will you have pick your spots with craft,i mean what happens if your traped in a barn and have to hind? make a cover out of hay and make it like natraul.
i think its pretty good at times.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Appraise...
*shudder*
I typically house rule it out of my games. It's cute, I like what it's trying to do, but the last thing I need is to make the process of recording treasure even more convoluted and time consuming by introducing additional skill rolls and mis-information on the front-end, which I then need to back out when the party goes to sell stuff. That said, it can be fun if that is your playstyle, and I have had good game sessions built around going to town, selling loot, and generally getting in trouble.
I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to replace Perception checks with Appraise checks when trying to find hidden treasure in a dungeon. So, instead of the Perception check to notice the diamond ring on the skeleton's finger, you use an Appraise check to realize that a ring is the most likely item to have remained with the body and discover the treasure. It takes a little flexibility in how you characterize the action (aka, save your clever "Derp, derp, how does knowing how valuable something is let you find a hidden object" comment for someone who appreciates your inflexibility.)
|
I think the rating of skills depends on whether you're talking about absolute usefulness or relative usefulness. Unfortunately, skills are one of the weaker improvements (still an improvement over 3.5, but weaker than the rest of the improvements), because Jason seemed to have a weird inability to decide whether he wanted skills to be valued by realism or utility.
As a simple example, consider "Climb and Swim" as opposed to "Listen and Spot."
Clearly Jason considered that the very real distinction between people with good eyes and people with good ears wasn't important enough to continue (and I agree) -- plus he figured "what about people with good sense of taste or smell" -- so he made Perception. People are either very perceptive or they are not.
So ... why can't people be either very athletic or not, by combining Climb, Swim (and jumping) into Athletics? I can't think of any reason other than "realism," and that didn't matter for Perception, so why does it matter for Athletics?
So you've got Perception, probably the single most powerful and important skill in the game ... and you have Climb and Swim, two of the least valuable and important skills in the game from the very beginning, almost literally useless at any level of 7th or above, once a group has powerful mobility abilities.
It's bad design, and it pervades the changes to skills.
IMO, skills should somehow be siloed by utility. IMG, I made many changes, to most of the problem skills people talk about here (spoilered to avoid spamming the uninterested):
* Folded Appaise into Observe.
* Removed jumping from Acrobatics. Made tumbling DC "10 + BAB + Dex" or "10 + defender's Acrobatics mod."
* Added Athletics (STR), which combines Swim, Climb, and jumping
* Made Disable Device INT-based.
* Made Knowledge (local) a class skill, and allow the untrained to exceed a DC of 10 for their home region, for which they receive a +2.
* Made Linguistics work with spoken languages as well, but with a +5 to DC.
* Folded Ride into Handle Animal. Riding an animal trained for the purpose can be done untrained.
* To Sense Motive, added "Assess Individual (DC 20 or opposed Bluff or Perform (acting)): You can tell whether an individual is more or less powerful than you are, along a scale of much less powerful, less powerful, in the same ballpark, more powerful, or much more powerful. You can make this assessment as to either personal power, situational power, or (with separate checks) both. You can also tell (with a separate Sense Motive check) what the individual's basic skill set is (e.g., warrior, arcanist, thief, brute, and so on) and even if and how it blurs those lines (e.g., both arcanist and warrior)."
* Gave fighters 4 skill points per level.
* Allow assisting with a complimentary skill. If time isn't an issue, allow a skill-user to "assist herself" with a complimentary skill.
* Beyond the first assist attempt, a failed assist attempt imposes a -2 penalty (the "Too Many Cooks Rule").
If I weren't in the middle of the campaign, I would add:
* Change Craft (alchemy) to Alchemy.
* Alchemy includes poison-making.
* Fold Sleight of Hand into Bluff.
* Get rid of Escape Artist and find a way to do it with the CMB/CMD system,
* Fold Knowledge (nobility) into Knowledge (history).
* Fold Knowledge (geography) into Knowledge (local) and (for climate and terrain information) Knowledge (nature).
* Perform is sort of a problem skill. Dunno what to do about it yet.
* Find some way to add attractive utility to Knowledge (engineering). My first thought is in allowing a successful check as a way to bypass the hardness/DR of constructs or objects.
