouldn't really be stepping on each other's toes because they'd be mostly doing different things with those skills.
YES PLEASE!
I absolutely and definitely agree!
|
|
In playtesting, we have had some difficulty with some of the points made...
Tracking the multiple types of perform for the effectiveness of bardic performance wasn't as hard as trying to remember the 2 pages of modifiers now needed for Perception, due to incorporating the various senses (and sense-specific racial abilities). I'll wait for the skills discussion for more on that.
Raising the amount of skill points for the bard makes all those arguemnts above making the minimum for skill points be 4 per level raise to the surface again. Do we really need that?
If you feel that the bard needs more skill points, house rule it in... that's what we were told about the fighter despite some good arguementative points against keeping the "2 skill points per level" mechanic.
Personally, I don't see the problem with the amount of skill points they recieve as it stands.
Now on needng a skill for their core class ability, I think that an automatic skill adjustment based on level, such as the ranger gets with the Track class ability (and Favored Terrain, Favored Enemy, etc.) would fix the perceived problem.
I don't see this as a problem. The one skill point that you have to lose by getting both tracks is replaced by one skill point going into a knowledge, and as far as skills, the class hands you skill mastery for any knowledge that you have trained, being far more reliable than bardic knowledge was, and the knowledge skills can keep up with a wizard's in usefulness, keeping those skill points in knowledges from being irrelevant. Seems like a small price to pay for general utility in my opinion.
Creative Director
|
The more I think about this thread, the more I think that maybe the right choice is to up the bard to the rogue's 8 skill points/level. I've been VERY resistant to the idea of skill creep (in particular to the fighter, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, and other 2/level classes), but unlike most other classes... the bard really IS about skills. Beyond Perform even. The bard is the scholar and the diplomat and the voice; he's the one that collects lots of lore about stuff and who knows how to look for information and so on. His Class Skill list is quite robust.To be Honest I think its a bad idea to do this since your opening a whole can of worms over skill points. Especially in the all class min 4 skill points crowd. You cant really tell them that 2 skill points min is okay then go and up another class from 6 to 8.
Actually... I think that since the bard's the only class that depends on skills to function, really (since he has skill minimums for a key ability), upping his skill points is really easy to argue. Fighters and Wizards and Clerics don't need skills to function.
Actually... I think that since the bard's the only class that depends on skills to function, really (since he has skill minimums for a key ability), upping his skill points is really easy to argue. Fighters and Wizards and Clerics don't need skills to function.
They don't need them as much as others, but they still could use them. Plus, wizards get a bunch more anyway thanks to high intelligence bonuses.
And I'd still consider making an end-run around the argument by giving bards the equivalent of one performance skill at max ranks for free.
|
I think the PRPG Bard still has her 3.5 counterpart beat:
1) Favored class bonus means possibility of 7+Int skill points for some races.
2) Racial ability score boosts means less demand on some abilities and the ability to directly or indirectly raise Int.
3) Int-boosting magic items now grant retroactive skill points and a bonus on Knowledge skills.
4) Side issue: No cross-class skills mean multiclass bards can still keep Perform up to par.
5) The rank-based nature of bardic music means the bard is getting an extra boost out of his spent ranks. Higher ranks means higher save DC. That's not comparable to any other class feature.
For example, the stereotypical human bard can now get a base of 8 skill points per level by putting +2 Int. So can a half-elf, while an Elf or Gnome gets 7. Thats a pretty good selection.
But ranks don't corrolate to save DC anymore.
|
Actually... I think that since the bard's the only class that depends on skills to function, really (since he has skill minimums for a key ability), upping his skill points is really easy to argue. Fighters and Wizards and Clerics don't need skills to function.
They don't need them as much as others, but they still could use them. Plus, wizards get a bunch more anyway thanks to high intelligence bonuses.
And I'd still consider making an end-run around the argument by giving bards the equivalent of one performance skill at max ranks for free.
