For everyone telling us that "No one is making the bard take perform skills":
Play me a bard without taking perform. Then give me a playtest report.
The only class features you will have are:
Bardic Knowledge
Well-versed (a bonus against all of 10 spells W O W!)
Lore Master
Jack of all trades
And your spells.
That's it.
Then take one perform skill to get:
Countersong (useful against 10 spells and a small handful of never used monster special abilities)
Fascinate (doesn't work in combat, and when are you going to use it out of combat?)
Inspire Courage
Inspire Competence (or you know just use the aid other action anyone can use, much more quietly)
Inspire Greatness
Inspire Heroics
Mass suggestion (a level six spell that you have to fascinate for first and only get at level 18)
Deadly Performance
and one of the two following lists:
Dirge of Doom
Song of Freedom
Frightening Tune
OR
Discordant Performance
Soothing Performance
Paralyzing show
FINALLY take 2 perform skills and get that entire list.
OK fine, bards have to take two perform skills to access all their class abilities
Then rogues have to take profession(mugger) and profession(backstabber) to use sneak attack
Clerics have to take profession(priest) and Profession(gravedigger) to use divine magic and have channel energy
Paladins must take Knowledge(nobility) and Profession(lawyer) to get smite evil and Lay on Hands
Wizards must take profession(magican) and profession(magistar) to use spells
Becuase it makes just as much sense for them to have to waste skill point on useless stuff as it does for the bard.
OK fine, bards have to take two perform skills to access all their class abilitiesThen rogues have to take profession(mugger) and profession(backstabber) to use sneak attack
Clerics have to take profession(priest) and Profession(gravedigger) to use divine magic and have channel energy
Paladins must take Knowledge(nobility) and Profession(lawyer) to get smite evil and Lay on Hands
Wizards must take profession(magican) and profession(magistar) to use spells
Actually, I like the idea of gaining extra class abilities if you invest in certain skills.
In a sense, it's true here: If you take one just one perform skill (say, sing), you get to use all the bardic music abilities from 3.5. But if you spend an extra point, you get more abilities. I kinda like that mechanic.
But it's true that this should be implemented consistently, or not at all. Since 3e isn't built like this, and it would mean too big a change for a revision (which PF RPG is), let's keep it simple.
I support the consolidation of perform skills (and also for Profession and Craft skills). Might not be too realistic, but realistic enough I think, especially since we have similar consolidations (training your eyes doesn't make you a better listener, or more likely to find things you're searching, but PF rolls them all into one ability.). On top of that, make bardic music give bards an extra free rank in perform skills, just like bardic knowledge, and then get rid of the skill rank restrictions in bardic music abilities: the requirement for deadly performance should just be "bard 20".
Still, perform isn't useless. In order to be useless, it would have to have no use. Perform may not grant you immediate mechanical benefits, or be as powerful as acrobatics or something, but it does have an use: You can perform and look good doing it. QED
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. [various good points snipped for space]
I think that various arguments are getting mixed together in this conversation. Some I agree with, some I don't.
Argument #1: "Pathfinder bards get fewer skills than 3.5 bards!!"
Response #1: No, they don't. In the simplest case, they need an extra Perform skill, but they get a free Knowledge skill, bonuses on all knowledge skills, benefits from skill consolidation, etc.
Argument #2: "It's silly that you need both bard levels and ranks in Perform to qualify for the various songs."
Response #2: Yes, it is kind of silly, although that's not unique to Pathfinder; it's a leftover from 3.5. But I'd probably be disappointed by a Pathfinder bard that has no ranks in Perform at all.
Argument #3: "It's not fair that Spot, Listen and Search are all combined into one skill while Perform skills are still separate."
Response #3: I think Pathfinder made a mistake with most of their combined skills. But I don't have a problem with the fact that some skills are more useful for dungeon delving while some skills are not very useful for adventurers. I certainly don't believe that all skills should be as useful as the most useful skill.
Argument #4: "Since only bards care about Perform, it should be deleted; everyone else should take Profession (entertainer), or something."
