|
Compare
The fighter’s class skills are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int), Knowledge (engineering) (Int), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Survival (Wis), and Swim (Str).
The barbarian’s class skills are Acrobatics (Dex), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (nature) (Int), Perception (Wis), Ride (Dex), Survival (Wis), and Swim (Str).
These skill lists should show alot more about the class than they do, barbarian is close but fighter is way off. Fighters are missing important skills for their common occupations like perception, stealth, diplomacy, knowledge (nobility). Just pair some skills up based on occupation and make the fighter choose one at lvl 1 for class skills.
|
Okay, the initial thread started with wanting more skill points for the 2+ classes, and evolved into a solution which was the main crux of why I wanted more skill points.
Giving 1-4 at character creation ONLY, to everyone, solves the issue of low points because it allows you, with an average score of 10 to still be a capable individual.
As I mentioned, assuming 1 craft (of which there are multiple), 1 profession (multiple), there are 35 skills. Unless you are a starting Human Rogue with an INT of 110 you are not going to have every skill. So there is no devaluing of a rogue. Especially when everyone is getting those points.
In PFS play its going to be hard for any non human class that is 2+ skills to have a profession. Its bad enough for humans, especially those that don't use INT as their main or secondary stat.
what if he gets 4, and everyone else gets 2?The problem is that there are only so many skills, so as everyone gets closer to the limit, the rogue's advantage diminishes.
So you're saying that the Rogue's skill point advantage isn't only in the numbers of skills he currently gets, but also because the others classes get so little.
I get that and will now return to my original position - leave the Int+2 guys alone, 'cause they're doing just fine.
Fighters are missing important skills for their common occupations like perception, stealth, diplomacy, knowledge (nobility). Just pair some skills up based on occupation and make the fighter choose one at lvl 1 for class skills.
Those are Rogue skills, really. I mean, sure, Perception is a dead-useful skill and every adventurer would be better for it. Okay then, if your Fighter recognizes that importance, then don't tank WIS and put some skill points into a non-class skill. Oh yeah, and since Fighters get an abundance of Feats, go ahead and buy Skill Focus: Perception.
Can you explain why the fighter must suck at skills when the barbarian and cavalier don't, or why the cleric must suck at skills when the druid and oracle don't?
The Fighter's combat abilities are always on. The Ranger, Barbarian, Cavalier - a great deal of what these classes do is subject to situation or dependent on finite resources. The Fighter has the best BAB in the game, 2nd best Hit Dice, great additional combat boni via Weapon and Armor Training and enjoys one Feat per level (more at 1st obviously).
He pays for all of that, in part, with the low skill points and limited class skill selection.
If you're a Fighter and you want more skill points, you can have 'em. There are lots of ways to do it.
I'm simply trying to point out why some people object to simply giving more skill points. Doing something like...
If you really want Rogues to be better at something, you should argue for special bonuses that only Rogues get that are tied to Rogue levels. Just rename Trap Sense to Rogue Training and add a bonus to Disable Device, Perception and Stealth to it. Bam, Rogues now have an edge with those skills.
So let rogues choose three or four skills to get this bonus, or have the skills be highly customized by archetype. I actually think that then this would be an excellent idea to give the rogue something nice that no one else has.
If you're worried about Rogues, give 'em Weapon Finesse at 1st level. I mean, never mind that they can take it at 2nd level, as a bonus feat via Rogue Talents...
If you respect the limitations of the Fighter class and then look at all the benefits of Rogue, it becomes clear that both classes are doing just fine.
|
|
I'm not saying the fighter is unbalanced because of his lame skills. It is stupid to think he has not had training with any skills other than on his list. Soldiers protect and watch for the enemy they form town guards, they are more skilled and have more training that what dnd and pathfinder represents. If you can't fill the fluff of a fighter from his own skill list there is a problem.
I'm not saying the fighter is unbalanced because of his lame skills. It is stupid to think he has not had training with any skills other than on his list. Soldiers protect and watch for the enemy they form town guards, they are more skilled and have more training that what dnd and pathfinder represents. If you can't fill the fluff of a fighter from his own skill list there is a problem.
So what you're really saying is "I want more skills @ rank+3." But I also want high BAB etc. That's cool and I get it. I've often lamented the limited choice of Fighter skills. But at the same time, I'm cool with working within that list and using other resources to get some things that are not on it.