I am with Bill on this one. The bard is not comparable to the other classes becasue you must use your skill points to make the class skills operate. I think making one performance skill a basic class feature is better than upping the skill points. The bard is our group's "almost never used" class - the consensus is that they just don't bring enough to the table. You could probably up the skill points and free up the class features from the skill points and the class would not be out of balance.
|
|
I don't really understand the necessity of upping the skill points. If you're already considering upping the skill points to 8+int, because people are having to spend 2 of each level into Performs...then why not just leave them at 6+int and let them have two Perform skills that get free ranks equal to the Bard's level?
This seems simpler, everyone seems to be spending these two into Perform anyways, would finalize the separation between needing skill points to use a class skill, and I think make everyone happy.
That's just what I think. I always saw the Rogue as the skill guy that was good at combat, and the Bard as the guy that was so so at everything (combat, spells, buffs, skills). Giving him as many points as the skill guy seems a little excessive, when you could solve the problem just as easily by giving the Bard two free maxed Performs.
Anyone support this? I know 8+int skill points would be aweeeesome, but so would d20 hit dice, full BAB, etc.
Basically, I just always saw the Bard as the guy that was the literal jack of all trades. Not as good at combat as the Fighter, not as good at skills as the Rogue, not as good at casting as the Wizard, not as good at buffs as the Cleric, but he could do all 4 pretty darn well. I don't want to see the Bard be equal to another class in one area, that seems to undermine its purpose.
|
|
One of the problems is that as they level, bards scale from pretty darn well at all 4 to mediocre at everything except buffing (which they can still be outclassed by a cleric of same level who has a lot more flexibility and utility).
That's a bigger issue though. One that won't be fixed by just upping their skill points from 6 to 8. All my point was is that the same effect can be accomplished by just giving them free max ranks in two Perform skills and leaving their points at 6.
I do not feel that Bards need more skill points.
First, they truly do benefit from the skill consolidation more than almost any other class. Very few "typical bard skills" were not combined. The exception...
Knowledge skills, very common for bards to have Knowledge (arcana) if not anything else - now they get a free Knowledge skill to nudge them along. Plus a boost to all others. That's in addition to...
Racial changes. Every typical bard now gets more skill points. That is to say, everyone but Dwarf Bards and Half-orc bards, will usually have more skill points now. Humans and Half-elves have favored class bonus (Bards already get more hit points before, likely to use for skill point), and possibly ability score boost (but likely Cha). Halflings and Gnomes also have favored class. And Elves have an Int boost.
New Bard, glorious.
|
It's always been a standing house rule in my game with 3.5 games that everyone gets an extra skill point to use in a knowledge, craft, perform, or profession skill and those with only 2 skill points get an extra on top of that strictly for craft, perform or profession. I always felt it helped round out a character and allowed them to have a real life skill that encouraged my players to think about the characters lives before they started adventuring. I ask them to let me know why they have these extra skills and it really opens up their characters. It might be worthwhile giving a performance familiarity similar to the knowledge familiarity of the bard.
Yes, but which has the better chance of convincing people. You'll note that most of the designer feedback has not been positive or supportive of the ideas or their expression.Which only proves his point: If you start with snark, people won't take you seriously any more. And whose fault is that?On the other hand... the "snarky" poster is gaining much more traffic, and much more designer feedback, than the thought-out, non-snarky version.
-Matt
Does it matter whether they are positive or supportive if it gets results? I can't help but notice that Matt's thread more or less went nowhere while in this one three developers got involved and James suggested bumping Skill points to compensate the bard's loss of skill points.
Squeaky wheel meet oil?
|
|
I personally see no issues at all with the current bard skill system. I love the fact that i have options for my performance and as a DM i truly am happy that most people now invest in more than one perform skill.
To the poster's issue:
If we take a class that can have Bard as a favored class we can have an additional free skill point. Using that in a separate performance gives us 2 maxed perform abilities.
Then we look at the skill consolidation and we end up way ahead of the game on skill points. Now i only have to spread my 5 points out over 15 (give or take the knowledge) skills rather than the 20+ from before. Plus, i get a huge bonus for putting 1 point into a class skill, not to mention the lack of penalty for "cross class" skills.