* Grant all starting PCs and heroic NPCs two free skill points which can only be spent on Craft, Profession, or Perform, or Knowledge skills.
I think Craft and Profession are pretty good, at least in the sense that you can flesh out your NPCs with them. Are they good for PCs? Sometimes. Craft (Alchemy) is definitely useful and so is Profession(Sailor).
The following skills aren't used in my games:
- Appraise: For the bookkeeping reasons others mentioned.
- Disguise: I think it should be rolled into Bluff.
- Escape Artist: Rarely used.
- K-Geography: Rolled into K-History
- Perform: I'd rather have this rolled into a profession skill.
A lot of other skills are class specific (Handle Animal, Ride) or are diminished as soon as magical means are available (climb, heal, swim), but it doesn't make them useless per se.
5 - Diplomacy: It's a critical skill to have, to either talk or assist someone else.
5 - Perception
5 - Use Magic Device
4 - Spellcraft
3 - Acrobatics: This is not a skill all PCs need.
3 - Bluff
3 - Disable Device: This is not a skill all PCs need.
3 - Heal
3 - Intimidate: The DC for this skill increases with HD, making it a less ideal method of coercion compared to Diplomacy or Bluff.
All knowledge skills depend on the GM because the official system doesn't work in practice. They could be a "5" or a "1".
3 - Knowledge (Arcana)
3 - Knowledge (Dungeoneering)
3 - Knowledge (Local)
3 - Knowledge (Nature)
3 - Knowledge (Planes)
3 - Knowledge (Religion)
3 - Sense Motive
3 - Stealth: Depends on campaign and depends on GM. Skill is currently broken using official PF rules. In a sandbox campaign with a GM that gives this skill a lot of leeway, it's invaluable.
2 - Climb
2 - Fly: PC specific and don't need much if any to be adequate.
2 - Linguistics: Depends on campaign, could be a 5 or 2.
2 - Sleight of Hand
2 - Survival: Campaign specific skill and Endure Elements makes it obsolete for survival.
2 - Swim
1 - Appraise
1 - Craft
1 - Disguise
1 - Escape Artist: Rarely if ever used.
1 - Handle Animal*: Druids, Rangers.
1 - Knowledge (Engineering)
1 - Knowledge (Geography)
1 - Knowledge (History)
1 - Knowledge (Nobility)
1 - Perform*: Bards
1 - Profession
1 - Ride*: Mounted PCs or campaign specific. In years of playing, this has been the skill that has actually been used the least.
* Class specific skill
|
|
@Jeff Wilder: If you're making disable device int based already why not fold it into knowledge: engineering?
That's pretty good, actually. (I'd do it the other way 'round: fold Knowledge (engineering) into Disable Device, but combining them is a good idea.)
EDIT: On second thought, I'm not as comfortable with it as I thought. While it's a good idea in the abstract, and I don't mind the idea of combining "micro-engineering" with "macro," the Disable Device features seem a little weird to give to the fighter (e.g.). (To be clear, it's not that I think it's unbalancing, or even would further erode a rogue's niche ... I'm not too worried about either of those. It's just that disabling fiddly little poison needles doesn't seem very "fightery.")
Back to the drawing board for ideas on improving utility of Knowledge (engineering).
It's just that disabling fiddly little poison needles doesn't seem very "fightery.")
But designing Cathedrals does feel fightery? I think I would argue that the only "fightery" usage for Knowledge (Engineering) is siege warfare anyway, so there's no reason you can't expand the skill.
Of course, I also have no issue with fighters having a skill that isn't "Fightery" and think they deserve a hell of a lot more skills on their list (Acrobatics, Escape Artist, Heal, Several Knowledges, Perception, Sense Motive, and Stealth--maybe even UMD).
|
|
I also have no issue with fighters having a skill that isn't "Fightery" and think they deserve a hell of a lot more skills on their list (Acrobatics, Escape Artist, Heal, Several Knowledges, Perception, Sense Motive, and Stealth--maybe even UMD).
You -- I think it was you -- actually already convinced me that the game could be perfectly fine (might even be better) with one non-magical combat/utility class, with the fighter basically beating up the rogue and taking his stuff. So you're preaching to the choir.