Response #4: By this argument, all skills can be bundled into the classes that use them (e.g. Disable Device for rogues, Spellcraft for wizards, Handle Animal for druids and rangers) and that strikes me as going backwards towards AD&D (where the only skills are class features).
Argument #5: "Non-combat 'flavour' skills should be cheap/free."
Response #5: This strikes me as going towards 4E's skill system and its drastically reduced list (which I don't like). If your fighter wants to be the world's greatest baker (say), why shouldn't he have to devote just as much of his "training budget" (i.e. skill points) to achieving that goal as an NPC would?
In 3.5, the save DC for a number of the bardic abilities were based on his Perform skill check. This actually gave him an in game use for the skill other than roleplaying.
Now, I agree with the changes to how the DCs for bardic abilities are figured under Pathfinder. Unfortunately, this moves the skill use of Perform largely to roleplaying. Don't get me wrong, I had two characters in my Age of Worms campaign that routinely used the Perform skills in roleplaying. Neither were bards. They occasionally joked about retiring from adventuring to go on tour. So, I am cool with roleplaying.
However, I would like to see some additional abilities added to a number of skills. Perform and Profession being two examples. It would add some flavor to what a character can do other than make a little coin. One possibility is to allow the bard to make a performance check to boost the DC of their abilities. An enjoyable performanceadds +1 to the DC, a great performace adds +2, a memorable performance adds +3, and a extraordinary performance adds +4.
I think that various arguments are getting mixed together in this conversation. Some I agree with, some I don't.
Argument #1: "Pathfinder bards get fewer skills than 3.5 bards!!"
Argument #2: "It's silly that you need both bard levels and ranks in Perform to qualify for the various songs."
Argument #3: "It's not fair that Spot, Listen and Search are all combined into one skill while Perform skills are still separate."
Argument #4: "Since only bards care about Perform, it should be deleted; everyone else should take Profession (entertainer), or something."
Argument #5: "Non-combat 'flavour' skills should be cheap/free."
Thanks for the breakdown, Hogarth. Just so we're all on the same page, my personal repsonses to those arguments would be as follows:
(1) No, they don't. But 3.5e aside, bards in Pathfinder benefit a lot less from consolidation than rogues do.(2) I don't think it's silly, but it is inconsistent with other classes. I've personally houseruled that wizards need Spellcraft = CL, and clerics need Knowledge (religion) = CL, just to maintain a semblance of parity among classes.
(3) "Not fair" isn't quite it; "totally bizarre" would be a better description. My biggest issue is that the most useful skills got cheaper and more useful, and the least useful skills are even less useful in comparison.
(4) Totally disagree, but see #2, above.
(5) No, they shouldn't be free, nor cheaper. But by the same token, they should not be 3x as expensive as the more useful skills (as they are in the Beta). That's just totally backwards; it strikes me as setting up a pissing contest: "I'm such a good role-player that I took Perform instead of Perception! Look at me! I'm so awesome! All MY skills suck, so you know I'm better at this game than you are!" Hopefully, we're all mature enough gamers to take flavor skills when appropriate; they shouldn't intentionally be made 3x costlier than useful skills, just to prove some kind of childish point.
If KaeYoss's idea that bards got a skill point that could only be put into a performance skill at each bard level went through I think any argument I have about bard skill points would be fixed.
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.
Strange and unique - sound like Bards to me.
Seriously - why *shouldn't* there be a class that has skill requirements for abilities? Adds some interesting variety.
Also, please consider this:
1. It's "silly" to have Bardic Performance require both bard level and ranks to "magically" get an ability.
2. So let's make it bard level and a Perform Check to use. Set the DC fairly easy at 5 higher than the ranks it used to require.
3. Now a bard doesn't have to put ranks in, but with Cha 12 and maxed ranks can automatically make the DC's if they want to.