How is this not an improvement over the 3.5 system? not only do we get more skill points (thank you favored class) but we get more benefits from the skills we do take.
I very much see this as a win win for us and see no difficulty in it at all.
To the Developer's responses:
I do think that adding a few uses of bardic performance a day wouldn't be a bad thing however. Create a "extra performances" feat or something to that affect like "extra turning" or "extra lay on hands." How they do it is up to them, but I think at least 2 or 3 more times a day would be nice, especially at lower levels since they way they use the ability is limited by their level and skill rank to begin with.
|
I don't really understand the necessity of upping the skill points. If you're already considering upping the skill points to 8+int, because people are having to spend 2 of each level into Performs...then why not just leave them at 6+int and let them have two Perform skills that get free ranks equal to the Bard's level?
Honestly? What seems simplest to me is to get rid of the Perform Skill altogether.
I mean...what does it do?
Seriously, it's a really, really pointless skill. Forcing bards to spend points in Perform skills simply to access their class abilities just adds insult to injury.
Remove Perform altogether. If you want to use the mechanic with your chracter, Profession (Dancing), Profession (Comedian) etc. will all serve just as well.
Give the bards their class abilities at the appropriate level - let them choose, let them spend feats to get alternate abilities, whatever, but this seems the simplest solution to me.
|
|
Honestly? What seems simplest to me is to get rid of the Perform Skill altogether.
I mean...what does it do?
Seriously, it's a really, really pointless skill. Forcing bards to spend points in Perform skills simply to access their class abilities just adds insult to injury.
Remove Perform altogether. If you want to use the mechanic with your chracter, Profession (Dancing), Profession (Comedian) etc. will all serve just as well.
Give the bards their class abilities at the appropriate level - let them choose, let them spend feats to get alternate abilities, whatever, but this seems the simplest solution to me.
With all do respect Jess, that is like saying rogues can open locks without spending points on open lock, or disable a trap without ranks in disable device.
Bards are a skill based class just as rogues are. That means their abilities need to be tied to skills. Changing perform to profession isnt changing anything at all except the skill that its based off of. Perform is how well a bard can do his performance. Just like disable device is how well a rogue can disable a trap. Its a skill to measure one of their key abilities.
|
|
With all do respect Jess, that is like saying rogues can open locks without spending points on open lock, or disable a trap without ranks in disable device.
Bards are a skill based class just as rogues are. That means their abilities need to be tied to skills. Changing perform to profession isnt changing anything at all except the skill that its based off of. Perform is how well a bard can do his performance. Just like disable device is how well a rogue can disable a trap. Its a skill to measure one of their key abilities.
No, because the rogue does not have to max any particular skill to gain access to his class abilities, such as rogue talents or sneak attack. A rogue can sneak attack without having to have his stealth ranks maxed.
Also, another part of my point is...what does Perform do.
A rogue gets an actual in-game benefit for taking ranks in Stealth - he has an action that he can now perform. And this action is not required (though it meshes well with his character) simply to access his class abilities. And it matches up in power level well with other skills, that cost the same amount, such as Ride or Spellcraft.
Perform costs a skill point each level to keep maxed, but it doesn't provide anyone with anything useful in game to do - except that it is required by a bard's class abilities before he can even make use of them.
Open Lock is not a base rogue class ability. Neither is disable device. Sure, a rogue has to put ranks into Perception in order to make good use of his Trapfinding class ability, but then those ranks are something he can use not only to use his class ability to it's fullest extent, but for other situations (many, perception is a valuable skill) as well.
There are efficient and inefficient uses of skill points for characters of a particular class - but there is no other class that forces a character to spend ranks on a skill with little to no in game use, other than to provide access to this one class's class abilities.
And the use of the Perform skill is really redundant. It's a mechanic that I really don't see any point to. as for backwards compatibility, just roll any characters with perform skills into profession skills, and you're good to go. Whee.
