I think that is left to the realm of traits.
There is the cosmopolitan feat from the campaign setting (Katapesh) that allows you to gain two mental skills (Int, Wis or Cha based skills) as well as two additional languages.
I think that is left to the realm of traits.Traits are nice, but they're not exactly part of the RPG.
Sure they are. They're just optional. I don't know of any better way to answer your question other than getting one of the Paizo powers-that-be to speak on the subject. You could houserule that skill focus makes the skill a class skill, or wait until the APG comes out, maybe they've got something there for you. Hope that helps at all.
Zo
Creative Director
|
I think that is left to the realm of traits.Traits are nice, but they're not exactly part of the RPG.
They will be (finally!) once the Advanced Player's Guide is out. Yay!
I tried REALLY HARD to get them included in the core game, because they seem to be popular and including them in the core rulebook would have helped make the Pathfinder game feel more "Paizo," but there just wasn't room.
In any case, I'm sure it's just a matter of time before we see a feat that grants additional class skills.
I think that is left to the realm of traits.Traits are nice, but they're not exactly part of the RPG.They will be (finally!) once the Advanced Player's Guide is out. Yay!
I tried REALLY HARD to get them included in the core game, because they seem to be popular and including them in the core rulebook would have helped make the Pathfinder game feel more "Paizo," but there just wasn't room.
In any case, I'm sure it's just a matter of time before we see a feat that grants additional class skills.
Awesome news!!!
In the meantime, since being a class skill does nothing more than give you a +3 to your roll, Skill Focus does the job quite nicely.
I'm not sure if this will help but there is a feat from the OGC portion of UA that might prove useful: Skill Knowledge The phrasing is a bit vague.
In the meantime, since being a class skill does nothing more than give you a +3 to your roll, Skill Focus does the job quite nicely.
Except that skill focus plus trained class skill = net +6 (+9 with 10 or more ranks in appropriate skill) so that can add up a bit.
I'm not sure if this will help but there is a feat from the OGC portion of UA that might prove useful: Skill Knowledge The phrasing is a bit vague.
That feat is rather meaningless out of context. It's for an entirely different skill system (funny enough, rather similar to the system proposed in Pathfinder Alpha 1.0) where you pick skills to be maxed out instead of spreading around points/ranks. This feat adds additional ones.
In the meantime, since being a class skill does nothing more than give you a +3 to your roll, Skill Focus does the job quite nicely.Except that skill focus plus trained class skill = net +6 (+9 with 10 or more ranks in appropriate skill) so that can add up a bit.
.
I'm not sure what you're saying.
I'm giving an alternative to a feat that makes a skill a class skill, which is what was requested. Making a skill a class skill only gives you a +3 to its use...Skill Focus does the same thing. Yes BOTH things would add up to more than +3, but that's not what was being asked.
|
I'm not sure what you're saying.
I'm giving an alternative to a feat that makes a skill a class skill, which is what was requested. Making a skill a class skill only gives you a +3 to its use...Skill Focus does the same thing. Yes BOTH things would add up to more than +3, but that's not what was being asked.
Actually, that kind of is what's being asked:
Will there ever be a Skill Training feat to make a skill count as a "class" skill? I realize there's skill focus but, sometimes it's nice to have both. :P
The OP acknowledged that Skill Focus gives the same +3 bonus as the trained bonus, but states that he would like to able to benefit from both bonuses.
If it was in my game, I'd allow a feat to treat a specific skill as a class skill. Alternately, I'd allow a player to lose a class skill and gain a new one if it fit the flavor of the PC (example: a cleric of Gozreh losing Know(Nobility) and Know(History) and gaining Know(Nature) and Know(Geography)).
Thanks, but I'm not looking for existing feats tied to the campaign setting.
Why not? What's bad about a feat coming from a campaign setting? Wipe off the Golarion flavour and use it. You don't have to tap the Weave to use it, you don't need a Dragonmark, you don't need to be Preserver, it's not a Low Skill and thus restricted to Unclean, or anything like that.
Traits are nice, but they're not exactly part of the RPG.
What else are they part of? The cartoon franchise?
I don't understand what you have with this stuff? You realise that there will never be a feat the way you like as part of the core RPG, because that book is written, printed, and sold. So what does it matter where the feat comes from? Or whether it is a trait, something which you can get by taking the Extra Traits feat.
The traits are from a completely free source, and the other is OGL, so you can get it for free, too.
And if you hate Chronicles: House rule it.
Wait: Save the effort
Skill Training [General]
Your training included a skill that is not among your classes' basic skill set
Benefit: Select a skill. If it is not a class skill for any of your classes, you can treat it as a class skill. If it already is a class skill for any of your classes, or you later take levels in a class this skill is a class skill for, you gain a +2 bonus in the skill
Special: You can take this feat more than once. The benefits don't stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a different skill.
There.
|
|
Why not? What's bad about a feat coming from a campaign setting?
Because I play with more then 1 DM that doesn't let us use stuff from setting books if we're not playing in that setting.
I don't understand what you have with this stuff? You realise that there will never be a feat the way you like as part of the core RPG, because that book is written, printed, and sold. So what does it matter where the feat comes from? Or whether it is a trait, something which you can get by taking the Extra Traits feat.
Pathfinder Roleplaying is not the Golarion Roleplaying Game.
And if you hate Chronicles: House rule it.
Never said I hated it.
There.
Did you fall out of bed before posting this?
The original question was a SYSTEM related question direct at Paizo. I tried being very polite when people started offering alternatives. James thankfully chimed in and address the original interest, realize that some of us don't/can't use setting material in non-Golarion games.
Did you fall out of bed before posting this?
The original question was a SYSTEM related question direct at Paizo. I tried being very polite when people started offering alternatives. James thankfully chimed in and address the original interest, realize that some of us don't/can't use setting material in non-Golarion games.