4. So every bard will put exactly enough ranks in Perform to automatically succeed at the skill check.
5. Now isn't it silly that Bards have to make these checks, that they will automatically make?
6. Let's just make the check automatic, and just require that they put some ranks in....
My point is that the next step to making Perform ranks "mean something" is to require checks, not to get rid of the skill. But requiring checks becomes just as 'silly' as requiring the ranks in the first place.
|
Some breakdown of various aspects of the Bard / Performance / Skill points issues
My thoughts:
Argument #1: "Pathfinder bards get fewer skills than 3.5 bards!!"
Response #1: Totally irrelevant to the conversation. I don't care about 3.5 bards, except that we must consider the ease of transforming them into Pathfinder bards for backwards compatibility reasons.
The only thing relevent to the design of a new system is intra-system balance. Perfect balance is probably impossible to achieve without ruining the variety inherent in the 3.5 system, which I loved. But some nominal parity should be one of the significant goals.
Argument #2: "It's silly that you need both bard levels and ranks in Perform to qualify for the various songs."
Response #2: IMHO, "silly" here is used to disparage the opinion. With that caveat:
It is an oddity that matches no other mechanic in the system. It is conceptually a weakening of the class because it removes a "resource" - 1 skill point / level - from the character when no other class has a similar required "resource" expenditure. It is in reality a weakening of the class because the "resource" must be spent on a skill that is, in game mechanics, not only indistinguishable from another existant skill, but it is also one of the least, if not the least optimal ability to buy with a skill point.
If the bard class were considered overpowered in most situations, this would still be an odd mechanic, but it would be understandable. Since the consensus opinion is that the bard is on a low tier on the rankings of class power, this serves no in-system purpose. As the performance ranks have almost no impact on subsequent bard performance uses, this prerequisite makes even less sense.
It's as if they created the Perform skill in 3.5, then realized "Wait a minute...we've provided no mechanic that makes it at all desirable to take this skill! Let's force some chraracters to take it anyway so the decision to create this skill doesn't look dumb." I see no good reason to keep this artifact of bad design.
Argument #3: "It's not fair that Spot, Listen and Search are all combined into one skill while Perform skills are still separate."
Response #3: While you can use the word "fair" here, it's not so much about fairness as it is (I reiterate) intra-system balance.
While I am happy to admit that some of my design preferences are influenced by a desire for beauty and efficiency of the system itself, what is actually important ( and less open to personal differences of opinion ) is balance. If something requires the same opportunity cost as another option, then both options should, in some situations at least, be of equal value.
Perception is valuable to any character. There does not exist a single character that wouldn't find some advantage from a good Perception modifier. Spellcraft, while it has little value to non spellcaster (some value - identifying enemy spells before they're cast is kinda cool...), has extreme value to any spellcaster. Acrobatics has value to both casters and non-casters. Diplomacy is valuable to most characters, though you don't need it to have a fun character. I even find Knowledge valuable to most of my characters. It moves stories along, deepens the world through random little discoveries, and allows the discovery of weaknesses and strengths of opponents through a method other than trial and error.
But Craft, Profession, and Perform skills are heavily broken down into discrete entities (not well defined entities, at that), and provide little in game mechanical utility - little roleplay utility, little combat utility. Perform, in my opinion, is the least useful of the skills because it is a subset of the Profession skills. I would rather roll perform into Profession and save the wasted page space for something else cool in the rulebooks.
Argument #4: "Since only bards care about Perform, it should be deleted; everyone else should take Profession (entertainer), or something."
Response #4: Again, you're twisting the "argument" to make it look ridiculous. The reasons it should be deleted are detailed above.
The only reason bardic use of perform comes up in the arguements to get rid of Perform entirely is because we're discussing the bard class, and discussions about the strange requirement but lack of uses for the Perform skill with the bard class leads to the realization that Perform has no reason to exist as a skill. Not because bards use it, but because it's a redundant bit of bad design left over from 3.5 that serves no purpose at all. For those that wish to attach mechanics to a character's ability to perform (very useful for playing bards, I agree. Does that comedy riff leave the inn gasping for air because they're laughing so hard? Or can you hear crickets chirping?), Profession(string musician) is still there for that purpose. You haven't lost the ability to attach mechanics to your roleplaying if needed.