But that's not the game I play now.
** spoiler omitted **...
I like most of your changes.
** spoiler omitted **
Just my two cents' worth in response.
5 - Diplomacy: If I’d rated any social skill “5” this would be the one. There are two reasons I left it at a “4”. First, because some campaigns will proceed exactly the same whether you do a great job of being diplomatic, or a terrible job. I’m not happy about that, but I’ve found it to be true, especially of dungeon crawls and anything that could be described as “on rails”. Second, because it’s a skill that many GMs run differently. So, at one DM’s table it’s [i]the[/b] way to deal with NPCs, and at another’s table everything is done by roleplaying and you probably won’t bother to roll at all.
3 - Acrobatics: I don’t think any skill, with the possible exception of Perception, is needed (or even desirable) for all PCs. But, if you can get a decent Acrobatics score, you can break some important combat rules like provoking attacks of opportunity for movement, passing through enemies, and jumping over difficult terrain without slowing down. Also, it’s a skill that you want full ranks in if you have it at all.
3 - Disable Device: “This is not a skill all PCs need.” Not every PC, but hopefully ever party. In retrospect, I’d rate it a “4” rather than “5”.
3 - Intimidate: “The DC for this skill increases with HD, making it a less ideal method of
coercion compared to Diplomacy or Bluff.” Yes, it is less ideal for coercion, but it has a number of other game effects, including making enemies shaken or flat footed, and forcing them to attack you, or run away from you.
3 - Stealth: Depends on campaign and depends on GM. Skill is currently broken using official PF rules. In a sandbox campaign with a GM that gives this skill a lot of leeway, it's invaluable.
2 - Fly: “PC specific and don't need much if any to be adequate.” At early levels it’s PC specific, but at high levels when 50-90% of enemies fly, it sees greatly increased use. Also, if you’re going to fly in combat you really want a +14 or better, or you may just fall out of the sky in the middle of a fight! Of all skills, this is the one I most favor for a Headband of Vast Intelligence.
2 - Survival: “Campaign specific skill and Endure Elements makes it obsolete for survival.” I’d downgrade it to “3” rather than my original “4”, but it gets used in various APs, and tracking can be incredibly useful.
1 - Escape Artist: “Rarely if ever used.” Except for breaking out of grapples, which get harder and more common at higher levels.
1 - Handle Animal & 1 - Ride: These are “1” for characters who choose not to use them, but absolutely necessary for those who do. I think that makes the skills average overall. “3” I know I rated Perform as a “1” for this reason, but Perform is only good for certain builds of one class (Bard), while a number of classes have animal companions or mounts.
personally i find that a lot of the different knowledge skills that overlap should be consolidated
you may argue that Knowledge(History), Knowledge(Local), and Knowledge(Nobility) are all unrelated, but i don't see it that way
especially when it comes to nobility, i can't really think of a way that that knowledge doesn't overlap with both of the others
i have yet to GM a pathfinder game, but if if and when i do, personally i think both i and my players would benefit from me lumping all these skills together as Knowledge(Anthropology)
(honestly i was gonna make a thread about it and see what people thought) Personally I'd even loop Linguistics in with this skill, making it much more useful and attractive to players (letting you learn languages this way instead of making another skill, and the specific languages you learn can also dictate just what knowledge you have so you can't claim to 'know everything')
there are other skills that i find to be silly on their own. Fly is an interesting one, because it was made specifically for pathfinder, but a lot of characters don't get it as a class skill and a lot of times you can 'just get it' at later levels, but you never get to put those ranks in when you needed them because it cannot be used untrained, i feel it could be combined with acrobatics fairly easily
Someone could say that knowledge(geography) doesn't overlap with knowledge(nature) but tbh, i don't like the idea of taking 2 similar ideas and forcing players to put ranks into both of them, but i understand the concept of not knowing the map vs. understanding something about animals being different, but once again, they do overlap as knowing about animals and plants requires you to know about the geography to find them in
Craft, Appraise, and Profession i am also not a fan of being separate skills, i would combine them all into a Business skill, whether its INT or WIS based is a different argument, but i feel it would be less useless if they were all together
Escape Artist i feel could be easily absorbed into acrobatics as well
a big thing i dont like is Bluff, because whenever you are bluffing, you are either trying to intimidate, or diplomate(is that the word?) with them, so i feel all bluff checks could be absorbed into either situation
Disable Device, Use Rope, Sleight of Hand, and even Crafting to an extent all come from the same part of the brain that controls articulate motor control, as such one could create a DEX based skill called Articulate and deal with that
survival and perform i think would be better off being Class Features of the Bard and Ranger, similar to how concentration got redone, same thing with Ride and handle animal to an extent, i don't like forcing players to waste skill ranks on things that they should just be good at because of their class, taking away from the point of giving them more skills in the first place
what even is UMD and why is it CHA based? i feel UMD and spellcraft are very similar, though i did play a house rule for a while where spellcraft was eliminated and you just put ranks into a respective knowledge and identified spells that way, personally i dont like it, and i think that anyone who can cast spells and learn spellcraft ought to be able to use magical devices, so i would put those skills together and make it INT based
how are disguise and bluff different skills? And how is Sense Motive not part of Perception? they use the same modifiers and do basically the same thing.
