|
I have noticed that characters are given enough skill points to be good at what their class is supposed to do.
IE a human rogue with a 13 intilegence might have 11 skill points per level (8+1 int+1 favored classs, +1 human)
He might spend his skill points in Acrobatics, Appraise, Bluff, Climb, Disable Device, Knowledge Local, Linguistics, Perception, Sense motive, Slight of hand, Stealth,
I am thinking of simply doubling the skills each class receives.
For example, A Human Fighter with 2 +1 Int, +1 human= 4 skill points,
Climb, Profession: Blacksmith (armor and weapon smith), Ride, Swim.
Double it for 8 skill points
Climb, Profession: Blacksmith (armor and weapon smith), Ride, Swim.
Handle Animal, Knowledge: Dungeoneering, Knowledge Engineering, Survival
I think by doubling the skills a character gets per level, it will allow a player to create a more rounded character.
Do you think doing this will upset “game balance”?
Thanks
I have so far disliked how bards and rogues dominate skill-scenes to the detriment of the rest of the party's involvement, while less skilled characters can barely be good at their own themes. Too many skills kill diversity, as do too few.
What I do is increase 2/level classes to 4/level (with the possible exception of int-based casters, depending on who I have as players), and 4/level classes to 5/level. 6/level or more is not changed. I am thinking of replacing versatile performance wityh something else next time I run, too. I loathe how cumbersome and aggravating that ability is.
considering only a select few skills really affect game balance (perception, stealth, maybe craft depending on how it's used) I'd say go for it. I love skills but tbh it's hard to break a game by getting extra skill points.
That said, it CAN be done.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
give everyone 2 more skill points. Encourage people to use skills. It's a bigger deal for someone with 2 skills points to be bumped to 4 rather then someone who has 10 skill points being bumped up to 12.
I have always, and I mean since day 1 of 3.0 giving everyone at lest 4 skills per level. It has never once hurt the "skill monkey" classes. everyone should have skills, not just a few classes.
There are a lot of ways to handle the "Some of my players don't seem to well-rounded characters, in terms of their skills" issue. Pick one and give it a try.
I think doubling every character's skill points might affect game balance because some classes (the rogue, of course, being one) will get too much benefit from it. There are other classes (some of the spellcasters, for instance) that may also get an inappropriate boost (it's nice that they have to make choices about where to allocate their skill points, if they have a super abundance of points, they can get everything they want).
I like some of the other suggestions. In particular, giving everyone two more points at every level doesn't seem like it'll break anything. Remember there are other ways around it. You could have a campaign set up so that being from a certain place automatically gives certain benefits (these are pretty common). Another way is to let (for example) a fighter swap one of his early feats for a big pile of skills.
Lots of options. Some of them good.
give everyone 2 more skill points. Encourage people to use skills. It's a bigger deal for someone with 2 skills points to be bumped to 4 rather then someone who has 10 skill points being bumped up to 12.
+1. I have done the exact same thing since the debut of 3.0 without any problems.
Master Arminas
I have played in games where everyone got two free skill points at each level but they had to be put into craft, profession, or knowledge skills.
Profession- tailor actually saved my groups life once upon a time.
|
I have so far disliked how bards and rogues dominate skill-scenes to the detriment of the rest of the party's involvement, while less skilled characters can barely be good at their own themes. Too many skills kill diversity, as do too few.
What I do is increase 2/level classes to 4/level (with the possible exception of int-based casters, depending on who I have as players), and 4/level classes to 5/level. 6/level or more is not changed. I am thinking of replacing versatile performance wityh something else next time I run, too. I loathe how cumbersome and aggravating that ability is.
Similar to what we do, except we leave some 4 skill classes the same and the rest we bump up to 6. The 6+ stay the say and all the 2's become 4. So far it has worked well for us.
Yeah, Oracle remains 4/level. That's the only one I can think of that's not altered. I've been going with Wizards at 3/level and they still end up with more skills than anyone else, so the wizard players aren't complaining. Witches get 4/level because they don't get quite the spell availability and because it makes it simpler when I introduced the maiden/youth (cha-based), mother/father (wis-based) and crone/elder (original class) archetypes.
|
give everyone 2 more skill points. Encourage people to use skills. It's a bigger deal for someone with 2 skills points to be bumped to 4 rather then someone who has 10 skill points being bumped up to 12.