Argument #5: "Non-combat 'flavour' skills should be cheap/free."
Response #5: I have seen no one propose this, ask for this, or even suggest this. Maybe I missed it?
Either way, this idea is probably a non-starter. I think it would introduce unneeded complexity to the admirably streamlined skill system. Instead, greater care should be paid to make sure that skills are consolidated in such a way that no skill is in all cases superior to another.
There will be characters for whom Use Magic Device isn't worthwhile - and those for whom it is. Same with Disable Device, Acrobatics and Spellcraft. But profession, perform and craft are overly specific and mechanically weak to the point that they're worth significantly less than other skill choices - for all characters.
Perform is redundant, so I believe it should be done away with. Profession and Craft should be changed so a little less specificity is needed (maybe...like Knowledge, defined Professions and Crafts of a broad nature? Profession(Laborer), Profession(beauracracy(sp?)), Profession(Entertainer), Profession(Mercenary), Profession(Mercantilism)?) and maybe a few extra mechanical uses. That would balance their relative value a bit more.
|
|
It seems some are confusing the discussion about the design of bard class and the tangential discussion of the Perform skill.
As the post monster ate my post, I'll just get right to the punchline.
Examination of the design of the Bard class and how the Perform skill is utilized by the Bard class reveals that the Perform skill is an artificial construct that serves no purpose in the game system except to limit the choices of bard players.
The Perform skill exists only to remove skill buying choices from people that play Bards. It adds no utility to any character that ranks in Profession doesn't add.
Argument #2: "It's silly that you need both bard levels and ranks in Perform to qualify for the various songs."
Response #2: IMHO, "silly" here is used to disparage the opinion.
Not at all, considering that this is the argument I agree with! I completely agree that it's silly, weird, abnormal, odd, kooky, dumb, whatever you want to call it.
It is an oddity that matches no other mechanic in the system. It is conceptually a weakening of the class because it removes a "resource" - 1 skill point / level - from the character when no other class has a similar required "resource" expenditure.
Isn't that like saying that requiring ranks in Disable Device (a 99% useless skill for non-rogues) is removing a resource from rogues? On the contrary, that 1 skill pt/level is factored into the decision to give rogues 8 skill points per level in the first place. Likewise, the need to spend 1 (or 2, with a kickback of 1, in Pathfinder) skill points per level is factored into the decision to give the bard 6 skill points per level.
Argument #3: "It's not fair that Spot, Listen and Search are all combined into one skill while Perform skills are still separate."
Response #3: While you can use the word "fair" here, it's not so much about fairness as it is (I reiterate) intra-system balance.
"Fair" and "balanced" are synonymous to me (in this context).
Argument #4: "Since only bards care about Perform, it should be deleted; everyone else should take Profession (entertainer), or something."
Response #4: Again, you're twisting the "argument" to make it look ridiculous. The reasons it should be deleted are detailed above.
I'm not trying to "twist" anything; I'm just trying to summarize. Certainly there are still going to be skilled and unskilled entertainers; whether they should use the Perform skill or a Profession skill is a valid point to debate irrespective of the previous arguments.
Argument #5: "Non-combat 'flavour' skills should be cheap/free."
Response #5: I have seen no one propose this, ask for this, or even suggest this. Maybe I missed it?
I thought Kirth was saying something this (with his story of Alfred the Perceptive and Bobo the Performer), but he disagrees.
|
|
Not at all, considering that this is the argument I agree with! I completely agree that it's silly, weird, abnormal, odd, kooky, dumb, whatever you want to call it.
Well then, I owe you an apology. Apologies for my assumption.
Isn't that like saying that requiring ranks in Disable Device (a 99% useless skill for non-rogues) is removing a resource from rogues? On the contrary, that 1 skill pt/level is factored into the decision to give rogues 8 skill points per level in the first place. Likewise, the need to spend 1 (or 2, with a kickback of 1, in Pathfinder) skill points per level is factored into the decision to give the bard 6 skill points per level.