If I were playing a Fighter, I'd talk to my DM about using a campaign trait from Second Darkness. I forget the name, but it grants a +1 to Perception and makes it a Class skill for you. So at the cost of 1 Trait slot and 1 skill rank, you get Perception @ X+5. That's a tax I would happily pay.
Edit: additional thoughts on Traits - if I were going to advocate for a houserule that could help things like Class skills, then I would grant a single additional Trait to all PCs. At least one of them would have to be directly related to the campaign or AP and the other two could come from wherever.
Having a high intelligence gives you a greater capacity for learning and placing a rank in a skill represents training in said skill. So intelligence makes perfect sense for bonus skills. Its my understanding, at least we do this in our games, that each level you can add a point in either your hp or a rank in a skill beyond what you would normally get for that level.
Having a high intelligence gives you a greater capacity for learning and placing a rank in a skill represents training in said skill. So intelligence makes perfect sense for bonus skills. Its my understanding, at least we do this in our games, that each level you can add a point in either your hp or a rank in a skill beyond what you would normally get for that level.
I think you're talking about the "floating" Favored Class point.
Having a high intelligence gives you a greater capacity for learning and placing a rank in a skill represents training in said skill. So intelligence makes perfect sense for bonus skills. Its my understanding, at least we do this in our games, that each level you can add a point in either your hp or a rank in a skill beyond what you would normally get for that level.I think you're talking about the "floating" Favored Class point.
Yup that is it exactly
I think Pathfinder skill points are way too anemic. I house rule +2 skill points per level for every class. I double the skill point bonus for INT and I have high Charisma give skill points (not doubled). I am used to game systems where characters have multiple skills and everyone gets the chance to do things outside of combat.
This way players pick the skills they think are appropriate for the character they want to play. The standard rules force the characters to meta-game so individual skills are only taken by one person, which I think is artificial and less fun.
Since more skill points are available, as a GM I set skill DCs a bit higher. At 10th level, 1 skill point in a skill just won't be very successful.
I think for many players there isn't really a problem if you get past the idea that you have to max every single skill you have in the game.
A 5th level fighter with intelligence 10 doesn't just have two skills, he has 10 skill points to spend, he could easily specialize in one skill and be decently proficient in two to five other skills.
From a different perspective I can completely agree with boosting skills for all/most classes by 2, though I would like to eliminate the skill bonus intelligence gives, though I think it will need something else to not quite make it a dump stat.
fighter, cleric, paladin, oracle, cavalier, summoner, sorcerer 4 sp
monk, druid, magus, wizard, barbarian, witch, alchemist 6 sp
bard, ranger, inquisitor 8 sp
rogue 10 sp
Boosting the intelligence based classes up a bit to compensate for their loss I think none of the classes really suffers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, hell the more I think about it give every starting character 1 point for a Craft or a Profession and this solves the whole argument, at least for me.
I'm in a campaign where our GM gave us some free skill points for Craft, Profession, or Perform. It was a great way for us to help flesh out our characters and give us some stuff to do but certainly has not upset the power balance in any way.
I don't know how it would work as an amendment to official rules, but the "Free point for character background building" works for me.
As for what classes I think get shafted or not, and why...
Cleric
The cleric is an issue of -- it is already good at a lot of things, so giving it more skill points is overkill. It's a balance effort that's done at the expense of concept, never mind that historically clergy have had to be relatively well educated and knowledgeable, and the 2+Int skill points isn't enough let them fill that out adequately.
If the cloistered cleric archetype wasn't utter pants, it would be a good compromise. You want to play a scholarly scribey clerical type, trade off some other clerical class abilities for more skills. There's some homebrew versions that do well.
Fighter
I am OKAY with limited skill points with this one. But I DO think the fighter should have three more skills as class skills:
Acrobatics -- 2 reasons:
Fluff: A fighter should have the option to move around the battlefield easily and jump well, without having to resort to a feat or dipping to reflect some kind of training bonus.
Crunch: Jump was a fighter class skill in 3.x. Why they got borked out of this, which screws up backwards compatibility, I do not know.
Heal -- It is very reasonable to expect a soldier to learn some field medicine. And tactically, it is useful since a fighter's likely to be on the front lines and get to an ally quickly to stabilize them if that's the most efficient thing they can do.