swim and climb i could see being put in with acrobatics as well, as jump was from 3.5
so my final skill list looks a lot smaller, and personally i like giving players more skill options without making them skip out on optimizing ideas for combat by forcing non INT based classes to put points into INT buys
Final Revised Skill List:
Acrobatics[DEX]
Articulate[DEX]
Business[WIS]
Diplomacy[CHA]
Heal[WIS]
Intimidate[CHA]
Knowledge(Anthropology)
Knowledge(Arcana)
Knowledge(Dungeoneering)
Knowledge(Nature)
Knowledge(Planes)
Knowledge(Religion)
Knowledge(Technology)
Perception[WIS]
Spellcraft[INT]
and with (arguably) the exception of Spellcraft, all these skills should be usable untrained, which gives your players more options
it also makes skill monkey characters who value INT capable of broadening even more so they dont have to toil over what skill are most important, but they still cant do everything. a human rogue still needs +5 INT to give himself all skills under this system
but it also means that class skills should automatically gain the +3, since you can attempt all skills anyway (and even if someone attempts a spellcraft UMD check, without ranks into it and no class skill, they can't really hope to succeed unless you let them take 20, even then they shouldn't)
don't get me wrong, i LOVE pathfinders skill system 100000x more than 3.5's but i still feel this might be for the better of the GMs and the players
also, who hasn't been in a situation where you have ranks in one skill, but not the one you need and your GM decides that rolling the other skill is acceptable? often with knowledge checks and social skill checks i found this to happen a lot
another thing, i just realized that i don't have any STR based skills, and that certain skills could use different ability scores, im not opposed to the idea of being able to choose alternate ability scores for some (if not all) of these skills in the kind of situation where it would be favorable and make sense
example: using WIS for business instead of INT
or using STR for Acrobatics instead of DEX
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I might get hated for that, but I seriously think that both Craft and Profession are underwhelming, underdeveloped... and downright useless.
The gamemaster has to adapt his plots to make a place for these skills. You might think these skills are useless... until you run into a game where they're needed, or even required.
Why? Crafting is LOOOOOOONG, for nothing. A longsword should take 1 day to forge, no more.
Really. Have you ever forged a longsword? I have (Thank you, SCA). To make a proper steel blade: You take a length of iron bar, and you heat it in a forge until it's glowing yellow, then you hammer the bejeezus out of it. By hand. Then you put it back in the forge, re-heat it, and then guess what? Back to hammering. When it's in roughly the shape of a long flat rod, you re-heat it and start folding it double, and then keep hammering until it's back to its original length. And you KEEP DOING THAT. Over and over and over, adding powdered charcoal (because you need to add carbon to iron to make steel). Eventually you will have something resembling a flat steel blade. Then comes time to hammer it into shape, so it will accept the crosspiece, guard, handle and hilt. And even when you attach those pieces you STILL do not have a longsword. You need to test it for balance. If it's not balanced right? All those pieces need to come off, and you commence with the heating and hammering AGAIN.