On the contrary. It is entirely possible to build a rogue that doesn't care to disable devices. What class abilities would said rogue lose? Trapfinding is still relevent, as he can find and avoid traps. Trap Sense will still help him avoid the negative effects of traps. He is also, of course, choosing to forgo the disabling of devices, but that is inherent to the skill, not the class.
I have personally built many rogues without disable device or open locks, and had fellow players do the same because they built confidence tricksters or acrobats or some such.
As I have said many times before, and will continue to say, if you want to compare the Performance requirements in the bard class with class requirements in other skill monkey classes, we are forced to create roughly equivalent hypothetical situations:
- In order to gain sneak attack damage dice upon reaching an odd level of rogue, the rogue must have a number of ranks equal to his level invested in the Profession (mugger) skill.
- In order for a ranger to gain access to his Favored Enemy class abilities or Combat Style feats, the ranger must have a number of ranks equal to his level invested the Profession (hunter) skill.
If both of these situations were required for the other skill monkey classes, then you are right, the design considerations would be comaparable. As it is, the Perform reuqirements on the bard only serve to remove their skill monkey status and skill point options in an obscure shell game that seems tailor made to deceive players. This is an artifact of 3.5 that serves no good design purpose.
I'm not trying to "twist" anything; I'm just trying to summarize. Certainly there are still going to be skilled and unskilled entertainers; whether they should use the Perform skill or a Profession skill is a valid point to debate irrespective of the previous arguments.
Very well then. Here's how I'd summarize my arguments on this subject:
Argument #4: Since Perform is only utilized to remove skill points from use for Bardic characters or mimic the mechanical effects of Profession skills, Perform should be replaced as a skill option with Profession skills.
I thought Kirth was saying something this (with his story of Alfred the Perceptive and Bobo the Performer), but he disagrees.
Yeah, I understood him as merely pointing out the disparity in value between different skills in the new skill system and the system balance issues that disparity caused, not suggesting a new category of "fluff" skills with new purchase rules.
|
But Craft, Profession, and Perform skills are heavily broken down into discrete entities (not well defined entities, at that), and provide little in game mechanical utility - little roleplay utility, little combat utility. Perform, in my opinion, is the least useful of the skills because it is a subset of the Profession skills. I would rather roll perform into Profession and save the wasted page space for something else cool in the rulebooks.
how much i hate to have my post erased....
i agree
this skills are suboptimal options
but instead of seeing some of them go, i would prefer them to be made optimal
craft: smithing should let you work all metal things... not divide it in weapons & armor, etc
professions should be better defined and give some bonus when properly used, not only some money ...
perform should be able to move hearts withotu being a bard
still i complain because this options are suboptimal for the bard and a few classes theya re even more for the classes with nothing but 2 skill points... it means that not only they lose a valuable resource... but taking it to have some extra background its punished by dividing it and giving all of them little to no use... but as i have read before "this clases need no skills to function... so they MUST not get them" <- this is a ridiculous argument, but highly sustained in the forums...
why a fighter should want to have a decent craft: smithing or profession: smith... notbecause heplans to retire and makes suits of armors and weapons, no
but because he NEEDS to keep his equipment in optimal conditions, and leaving it once in a while with the armorer orthe weaponsmith... that is ridiculous...
i don't want to see any of this 3 skills to go, i want them to serve something, considering they cost the same as more useful skills...
(yes disable devise can be used by anyone... but only thiefs find the most difficult tramps, but cheap easy tramps can be disabled by anyone)
(yes disable devise can be used by anyone... but only thiefs find the most difficult tramps , but cheap easy tramps can be disabled by anyone)
That's just good fun for anyone! (I don't mean disrespect, just having a little fun)
Um... anyways, there are other uses for disable device than just disabling traps.