2nd this.
This would make classes that have low skills points more viable in their skills, while classes that already have a ton of skills won't become bloated "Know it alls"
I am giving my players 2+int mod skill points at 1st level, enough to have a little bit of diversity in character background, the players do not need to max out all their skill ranks, if they are not optimizing every single skill they have every class gets enough.
Having even a single rank in some skills makes them fairly capable in that skill equivalent to many commoners but with higher ability scores, a typical non-human fighter with int 10 can have two tag skills it is very good at.
Otherwise I'd go with adding 1 per level to every class, but give 6/lvl or higher classes the option to get toughness as a bonus feat instead.
I did home-rule 4 ranks for fighters while making Perception and Sense Motive class skills, while getting rid of Knowledge (Engineering). Otherwise I think the number of ranks is fine as it is.
Instead of adding skill points, why not simply finish the job that Paizo started, in terms of skills consolidation? In Pathfinder, Acrobatics and Perceptions are huge skills amalgamations, but the other individual skills stayed fragmented. Why not merge all Perform skills into a single Perform skill? Likewise for Craft skills. Climb and Swim could merge, and you could steal Jump from Acrobatics and add it, too, to make an Athletics skill (inevitable commentary on that not being "realistic" aside). Combine Spellcraft + Knowledge (arcana); Knowledge (religion) + Knowledge (the planes); Survival + Knowledge (geography); Bluff + Intimidate + Sense Motive; etc.
Then you can keep the number of skill points the same, but everyone can do more with them.
|
|
Thank you all for your posts.
My basic goal is to give the players ‘ characters enough skill points, so that they have a couple of spare skill points, they can spend to both ad depth and perhaps a “background”
I would like for the player running a fighter to be able to say, yeah my character is a black smith in his off time, (profession blacksmith) and his family raised and sold horses (Handle Animal)
Or the wizard to be able to say, Yes my father was a fisherman, that’s why I know how to handle boats (Profession Sailor). Because there can be some presser for the wizard to spend every skill point in Knowledge Arcane, Spellcraft, and well the rest of the knowledge skills.
Or for the Cleric who is often very hard pressed for skills, to be able to say, well (Craft: potter) my character was a potter before he heard the call to the priest hood, and while he was training in a monastery he got a broad education, (Heal Knowledge: Planes, Knowledge Religion, Linguistics) and from his work as a parish priest, he learned how to help settle disputes (Diplomacy) and how to listen to what people were not saying when taking Confessions, (Sense motive)
Black Lantern perhaps giving everyone 2 more skill ranks is the way to go. Its simple, gives the 2+ skill classes a little more, and the 8+-skill rank rogue a few more skills.
I will have to admit giving the rogue 16 ranks + int modifier, might very well turn the rouge into his own little thieves guild.
Altarlost, I do understand your concern, however interestingly enough, for some strange reason, I have more rogues at the weekly PFS game I run at my local game store then any other class. Everybody seems to want to play one, not that I mind.
Kirth Geresn. thank you for your suggestion, however, I'm just looking for a small tweak, not a great big one. I think that Pathfinder has done ok with the skill consolidation.
Now granted it has now been a couple of years since I looked in the 4.0 D&D players hand book o bought when the game first came out, I remember that I thought at the time, the 4.0 D&D game had gone too far with skill consolidation.
the +2 skill points across the board seems like a good idea.
again thank you for your thoughts
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Instead of adding skill points, why not simply finish the job that Paizo started, in terms of skills consolidation?
Great observation :) My group allows skills and some class-features to overlap functions in the grey areas. Profession: Engineering and Trapfinding overlap quite a bit, and so the need for that game mechanic is always available for a cost in skill points.
To OP, also keep in mind that skills and class-features are as relevant as you make them. If you never have to haggle over prices, you probably wont invest points into Appraise. If you never put traps into your game, then who on earth would play the core rogue when the archetypes offer replacements. :) I encourage you to consider keeping the skill point economy as written in the books, and then add critical situations which require the use of a particular skill or ability. Its absence will be sorely felt, and classes with specialized skill lists will start to think *Hey, I'm the only one who can do that! I'll be the go-to guy for <swimming> <bluffing> <performing>* etc.
I only suggest this because limited resources--ie time, money, lives--create the most dramatic situations. Skill-economies are a great source of excitement and satisfaction, but only if you foster it :)
--PC