All this takes about two weeks. Of course, that's two weeks of working on it for three hours a day -- I had a day job too. And I had to take breaks, as my arms were not used to hammering on iron for hours on end. But still, it takes longer than one day. (Oh, and I forgot about the time it would take to grind an actual edge into it -- the blade I crafted was a crafting project, and not an actual weapon or showpiece. That would take some time, as well. Probably a few extra days.)
Yes, you're better off buying your swords from a smith. However, do you have the Craft skill to FIX the blade when it breaks? Do you know enough about Crafting blades to fit it to your personal style? What about if you want to inlay the blade with silver (for those lycanthropes)?
Play a low-power game once and you'll see the benefit in crafting skills. When you have to scrape and scrounge for every copper, making your own weapons and armor becomes desirable for the cost savings. Living Greyhawk, a 3.0/3.5e D&D campaign, was that low-powered its first year -- and was the most popular living campaign out there at the time. Even more popular than the high-magic Living City.
Why? Profession... is useless, it has no use. Which adventurer is gonna stop adventuring to work?
When your GM starts realizing that adventures do not happen every day, and your characters are going to have downtime. Suddenly you have months between adventures, with no income because you decided professional skills were worthless. And you suddenly have to start paying for your room & board, not to mention the drinks you get at the tavern -- the innkeeper only wants to hear the stories about your last adventure so many times. If there is so much work for your characters to do that you get no downtime, then other people are going to become adventurers too, because everyone wants money.
[Profession] (Brewer) doesn't give you a bonus to identify a faulty drink
It doesn't? I'd give you a +2 on a Perception check to determine that your ale is poisoned, sure. Your GM is being stingy with the bonuses. Whap him upside the head and tell him to stop that.
(Baker) and (Cook) don't have you prepare specific meals that grants temporary bonuses,
Quit playing World of Warcraft. :)
As to the rest, your GM has the power to grant bonuses to these things based on your choice of professions. If he's not giving you these bonuses, he needs to learn to reward player creativity.
You might also check out the Pathfinder Society to see how the campaign handles Profession skills and people making money on the side.
|
|
I just hate Appraise the way it is described. The application of the skill is far to narrow and the DC far too high. And you cannot even take 20 on it.
If my abysmally low Appraise check tells me a sword is worth 1 sp (which is just impossible and that should be common knowledge) while my Detect Magic tells me it's magic (and thus worth far more) which will I believe ?
Appraise should be part of it's appropriate craft skill, and folded into profession (merchant).
That is, profession (merchant) covers everything appraise does now, and each craft skill covers appraising stuff crafted with that craft.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally would allow profession and craft to substitute for other skills at a situational half strength.
Examples: Profession Gambler could include sense motive (you're used to looking for 'tells'), bluff (you're used to hiding your own tells), and even a situational slight of hand (counting cards, palming dice, etc).
Craft (armor) works as a poor man's appraise (such as to tell if masterwork or not, what it's made of) I might be inclined to give a bonus to attempts to sunder/break armor or shields.
@Ilja, I'd say appraise should not fold into profession (merchant) at 'full strength' as it were. To use (sur)real life examples, on Pawn Stars, they've no qualms about calling in an expert to review property. I'm pretty sure that Richard sr. has maxed out his profession (merchant) skill, and he still needs aid another attempts. :-)
I might get hated for that, but I seriously think that both Craft and Profession are underwhelming, underdeveloped... and downright useless.The gamemaster has to adapt his plots to make a place for these skills. You might think these skills are useless... until you run into a game where they're needed, or even required.
I actually offer players to use these skills according to the situation, not tailor the situation for the skills. My players get rewarded for using skills in creative ways, provided they find good uses for them. However, even if in an AP, this Craft skill or that Profession skill comes into play, what are the chances that any of my players havs the skill? So far, the Craft and Profession skills are so underdevelopped that it doesn't look appealing. They lack exclusive uses that would tempt players to use them more often.
Why? Crafting is LOOOOOOONG, for nothing. A longsword should take 1 day to forge, no more.Really. Have you ever forged a longsword? I have (Thank you, SCA).
Good for you... the skill is still not that tempting though... Everything is based on the cost in silver pieces instead of gold pieces; there's no minimum crafting time given for each entry; there's no modifier if you're alone or if you're with other craftmans, aside from the Aid Other option; there's no mention about interruption.
