Skills do not cost extra points if they are not class skills, you simply do not gain the +3 bonus from putting at least 1 rank into it.
I'm still wondering about the SRD though. How often it's updated, how thoroughly it's been checked, etc. Not trying to suggest anything here, just honestly curious how often and thoroughly it's revised.
The bottom of the home page lists the dates of the latest updates (under Reference Document Updates).
At the bottom of the PRD it will list the most recent update(s).
EDIT: Pfft...the ninjas around here
PF has a lot more choice than 3.x. Skill rank limits harshes that buzz, man.
I'm still wondering about the SRD though. How often it's updated, how thoroughly it's been checked, etc. Not trying to suggest anything here, just honestly curious how often and thoroughly it's revised.
Just to be clear, folks here steer clear of the "SRD" name. PRD is used to denote the Pathfinder Resource Document. That said, the PRD is maintained by Paizo and it's by and large a copy & paste job from the books. So it's typically accurate. Certainly it's not missing things like "how do skills work in this version of the game".
Both Paizo's PRD and d20pfsrd.com are very reliable sources for materials. I'd still encourage getting at least a PDF of the Core Rulebook because the layout is better for leafing through things.
|
It's now also way easier to actually build a character skill wise and explain to people who aren't always the quickest to catch onto things.
In 3rd edition you had to remember where you took what due to the whole class/cross-class thing and it got to be at least an annoyance. Now you can just figure out how many you should have in total and just use them how you see fit. So long as your totals are right it shouldn't cause any trouble.
Also had the effect of screwing over the rogue's mastery of skills, but that's a topic for another thread :)
Skills points are hard enough to come by without the penalty slowing things down further?
In part. In another part, it's a lot easier to do NPC generation/sanity checking of multiclass characters if a skill point is a skill point is a skill point. (No needing to know if the character was a fighter for three levels and then a rogue for two, or a rouge first and then a fighter; his maximum Stealth skill is the same either way, and his total ranks in all skills will be the same number as his skill points for each level of each class.)
|
Class 1st-level Skill Points1 Higher-level Skill Points2
Barbarian (4 + Int modifier) × 4 4 + Int modifier
Bard (6 + Int modifier) × 4 6 + Int modifier
Cleric (2 + Int modifier) × 4 2 + Int modifier
Druid (4 + Int modifier) × 4 4 + Int modifier
Fighter (2 + Int modifier) × 4 2 + Int modifier
Monk (4 + Int modifier) × 4 4 + Int modifier
Paladin (2 + Int modifier) × 4 2 + Int modifier
Ranger (6 + Int modifier) × 4 6 + Int modifier
Rogue (8 + Int modifier) × 4 8 + Int modifier
Sorcerer (2 + Int modifier) × 4 2 + Int modifier
Wizard (2 + Int modifier) × 4 2 + Int modifier
Level Class skill Max Ranks Cross class skill max ranks
1 4 2
2 5 2.5
3 6 3
4 7 3.5
5 8 4
6 9 4.5
7 10 5
8 11 5.5
9 12 6
10 13 6.5
11 14 7
12 15 7.5
13 16 8
14 17 8.5
15 18 9
16 19 9.5
17 20 10
18 21 10.5
19 22 11
20 23 11.5
you could buy one skill rank in a class skill with 1 skill point. You could by ½ a skill rank in a cross class skill with one skillpoint .
For example a 1st level human rogue with a 14 intelligence gets (8+2)4+4=44 skill points at 1st level. He can spend up to 4 skill points to purchace 4 skill ranks in a class
In pathfinder, the same 1st level human rogue with a 14 intelegence gets gets 8+int mod+1=11 skill points. He may purchace 1 rank in any skill. The maximum number of ranks a player can purchace is equal to his hit die. If the skill is a class skill, he gets a +3 Modifier.
SO the 3.5 rogue could purchace 11 skills and max out on them. The Pathfinder rogue gets 11 skills that he can put a rank in. If it is a class skill that has been purchased, you get a +3 bonus..
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm still wondering about the SRD though. How often it's updated, how thoroughly it's been checked, etc. Not trying to suggest anything here, just honestly curious how often and thoroughly it's revised.
How Often: About 11,000 times per day.
No, really. There are over 200 volunteer collaborators and usually at least 5-10 are online at any one time doing one thing or another. I, John, am usually on the site virtually all-day, every day, since my job is exceedingly non-demanding. I fill in wherever needed, but usually focus on looks/appearance, performance, search result quality, and overall user-friendliness. We have two "beastmasters" who are extremely experienced at building/converting/checking monsters who manage the Bestiary section. They oversee/double-check all monsters before they hit the site and post "editor's notes" indicating when things don't appear to add up correctly. In addition to the beastmasters we have a "classmaster" and a "spells master" who do the same thing as the beastmasters, but focused on different areas of the site. In addition to the "masters" we have very many fine folks who fix typo's and missing links here and there whenever they find them. I get alerted to almost every edit on the site and double-check the work of all new collaborators for the first week or two to make sure they "get it" and also to ensure nothing "malicious" happens. Once I see everything's all good I then only randomly "spot-check" peoples work. I'm happy to say that to this day, after 2 years of running with 0 downtime, we have not had even 1 instance of anyone doing anything malicious. A couple mistakes were made here and there but we quickly reverted them.
In any event, everyone should know that basically the site is updated ALL THE FREAKING TIME. New classes, new spells, new feats, new items, etc. almost every single day. The "core rules" don't change that often so we rarely have to touch those, well except to add FAQ or Errata boxes, which we add "in-line" so that if you are looking up a rule you can't help but set the big blaring FAQ box right next to it.
Ok, back to your regularly scheduled programming...
Sidenote: Check this page out if you haven't seen it before. Brett (Beastmaster #1) posts an update every time he releases new monsters "into the wild,"
The difference is because that's not how skills work in Pathfinder. Skills work exactly as described in the Core Rulebook/PRD. Nothing more, nothing less.Ah, okay, that was my first guess but it seemed like kind of a big deal to change that so I figured I'd ask. What's the thinking on that (as in designers and the player base)? Skills points are hard enough to come by without the penalty slowing things down further?
This was less about balance and more about simplifying putting together a character's skills. In 3.5 you had to track which level you are taking what skill if you multiclass or take a prestige class, and if you took crossclass skills you had to track that meaningly .5 rank.
Pathfinder simplified that with 1rank = 1 skill point, and instead of getting more skills at first level and the 1/2 value for cross class, instead you only get x+int skills at EVERY level, and class skills get a +3 bonus if you take a rank in them.
What this does is encourage versatility (you get more bang for your buck if you spread you're skills around) and makes adding skills to a character easier, since its always 1 for 1.
Imagine if as a dm you were creating an npc rogue/fighter/duelist villain. In 3.5 the skills for this character are REALLY complicated. You get a ton of skills from the rogue, but then when you took levels of fighter most of those skills were crossclass, then when you went duelist some skills might be class skills and others are still crossclass. You would have to go level by level adding skills to the npc to get it right. In the pathfinder system, I am 12th level max ranks in any given skill is 12, i have x skipp points, i can just add them up untill i run out then add a +3 to trained class skills. At least in my experience as a dm the pathfinder version is WAAAAY faster and more convenient.