I was checking Ultimate Combat and noticed the Tactician archetype, which among other things gets a fighter more skill points and more class skills. That reminded me of another option for fighters to get more skills - the variant they were offered in the Pathfinder Chronicles setting book. Is it still a valid choice for a Pathfinder game? I think the book came out before the Pathfinder system was finalized and 3.5 rules were still being used.
It should be fine, but was always a bad trade if ya ask me. I would just give em 4 skills per level and fold that list into the normal fighter skill list and be done with it myself.
I never can understand 2 skill per level. It never made sense and still does not.
It should be fine, but was always a bad trade if ya ask me. I would just give em 4 skills per level and fold that list into the normal fighter skill list and be done with it myself.
I never can understand 2 skill per level. It never made sense and still does not.
Well, supposedly that's the level of skills you get when you focus exclusively on your class specialty (i.e. wizard focusing on arcane training) and don't go out at all :) . While it makes marginally more sense for fighters than it does for, say, paladins (who actually have a pretty decent skill list, and fluff reasons for needing to make use of it), I am certainly interested in ways it could be fixed.
As for a bad trade... 1 bonus feat out of 11 for 2 skill points every level? I think it's pretty decent, all things included.
I never agreed with it.
Fighter who are civilized only get 2...but ranger ( who are more specialized) get 6 and Barbarian get 4 and couldn't even read.
Wizards get 2 ( the master of book learning gets 2, but is often more like 6) while the cleric ( often expected to be learned) also gets 2 as does the sorcerer. Yet the druid gets 4?
It was kinda lopsided. It was "lets screw this class in the skill area because..well just because"
I can tell you I have ran a minmun 4 skills for about 11 years now. It has never hurt anything It has held some of those classes.
So,Yes I think it is an awful trade to bring you up to par with the barbarian with an int of 9 who couldn't read.
I saw skills mostly as a measure of how devoted a certain class is to its "core" abilities - i.e. fighters or wizards constantly practice their craft, rangers, rogues and bards focus on skills as well. However, imo sorcerers and paladins definitely need 4+ skill points/level; for fighters and clerics there should at least be a viable option to get them (no, PF cloistered cleric doesn't count).