Perception -- It has always utterly boggled me that the class--along with its NPC cousin the warrior--most likely chosen to be used as a town guard/warden/lookout does not have Perception as a class skill. Since when do soldiers not need to be alert? That's just crazy talk. Yeah there's that trait that lets you get it as a class skill, but a) traits are optional, and b) it's a religion trait meaning it may not be used in homebrew games, since it's tied to the worship of a specific god.
Yes of course fighters can dip or take skill focus. But these skills fit the concept of the class. There's no reason one should have to burn a class level or a feat to play a ordinary soldier or guard concept.
Sorcerers
IMO, sorcerers could be bumped to 4+Int skill points no problem without breaking anything. Sorcerers do not need a high Int. Your average sorcerer build will have only 2-4 at most skill points a level. As--GENERALLY SPEAKING OF COURSE, yes everyone's concepts vary-- Spellcraft is practically requisite, and likely you will also want Knowledge Arcana or Use Magic Device or both, that leaves you little to zip for crafting or bloodline class skills or Charisma-based skills. Which doesn't really make sense for a sorcerer concept. A sorcerer may not be as learned as a wizard (who also gets 2+Int, but has Int as a key stat, so they will still have lots of skills) but they still should know their way around magic and use their force of personality to accomplish things, and they don't have enough skill points to do it.
DQ - nice post
About Perception - not all Fighters are as perceptive as we think they should be. Certainly a few are and they're the ones who invested in a non-Class skill and/or took Skill Focus: Perception. However, all Fighters (at least the ones we see in movies or read about) are physically competent and can climb, jump, and swim (obviously some better than others.)
Perception really and truly is a the bread and butter of the Rogue Class. It's just a core building block for 'em.
Obviously you can houserule in Perception and Acrobatics as Fighter class skills and no one will argue it would be a major game changer. But it does devalue little ol' Rogue, even if it's just a little bit.
DQ - nice post
About Perception - not all Fighters are as perceptive as we think they should be. Certainly a few are and they're the ones who invested in a non-Class skill and/or took Skill Focus: Perception. However, all Fighters (at least the ones we see in movies or read about) are physically competent and can climb, jump, and swim (obviously some better than others.)
Perception really and truly is a the bread and butter of the Rogue Class. It's just a core building block for 'em.
Obviously you can houserule in Perception and Acrobatics as Fighter class skills and no one will argue it would be a major game changer. But it does devalue little ol' Rogue, even if it's just a little bit.
If Perception must be solely the purview of the Rogue, then we need to take it away from the Alchemist, Barbarian, Bard, Inquisitor, Monk, and Ranger.
And I don't think that's gonna happen.
Further, I really do not believe these other classes having Perception undermines the Rogue. Do you? If so, why?
Compared to the Fighter, the Rogue has 4 times as many skill points, a number of unique abilities ONLY he can have (rogue talents, and there are far more rogue talents than there are fighter only feats), Evasion, Uncanny Dodge, and sneak attack. The rogue gets a BONUS to Perception to find traps, which the fighter will never have. All of these things in that specific combination makes the Rogue what it is. Giving the Fighter Perception is not going to take any of that away from the Rogue. The Rogue's nearest rivals are the Bard and Ranger (especially with the Archeologist and Urban Ranger archetypes), and is far more in danger of being undermined by those classes than a Fighter having Perception ever will.
And no, not every single fighter should have to be Perceptive, but I think it should be a clearer and easier option for them to have. That is all.
Alchemist - gets Perception as class skill, maybe because they need to know when the milk* is about to boil.
Barbie - I expect Perception is directly related to their Trap Sense ability.
Bard - most of 'em are incredibly in tune with the crowd yeah? Ranks in Perception seems to indicate that.
Inquisitor - don't know anything about that class.
Monk - I got nothing. They need it 'cause they had to get something?
Ranger - Rangers need Perception every bit as much as Rogues. It's their bread and butter as what. What kind of Ranger can't track or gets caught unawares in the woods? That's the profile, I guess.
Fighters get so much stuff that is "always on". They get the most swings for almost the most damage. They wear the best armor in the game. If they pay for that, at least in part, by not getting an extra +3 bonus to Perception, I'm okay with it.