No, it's like saying rogues can open X lock 0% of the time below skill level Y, but once they reach Y skill rank it suddenly becomes available, with a chance based on their 1/2 their rogue.
With all do respect Jess, that is like saying rogues can open locks without spending points on open lock, or disable a trap without ranks in disable device.
Maybe instead of having a set base limit in perform you would prefer that the specific performances had a DC? Because there are many things the rogue can simply not do until they get to a certain skill rank (DC 30 open locks).
I would think that having a static turning point would be better than having to roll a skill check every time you do something would be better not worse because once you get it is reliable.
|
|
I would think that having a static turning point would be better than having to roll a skill check every time you do something would be better not worse because once you get it is reliable.
I totally agree Dennis.
The other part of my point is that Perform isn't a required ability of a bard any more than opening locks, disabling traps, or back stabbing is part of the rogue. Yes you can argue that they are "required abilities" but the fact is you CAN build a rogue without them, just most people wont. You can open locks untrained, you can perform untrained. You are just going to suck at it. Yes, you cant do certain perform actions without skill ranks... but you cant open certain locks without open lock ranks and you cant disable certain traps without disable device ranks either... I guess that's my point on how they are similar abilities.
*edited for spelling*
|
|
The other part of my point is that Perform isn't a required ability of a bard any more than opening locks, disabling traps, or back stabbing is part of the rogue. Yes you can argue that they are "required abilities" but the fact is you CAN build a rogue without them, just most people wont. You can open locks untrained, you can perform untrained. You are just going to suck at it. Yes, you cant do certain perform actions without skill ranks... but you cant open certain locks without open lock ranks and you cant disable certain traps without disable device ranks either... I guess that's my point on how they are similar abilities.
That's comparing apples to oranges. Forcing the bards to max one perform skill to have access to bardic performances would be like forcing the rogue to max the skill Profession(mugger) in order to use sneak attack.
The things is, I don't see any difference between the skills Perform and Profession, except that Performance skills are really subsets of Profession(Entertainer). You can use performance to:
Make a perform check to make minimal amounts of money.
What if a rogue, in order to use trapfinding at all, had to max out Profession(Scouting) and in order to gain a new d6 of Sneak attack at a level also had to max out Profession(Mugger). That's what's being done to the bard in order for him to gain access to his class abilities.
I don't understand the resistance to removing Performance as a skill from the game entirely. It really adds nothing to the game at all. It's indistinguishable in use from a Profession skill. Simply allow the bard to choose a song from a variety available at that level, or let him choose songs as a rogue chooses talents. It unified mechanics, takes away the "skill tax" from the bard, who already has difficulty measuring up with more specialized classes, and simplifies skills.
|
|
I have always thought that Bards should have eight skillpoints a level (I perhaps feel even more strongly about it than I do about the fact that Rogues should keep their 8 per level), so colour me happy if it happens in the rules.
I don't think 8 skill points would overbalance the bard. Heck, I'm a strong proponent of 4 skill points for fighters and paladins too (clerics, wizards and sorcerors not so much, because they have full spellcasting to plug most skill holes admirably). The bard still doesn't have class access to certain iconic rogue skills, so there's some difference in their role even if their skill point levels did match up. But I think the Performance skills is a strange beast, and when compared to beefed up skills like Perception, Stealth and Spellcraft, it's also utterly worthless. Eight skill points would be cool, but all the bard needs is to have the Performance skill tax removed, and he'd be fine.
It removes unneeded rules that are just a copy of the Profession rules, it unifies bard class ability gains with either rogue (pick a talent from the pool) or monk (pick 1 of 2 available this level) class ability gains, and it gives a skill based class a little bit of a push forward in flexibility and fun. What's not to like?
I don't understand the resistance to removing Performance as a skill from the game entirely. It really adds nothing to the game at all. It's indistinguishable in use from a Profession skill. Simply allow the bard to choose a song from a variety available at that level, or let him choose songs as a rogue chooses talents. It unified mechanics, takes away the "skill tax" from the bard, who already has difficulty measuring up with more specialized classes, and simplifies skills.