It lacks a bunch of rules. Sure, it can be done if you give players downtime, but it's still not that rewarding. Beside, Fabricate makes you a sword under 6 seconds, and Make Whole repairs your sword under 6 seconds. While not every party has a spellcaster, it would still be more viable to search a magewright to cast those spells instead of spending your time crafting or repairing it.
Why? Profession... is useless, it has no use. Which adventurer is gonna stop adventuring to work?When your GM starts realizing that adventures do not happen every day, and your characters are going to have downtime.
True... but that can bore the heck out of players. GMs might as well say how much time has passed between each adventure and let players roll dices, skipping the whole thing. Beside, 99% of players are explorers that happen to be adventurers as well.
As to the rest, your GM has the power to grant bonuses to these things based on your choice of professions. If he's not giving you these bonuses, he needs to learn to reward player creativity.
Those are all houserules. DMs shouldn't have to houserule that. That should be in the actual rulebook. How come the "special" part of the skill description only lists that Gnomes get a bonus, and nopt that this profession grant bonus on this other skill? Where are the synergy bonuses? What...? That was WotC's copyright?
You might also check out the Pathfinder Society to see how the campaign handles Profession skills and people making money on the side.
Oh, that's rich... "Hey! Check those other books for more rulings!"
¬_¬;
They're not awful, but come on, it's just that EVERYTHING skill-related should have been in the rulebook. I should have to jump between products to learn how to properly use skills. How come they don't update the rulebook instead?
I would again suggest as a solution that we remove profession, craft, and appraise and replace them with 'trade(whatever)' that covers all situations involving that specific trade. Need to know who made those swords? Roll Trade(blacksmith) (or the correct knowledge if you have it).
That certainly would weed out problems in interpretation between whether it's a craft (food) or profession (cook) check. I can see the convenience in mashing the skills together.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I would again suggest as a solution that we remove profession, craft, and appraise and replace them with 'trade(whatever)' that covers all situations involving that specific trade. Need to know who made those swords? Roll Trade(blacksmith) (or the correct knowledge if you have it).
That certainly would weed out problems in interpretation between whether it's a craft (food) or profession (cook) check. I can see the convenience in mashing the skills together.
Craft food is what I do in my kitchen.
Profession (cook) is what you see them do with those stupid little drizzels, garnishes and stuff on cooking shows :-)
I don't mind most skills. Most have lots of good uses. There are some that rarely come up or don't work right though.
Fly I think is the biggest hinderance in this. The DCs are so trivial that its just not worth rolling the checks. They had some great concepts, like knocking enemies out of the air, but it just did not work well.
Spellcraft is annother. You should be rolling Knowledge arcane/religion and be tossing out the general combination of the 2. There is little point to the skill.
The social skills work great once you toss out most of the mechanics and let the players use them to roleplay. Also, the lack of rules for others using them on the PCs is annoying, and something I immediately toss out.
Craft and Proffession should be combined into 1 skill, with some of the knowledges like engineering as well. I love these skills and they do great things for the game, but often they tax the players too much, especially with GMs who wont let you roll a related craft for proffession.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For a less dramatic example, let's say I'm running a game where someone wants to collapse a bridge before the enemies could follow. Just using the breaking an object rules in the game, it may take them too long to bypass the bridge's effective hardness/take down the hit points to do so. But I might ask them to roll Knowledge (engineering) to find which key strut to strike to make it collapse more easily. If they succeed, then I would let them basically ignore the appropriate strut's hardness (or gain a bonus to damage) so they have a better chance of collapsing the bridge before their pursuers arrive--their knowledge of engineering allows them to use physics to overcome something's durability.I have no objection to what you did in your game. But I do want to point out that your answer was essentially, "I houserule some stuff to make this worthless skill do something."
It really wasn't. If you bothered to look under the knowledge skill, the table clearly notes that engineering can be used to identify dangerous construction, determine a structure's style or age, or determine a structure's weakness.
We had a fighter in our group with Knowledge (engineering) not too long ago. He was awesome!
He was able to determine dangerous construction, such as when we were chasing after a teleporting fiend in a burning village. The monster tried to lure us into burnign buildings where the roof would collapse upon us, or on top of piles of unstable rubble in the hopes of catching us in a landslide. Each time, out engineer made a check and saw through the ruse, saving our party a LOT of grief.