/ milk* - was making cream of wheat the other day - how the heck do you know when milk is about to boil? I usually figure out when it's too late and the pot is overflowing.
|
|
Having a high intelligence gives you a greater capacity for learning and placing a rank in a skill represents training in said skill. So intelligence makes perfect sense for bonus skills. Its my understanding, at least we do this in our games, that each level you can add a point in either your hp or a rank in a skill beyond what you would normally get for that level.I think you're talking about the "floating" Favored Class point.Yup that is it exactly
Don't get me wrong I understand that is an option, but you get that point from your class. I have a hard time believing that a Dwarven Cleric who is minimum 47 years of age spent 46 years learning nothing. Did he/she just spend those years playing the Price is Right, trying to guess the exact value of a nonmagical item with precious metals or gemstones, only to win and get stand on the stage staring at a stone wall until the first one discovered the secret door and passed through winning the ability to now pick a class?
I'm in a campaign where our GM gave us some free skill points for Craft, Profession, or Perform. It was a great way for us to help flesh out our characters and give us some stuff to do but certainly has not upset the power balance in any way.
Totally understands what I am getting at.
That's a good analysis, but I disagree that the fighter having a lot of stuff always on keeps him from needing Perception, since the stuff that's always on is usually entirely combat/weapon/armor related. And being able to use those combat/weapon/armor related abilities in a surprise round would be nice (he could help flank with the rogue a round early!), as would the fighter being useful even to the tiniest degree out of combat.
I still don't see how any of this "undermines" the rogue, furthermore, which is what we were talking about. The rogue brings to the table skill-wise and ability wise a hell of a lot more than Perception, and the fighter is nowhere near in danger of stepping on his toes with three more class skills. Can you provide an example of how a fighter with a Perception as a class skill and a rogue might conflict in a game scenario solely because of this class skill issue?
When you boil milk -- you should be standing in front of it stirring constantly. When it starts to produce steam voluminously and bubbles a bit, usually after a few minutes, it is boiling. Remove it immediately from the heat so it does not scorch.
That's a good analysis, but I disagree that the fighter having a lot of stuff always on keeps him from needing Perception
Let there be no doubt in this - Perception is dead-useful. I don't care what class you're playing, an Adventurer who invests in this skill (Class skill or not) will see returns later.
I still don't see how any of this "undermines" the rogue,
I guess I'm saying that Perception is a given for Rogue, as their class abilities (sort of*) depend on it. On the other hand, the Fighter finds Perception to be a luxury, none of his class abilities demonstrates a particular need for it.
When you boil milk -- you should be standing in front of it stirring constantly. When it starts to produce steam voluminously and bubbles a bit, usually after a few minutes, it is boiling. Remove it immediately from the heat so it does not scorch.
I'll keep this in mind tomorrow morning. Gracias. :)
/ by "sort of", I mean to say that Trapfinding does lend itself to also having a high Perception. Which is why Perception is a Class skill for Rogues.
Yes, rogues have a class ability dependent on a skill--but that same class ability a small part of a whole class, and it even is entirely replaced in many rogue archetypes.
Fighters may not have class abilities that depend on Perception, but to me, my concept of the type of character the fighter represents -- guards and soldiers and thugs -- have a lot of reasons to train their alertness such that it should be part of the class build. Fighters do not have class abilities that depend on Climb or Craft or Handling Animals or Intimidating or Knowledge Dungeoneering/Engineering or Survival or Swimming, but I don't think they should lose those class skills. Likewise, I don't think the Rogue should lose, say, Appraise or Linguistics even though they don't have default class abilities that use those skills--it still makes sense for them to have them.
I think we're coming from two different POVs, but since this is all a proposed house rule anyway, I guess we can agree to disagree. I don't think I can make my case any further. It's possible just how you tend to conceptualize what a fighter should be easily capable of is not what I conceptualize.
Good luck with the milk!
DQ - nice post
About Perception - not all Fighters are as perceptive as we think they should be. Certainly a few are and they're the ones who invested in a non-Class skill and/or took Skill Focus: Perception. However, all Fighters (at least the ones we see in movies or read about) are physically competent and can climb, jump, and swim (obviously some better than others.)
Perception really and truly is a the bread and butter of the Rogue Class. It's just a core building block for 'em.
Obviously you can houserule in Perception and Acrobatics as Fighter class skills and no one will argue it would be a major game changer. But it does devalue little ol' Rogue, even if it's just a little bit.
Dood, having it as a class skill =/= absolutely needing to have ranks in it.