First of all, I agree that it's dumb to have an ability that requires both N ranks in Perform and N levels in bard.
But I don't have a problem with having some bard abilities require the use of the Perform skill, just like I don't have a problem with some wizard abilities (writing spells in a spellbook) requiring the Spellcraft skill or some rogue abilities (finding and disarming magic traps) requiring the Search and Disable Device skills.
I also don't have a problem with a Pathfinder "skill tax" when there's a huge, corresponding Pathfinder "skill tax credit" offsetting it.
|
|
I don't think 8 skill points would overbalance the bard. Heck, I'm a strong proponent of 4 skill points for fighters and paladins too (clerics, wizards and sorcerors not so much, because they have full spellcasting to plug most skill holes admirably).
I also don't mind if varied skill points ended up as an optional rule (in a future PFRPG 'Unearthed Arcana' as I was mootinghere).
Jess,
What if Perform did something different, and more?
What if Perform had one fixed function? To use Perform, you roll to Busk against the size of the population you are trying to impact with your performance. Although community size rules are not part of the 3.5 SRD or the PFRPG, let's say the DC to Busk an entire Metropolis is DC 30 or more. The size of the community you are Busking against determines the amount you are paid, and you can busk against a smaller community than the one you are in, which means you can Busk against the East Quarter of the city, versus Busking against the whole city, at a lower DC. For every 5 your roll beats the city's/neighborhood's DC, you gain a +2 or so circumstance bonus to Diplomacy checks involving that area for one week.
|
|
First of all, I agree that it's dumb to have an ability that requires both N ranks in Perform and N levels in bard.
But I don't have a problem with having some bard abilities require the use of the Perform skill, just like I don't have a problem with some wizard abilities (writing spells in a spellbook) requiring the Spellcraft skill or some rogue abilities (finding and disarming magic traps) requiring the Search and Disable Device skills.
I also don't have a problem with a Pathfinder "skill tax" when there's a huge, corresponding Pathfinder "skill tax credit" offsetting it.
Exactly hogarth, that's exactly what i'm trying to say =)
why tax something if you are going to give all the money right back?
Same for skills.
why tax something if you are going to give all the money right back?
Same for skills.
I'm not the guy who decided to consolidate a bunch of bard skills (Diplomacy + Gather Info, Search + Spot + Listen, Hide + Move Silently, to a lesser extent Speak Language + Decipher Script + Forgery, Tumble + Jump + Balance). Nor am I the guy who decided to give the bard a free skill point every level for a Knowledge skill. Nor am I the guy who decided to give a free skill point for taking your "favored class".
Maybe Jason can answer your question.
I mean...what does it do?
Absolutely nothing. Just some nonsense to do with "roleplaying", but we don't need that in a skirmish game like Fourth Edition.
Wait a minute. These aren't the 4e character optimisation boards. We *are* talking about roleplaying games ;-P
|
|
Jess,
What if Perform did something different, and more?
What if Perform had one fixed function? To use Perform, you roll to Busk against the size of the population you are trying to impact with your performance. Although community size rules are not part of the 3.5 SRD or the PFRPG, let's say the DC to Busk an entire Metropolis is DC 30 or more. The size of the community you are Busking against determines the amount you are paid, and you can busk against a smaller community than the one you are in, which means you can Busk against the East Quarter of the city, versus Busking against the whole city, at a lower DC. For every 5 your roll beats the city's/neighborhood's DC, you gain a +2 or so circumstance bonus to Diplomacy checks involving that area for one week.
If Perform had some intrinsic value other than "You are a bard. You must use this skill." then at least it's arguable you can keep the skill and force bards to take it.
I still think it's silly, but at least it's no longer only a finger in the bard's eye.
Skills consolidation has changed skill quite a bit, I'll agree. Any class with a reasonably large skill list will now have a wider variety of abilities they can call on with regularity. I think that's only a good thing - lack of skills reduces fun, but very few skills (use magic device, the concentration aspect of spellcraft and tumble aspect of acrobatics, maybe) cause power balance issues between classes.