1. Maybe you want to put the lock on the door you just closed out of commission so someone/something can't follow you.
2. Maybe you want to stop a wagon from moving without it being noticable at first, a mechanical device needs to stop working before it rings a bell or something.
3. Jam the Porticulis open so you army can swarm into the keep.
All these are uses for disable device.
|
|
(yes disable devise can be used by anyone... but only thiefs find the most difficult tramps , but cheap easy tramps can be disabled by anyone)
That's just good fun for anyone! (I don't mean disrespect, just having a little fun)
Um... anyways, there are other uses for disable device than just disabling traps.
1. Maybe you want to put the lock on the door you just closed out of commission so someone/something can't follow you.
2. Maybe you want to stop a wagon from moving without it being noticable at first, a mechanical device needs to stop working before it rings a bell or something.
3. Jam the Porticulis open so you army can swarm into the keep.All these are uses for disable device.
i agree
i was just using an example to show that performance is the only tied to class skill
Um... anyways, there are other uses for disable device than just disabling traps.
1. Maybe you want to put the lock on the door you just closed out of commission so someone/something can't follow you.
2. Maybe you want to stop a wagon from moving without it being noticable at first, a mechanical device needs to stop working before it rings a bell or something.
3. Jam the Porticulis open so you army can swarm into the keep.All these are uses for disable device.
Right -- there are a few minor uses for the skill, and one much, much more powerful use for a particular class with a particular class feature.
Similarly, a character with Perform can:
1. Make some pocket change.
2. Impress a music-lover.
3. Use a set of Pipes of the Sewer without fear of being eaten by rats.
|
|
Right -- there are a few minor uses for the skill, and one much, much more powerful use for a particular class with a particular class feature.
Similarly, a character with Perform can:
1. Make some pocket change.
2. Impress a music-lover.
3. Use a set of Pipes of the Sewer without fear of being eaten by rats.
if its sarcasm is good :)
otherwise... i don't see how this would translate, lets say as a fair exchange of usefulness in both of them :P
i agree
this skills are suboptimal options
but instead of seeing some of them go, i would prefer them to be made optimal
craft: smithing should let you work all metal things... not divide it in weapons & armor, etc
professions should be better defined and give some bonus when properly used, not only some money ...
YES!!! Mondalve is with me completely! I love skills. All of them. If Jump and Tumble and Balance are all merged into this great new skill, Acrobatics, OK, I'm on board there. What I'd like to do is finish the job, and in some cases, that might mean sweetening the pot a bit:
In this manner, some semblance of parity among skills is maintained. I don't want to eliminate skills -- on the contrary, I want to make a skill system that has some degree of internal consistency.
Knowing how good a musician someone is is a good thing. I love the fact that there's a Perform skill. However, setting up that skill so that the average musician needs to spend most or all of their skill points on various individual instruments and forms of composition is like separating Perception back out into its components, and then further separating Listen into Listen (for noises in the background), Listen (for noises behind doors), Listen (to whispered conversations), Listen (to music), and Listen (other) skills.
I don't have any problems making Perform (and other marginal skills) more useful and/or combining them as Kirth suggests above.
I don't have any problems making Perform (and other marginal skills) more useful and/or combining them as Kirth suggests above.
Thanks, Hogarth. That brings us back to the bard: if Perform and Knowledge skills get some merging and/or improvement, then bards have plenty of skill points at 6; they would have enough to max out Perform and thus keep up with their weird class feature requirement without breaking a sweat, and they absolutely wouldn't need 8 skill points. That's my preferred solution by far.
I feel that, if we fix the skill system, the bard's problems will also be addressed thereby. If, on the other hand, we use most of the bard's class features solely as a band-aid for a skill system that makes no sense, we're engaged in very poor game design work indeed.
If KaeYoss's idea that bards got a skill point that could only be put into a performance skill at each bard level went through I think any argument I have about bard skill points would be fixed.
That's me. I solve problems. That's why both the Mob and Secret Service have me on permanent retainer.
You know when they killed Kennedy and 20 other guys at once? What, you only know of Kennedy? Now you see how good I am.