Another time, when we were fighting a band of gnolls on a large bridge, he found a weak spot in the bridge's supports, where the wood had been rotted away. He instructed the spellcaster to take it out, thereby causing the bridge to collapse and sinking the entire gnoll band into the ravine below.
Whenever we came across abandoned ruins he was readily able to tell us what culture they belonged to merely by the architectural styles he saw and approximately how long they had been standing.
That skill was a gold mine. And those were only the RAW uses. If you've ever read any of the OFFICIAL modules published by PAIZO, then you would see that they use Knowledge skills for unusual or unlisted things ALL THE TIME.
How are diplomacy and bluff not 5s. Its like mundane Suggestion. Easily the more overpowered skill after perception.
5 - Diplomacy: If I’d rated any social skill “5” this would be the one. There are two reasons I left it at a “4”. First, because some campaigns will proceed exactly the same whether you do a great job of being diplomatic, or a terrible job. I’m not happy about that, but I’ve found it to be true, especially of dungeon crawls and anything that could be described as “on rails”. Second, because it’s a skill that many GMs run differently. So, at one GM's table it’s [i]the[/b] way to deal with NPCs, and at another’s table everything is done by roleplaying and you probably won’t bother to roll at all.
I'll add a couple points:
Diplomacy is one of the skills that allows a single PC to represent the entire party. So, much like one character with Disable Device gets the whole group past a trap, one character with Diplomacy gets the whole group a positive negotiation.
Also, like certain other skills, magic can supplant Diplomacy when needed.
You had some good points and I wanted to respond.
5 - Diplomacy: If I’d rated any social skill “5” this would be the one. There are two reasons I left it at a “4”. First, because some campaigns will proceed exactly the same whether you do a great job of being diplomatic, or a terrible job.
I guess everything depends on the GM, but this is one skill most GMs accept and defer to. Besides Perception, it's also the most common skill used in modules, APs, and especially PFS scenarios. I'd still rate it "5" unless you have an uber diplomat, because assists can be invaluable.
3 - Acrobatics: But, if you can get a decent Acrobatics score, you can break some important combat rules like provoking attacks of opportunity for movement, passing through enemies, and jumping over difficult terrain without slowing down.
In my experience, it doesn't work well at all for tumbling at high levels. In PFS we had a rogue optimized for acrobatics and he just got NAILED trying to pass through threatened squares by a Gug. Even at low levels I've seen rogues fail more than not.
I'd agree with Claymade that it's decent for 3 ranks for extra full defense. And it's not bad for basic balance. So "4" I guess.
3 - Disable Device: “This is not a skill all PCs need.” Not every PC, but hopefully ever party. In retrospect, I’d rate it a “4” rather than “5”.
OK.
3 - Intimidate: “The DC for this skill increases with HD, making it a less ideal method of
coercion compared to Diplomacy or Bluff.” Yes, it is less ideal for coercion, but it has a number of other game effects, including making enemies shaken or flat footed, and forcing them to attack you, or run away from you.
Well, Intimidate can only do those things with a feat chain, and it can never make an opponent flee. What feat makes an opponent flee with Intimidate? I thought they removed that because of the ridiculous things you could do in 3E with Intimidate (and Intimidate builds).
RE: Intimidate skill. My houserule for this skill is to allow it to be used with whatever attribute you like. After all, there are many ways to Intimidate someone. It should be the "dirty and easy" way of coercion with negative long term ramifications. Its worked well for me.
2 - Fly: “PC specific and don't need much if any to be adequate.” At early levels it’s PC specific, but at high levels when 50-90% of enemies fly, it sees greatly increased use. Also, if you’re going to fly in combat[/i]...
You don't have to make checks as long as you move 1/2 your movement each round. Hovering isn't that hard. If the mob is hovering and range attacking people below, you could always hover above him and fall on him if you don't make your check. :)
I guess there's a lot more flying in your campaigns than mine.
woah to the adventurers that dont put points in climb and swim... this has killed more than a few at our table in really lame ways.
There once was this dwarf paladin in Serpent's Skull...... a las, he is no more.