The giving and taking of skill points for the bard is just an oddity I don't understand. I enjoy the idea of bardic knowledge, and think it a great niche for the class, but I found the implementation - you invest in perform and I'll give you a knowledge of your choice - a little weird.
I think the easiest solution is to remove perform and make bardic performances a part of a talent pool. Rather than coming up with new mechanics for Performance that will overlap either Profession or Diplomacy, just drop the silly thing. it serves no purpose.
Edit:
I mean...what does it do?Absolutely nothing. Just some nonsense to do with "roleplaying", but we don't need that in a skirmish game like Fourth Edition.
Wait a minute. These aren't the 4e character optimisation boards. We *are* talking about roleplaying games ;-P
Hrm. I thought we were discussing design and balance considerations for a new roleplaying system. Evidently I was mistaken.
I mean...what does it do?Absolutely nothing. Just some nonsense to do with "roleplaying", but we don't need that in a skirmish game like Fourth Edition.
Wait a minute. These aren't the 4e character optimisation boards. We *are* talking about roleplaying games ;-P
Maxing out your modifier for a useless skill does not make you a good roleplayer.
That is all.
-Matt
a useless skill
Perform isn't useless. It might not grant you an instant +5 damage and make you outright kill enemies on a crit, but that doesn't mean it's useless. It represents a skill in the game. Unless you're plaiyng a war game, not all skills need to be combat related.
|
|
Snark aside, I think the Perform skill does serve a purpose. I have seen it crop up in adventures and such (especially paizo adventures) as a way to get certain results. If i could think of specifics i would list them but I'm at work and don't have my books. But one i do remember is using perform in conjunction with disguise as a way to pass yourself off as another person. Disguise gets you past the initial test, but perform(acting) was your way of continuing to stay in character. There was even a synergy bonus. 5 points perform(acting) gives you a +2 to disguise. Anyway, i like perform. Its even something i will invest in with characters who are not bards. I think, just like the profession and craft skills, its a way to give depth to a character. And i do think profession and perform are different. I've always seen profession is something people will take 5 ranks in for a synergy bonus and a background... perform is something people will invest in for future use. Yes its not as tangible some of the others, but a good DM can use it in alot of ways. While most concrete classes are tied to concrete skills (spellcraft for wizards, disable device for rogues, etc) the bard, an intrinsically fluffy character is tied to a fairly fluffy skill. It makes sense to me.
But one i do remember is using perform in conjunction with disguise as a way to pass yourself off as another person. Disguise gets you past the initial test, but perform(acting) was your way of continuing to stay in character. There was even a synergy bonus. 5 points perform(acting) gives you a +2 to disguise.
I've even gone ahead and rolled Disguise into the Perform (Acting) skill. I have to strongly agree with Jess Door to the extent that I'd like skills to be more or less equal in breadth, if they all cost 1 skill point per rank. As it is, Acrobatics and Perception are "super skills" encompassing lots of things that are only vaguely related... but Craft, Perform, and Knowledge have hundreds of minor variants that are each sold separately.
That makes absolutely no kind of sense at all to me, so I've combined all music stuff (instuments, singing, composition) into Perform (music); all acting and disguise stuff into Perform (acting); and all forms of dance into Perform (Dance). Perform (oratory) got rolled into Diplomacy (or you could pull it off with Acting as well). Perform (juggling) or whatever goes into Sleight of Hand. So, in my homebrew rules, there are only 3 perform skills, not 7 or 8.
I think the easiest solution is to remove perform and make bardic performances a part of a talent pool.
Technically, I think the easiest solution would be to keep the bard exactly the same as in 3.5.
I still don't understand what problem we're trying to solve. The original poster's point that a Pathfinder bard has fewer skill points than a 3.5 bard isn't really true (you might be able to create a counter-example, but for the "average" bard I don't think he's any worse off). So is the problem that there's a useless skill in the game?