I think KaeYoss's suggestions were perfectly legitimate. If your DM won't let you use things from a golarian book, what makes you think they'll let you use something from the APG or any other yet to be published Paizo product?
|
|
I think KaeYoss's suggestions were perfectly legitimate. If your DM won't let you use things from a golarian book, what makes you think they'll let you use something from the APG or any other yet to be published Paizo product?
Because setting books were off limits during 3.x :P
The Complete books and other splat books were fine. Realms, Lance, Loft, heck even Scarred Lands no. These DMs don't want to deal with fluff and balancing issues of other settings. I can understand and respect the attitude.
I consider it a perfectly reasonable house-rule to say that Skill Focus and all of the "+2 to two skills" feats make the chosen skills class skills in addition to their normal effects.
That said, I too really wish there was something official, because I don't have access to my finely crafted selection of house-rules when I'm playing.
Pathfinder Roleplaying is not the Golarion Roleplaying Game.
And the basic traits are a purely Pathfinder Roleplaying Game mechanic. Some specific feats are Golarion-fluffed, but the traits in question are world-neutral and available to everyone for free.
|
|
Pathfinder Roleplaying is not the Golarion Roleplaying Game.And the basic traits are a purely Pathfinder Roleplaying Game mechanic. Some specific feats are Golarion-fluffed, but the traits in question are world-neutral and available to everyone for free.
Really? Show me the book in the RPG line that has them in it. Last time I checked there are only 2 books, the Core Rulebook and the Bestiary and they weren't in them. Until APG comes out, traits aren't an option. And when they are, the ones in RPG line books only.
Just like my dual wielding rogue had to use Off-Hand Parry from the splat books instead of Twin Sword Style from the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting even then they were both feats that basically gave you an AC bonus for using certain weapons in your off-hand.
Anyway, I'm done arguing with people about what will be and what won't be allowed at a game table they don't even play at.
|
|
Wow. I understand now that your original question was a literal one - you wanted a yes or no answer from Paizo, and James gave you one.
The other posters, unable to give an official answer for obvious reasons, instead tried to assist you the best we could by offering rules interpretations, house rules, and pointing you towards the most official source we could (traits).
It's not our fault that your GM is strict about allowing non-core material. Don't get upset at us for not being able to read the minds of you and your GM - we're just trying to help you out.
Besides, how much do you think the traits being cited are going to change between now and the APG? Is your GM really that strict that s/he would wait until the rule was reprinted to allow you to use it? Or is it a matter of disliking the traits system all together?
Why not? What's bad about a feat coming from a campaign setting?Because I play with more then 1 DM that doesn't let us use stuff from setting books if we're not playing in that setting.
Just tells him "look, this may be in a Campaign Setting book, but it works perfectly fine anywhere. He should understand that.
I don't understand what you have with this stuff? You realise that there will never be a feat the way you like as part of the core RPG, because that book is written, printed, and sold. So what does it matter where the feat comes from? Or whether it is a trait, something which you can get by taking the Extra Traits feat.Pathfinder Roleplaying is not the Golarion Roleplaying Game.
Golarion, on the other hand, is a Pathfinder Campaign Setting. In fact, it's THE Pathfinder Campaign Setting. It's very, very Pathfinder.
And I'm not sure they will reprint the feat in a book from the RPG line because there's people who categorically refuse stuff just because it's from a campaign setting book. Especially since the existing feat is open content.
I'd say it's easier to talk your GM out of his stance than waiting years until Paizo might reprint that feat or invent a similar one.
There.Did you fall out of bed before posting this?
The original question was a SYSTEM related question direct at Paizo. I tried being very polite when people started offering alternatives. James thankfully chimed in and address the original interest, realize that some of us don't/can't use setting material in non-Golarion games.
First of all: I did not fall out of the bed. If I had, I surely wouldn't have gone to the trouble of writing that house-ruled feat for you, which is totally campaign-neutral.
Which I did. I don't exactly call that impolite. I'd call it helpful.
And I realize that some people will refuse to use/allow stuff from a campaign setting. I just don't agree with them - not in the case of stuff that just happens to be in a setting book and can be used practically everywhere.
I can understand that he won't allow you to use Spellfire Hierophant or something. But I'm sure if you talk to the guy and tell him how this feat is not tied to the setting, he'll allow it.
Anyway, I'm done arguing with people about what will be and what won't be allowed at a game table they don't even play at.
Let me guess: You fell out of the bed because your GM won't let you use Golarion stuff just because and now you're projecting! :P
Really? Show me the book in the RPG line that has them in it.
Come on, that's beneath you. We all know it's a free PDF available here. Just because they didn't put it in a dead-tree-book yet doesn't mean it's not part of the RPG.
Really? Show me the book in the RPG line that has them in it. Last time I checked there are only 2 books, the Core Rulebook and the Bestiary and they weren't in them. Until APG comes out, traits aren't an option. And when they are, the ones in RPG line books only.Pathfinder Roleplaying is not the Golarion Roleplaying Game.And the basic traits are a purely Pathfinder Roleplaying Game mechanic. Some specific feats are Golarion-fluffed, but the traits in question are world-neutral and available to everyone for free.
Your argument does not counter my argument. Traits are a PRPG mechanic. It says so right on the Traits handout: CHARACTER TRAITS WEB ENHANCEMENT. Further on, it states, "And that brings us here, to the official Pathfinder character traits PDF, updated to work seamlessly with the Pathfinder RPG. This document contains all the rules you need to use character traits in your campaign, be they Pathfinder Adventure Paths or campaigns of our own design."
I'm not arguing that your DM says he will allow them. I'm arguing against your statement that Traits are "Golarion Roleplaying Game" and not PRPG.