So is the problem that there's a useless skill in the game?
Granted, that's a skills discussion, not a bard one, but since the skills-specific thread isn't open, I wonder why:
If there's a logical mechanics reason for that, great. Otherwise, why make bards buy lots of Perform skills, unless we make rogues buy lots of Perception skills (i.e., go back to the 3.5 skills list)? I like skills consolidation, but I feel as if it's been done to high-utility skills that didn't need it as much, and has been ignored for low-utility, high-flavor skills that need it more. I can easily see how people can say, "ya know, the rogue (who focuses on Acrobatics, Perception, and Stealth) made out like bandit with the skills consolidation, but the bard (who focuses on Performance, Knowledge, and Profession skills) really got kind of shafted in comparison."
Does it matter whether they are positive or supportive if it gets results? I can't help but notice that Matt's thread more or less went nowhere while in this one three developers got involved and James suggested bumping Skill points to compensate the bard's loss of skill points.Squeaky wheel meet oil?
We'll see. Hopefully I'll get some time to catch up and provide some more insight rather than continue the back-n-forth stalemate nature of this thread.
-Matt
|
|
There's a point you're both missing, or refusing to examine.
Perform is not a "useless" "wasted" "unneeded" skill because it does nothing.
Its problems are:
- It doesn't do anything mechanically that Profession(blah), where "blah" = something performance based such as "acting", "dancing" or "singing", doesn't do. It's redundant.
- Its mechanical usefulness is orders of magnitude less than the mechanical usefulness of most other skills that cost the same amount of opportunity to "buy" for your character.
Either of these problems is a mechanical weakness inherent to Perform's place within the skill system large enough to merit re-examination of the presense of Perform as a viable skill in PRPG.
Forcing bards to "spend" a skill point/lvl on such a skill in order to gain access to a portion of their class abilities - not use their abilities to full effectiveness, like rogues, but only gain access to their abilities - is a built in system to "de-optimize" the bard. Unless you believe the bard to be overpowered mechancially when compared to other classes, this is not desirable in a well integrated system.
You can make disparaging remarks on my ability or willingness to roleplay because I speak up about mechanical balance concerns in the design of the bard class if you wish to. They do not supercede the fact that mechanical balance of at least a nominal level is one of the design concerns in any game system. Unless you believe that mechanical balance should not be a concern at all in the design of the PRPG system, I suggest you converse on this subject at a level that is mindful of mechanical system concerns. Otherwise please feel free to put forward your hypothesis that mechanical balance should not be a consideration at all in the Pathfinder RPG system in a thread created to discuss such a topic.
So is the problem that there's a useless skill in the game?Granted, that's a skills discussion, not a bard one, but since the skills-specific thread isn't open, I wonder why:
Listening at doors, spotting stuff, searching for traps, and smelling for disease are all the same skill, yet
Playing the harp, playing the flute, composing a song, and singing are all different skills.
That's a terrific question; I have no idea why (for instance) Eyes of the Eagle makes your sense of smell more acute!
If there's a logical mechanics reason for that, great. Otherwise, why make bards buy lots of Perform skills, unless we make rogues buy lots of Perception skills (i.e., go back to the 3.5 skills list)?
See, this is the sticking point for me. Nobody is making bards buy lots of Perform skills. I believe in letting players have complete freedom in making weird, unoptimized choices, like a bard who doesn't have any ranks in Perform, or a wizard with no spellbook, or a fighter with 3 strength. I don't think we need to idiot-proof classes by making sure that someone doesn't accidentally (gasp!) not max out two Perform skills for their bard.
Having said that, I don't really care one way or the other if the Perform skill requirement gets removed from the bard's abilities. It seems like such a minor thing.
|
|
The more I think about this thread, the more I think that maybe the right choice is to up the bard to the rogue's 8 skill points/level. I've been VERY resistant to the idea of skill creep (in particular to the fighter, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, and other 2/level classes), but unlike most other classes... the bard really IS about skills. Beyond Perform even. The bard is the scholar and the diplomat and the voice; he's the one that collects lots of lore about stuff and who knows how to look for information and so on. His Class Skill list is quite robust.
this actually sounds promising, and will give the abrd back his place of jack of all trades
still i will keep complaining abour the other classes with just 2 skills :P
|
|
I still don't understand what problem we're trying to solve. The original poster's point that a Pathfinder bard has fewer skill points than a 3.5 bard isn't really true (you might be able to create a counter-example, but for the "average" bard I don't think he's any worse off). So is the problem that there's a useless skill in the game?
The problem I am trying to solve in this thread is that Bards are required to spend at least 1 skill point per level in a single Perform skill to gain access to a significant portion of their class abilities. This is a strange mechanic no other class has. After spending this skill point, you realize that you cannot use this skill to do anything you couldn't do with spending that same point in a different skill - and you can't use it for anything very useful in the game.
It is, in my opinion, equvalent to forcing a rogue to maintain full ranks in Profession(mugger) in order to gain new sneak attack dice when they get to an odd rogue level.
It is easier, simpler, and kind to a class that has difficulty finding a place in most parties anyway to remove this mechanic and replace it with an existing one, such as rogue talents to gain bardic performances, or the ability to choose between two available bardic performances at levels where such a choice exists now between performance types.
See, this is the sticking point for me. Nobody is making bards buy lots of Perform skills.
I understand that, just bear with me for a second. It's part and parcel of the first comment you agreed with. Say I have a character (Alfred), and he wants to be good at listening. In 3.5, he maxed out Listen; in Pathfinder, he also gets Spot, Smell, Search, and a bevy of other related stuff for free. He might have wanted that other stuff, he might not have, but he's not going to say "no" to it, if it's free. I have another character, Bobo, who wants to be good at singing. In 3.5, he maxed out Perform (sing). In Pathfinder, he maxes out Perform (sing), and gets nothing extra for it, even though singing is less likely to have anywhere near the in-game use (other than annoying other PCs) as Listen (forget bardic music for now; we'll get back to it later). That's the starting point.
Now, say Alfred also wants to be able to search for traps and secret doors -- stuff that comes up all the time adventuring. In Pathfinder, he already has it for free. Say Bobo wants to learn to play the flute, just for fun. He has to spend more skill points on it. We have two problems here so far:
In essence, then, we have a "tax" on well-rounded-character fluff skills, and a "free pass" on min-max skills. That seems totally backwards to me.
And now we get down to another problem: between the two, Alfred and Bobo, is there a better than even chance that one of them is a rogue, vs. the other one being a bard? If so, then the skills consolidation doesn't just target "flavor" skills as getting less skill per skill point, it also targets certain classes as getting less skill per skill point. That miffs me a bit.
The current solution? Instead of combining perform skills, we pick the class most likely to take them (the bard), tell them they're required to max out one perform skill to gain access to any class abilities (THAT's where bardic performance comes in!), we give them more class abilities if they max out another one, too, and on top of that, give them a bonus on other minor non-consolidated skills (knowledge) to make those more attractive. We place heavy incentives, requirements, and subsidies in certain classes, rather than just making them broader, more useful skills. This seems bizarrely backwards to me. In essence, it says "the function of the Pathfinder bard is not to fill a role, but to provide more incentives for people to take ranks in the Knowledge and Perform skills."
@Jess: The ranger more or less needs Survival maxed out; it's his primary class skill. But, yes, he can function quite well without maxing it out, loses no class features, and even gets a bonus on checks. There's not a whole lot of consistency there, I agree. If the essence of bardic performance is the prerequisite Perform skill, why is it mechanically a class feature and not a function of that skill?
1) Consolidate the various Perform subskills to two -- Music (keyboard, percussion, wind, string, and sing) and Act (act, comedy, dance, and oratory).
2) Add Diplomacy's "influence attitude" ability to Perform, on top of the earn gold ability. This doesn't include the ability to make a suggestion, but can work on any creatures with an intelligence of 1 or greater regardless of language.