|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am going to try to break it down!
A class skill is a skill in which you get a +3 bonus if you put at least one rank in that skill.
ex. Rob the Rogue puts 1 rank in Stealth. He gets 1 rank, +3 class skill bonus, +dex mod for that skill.
A non class skill is any skill that is not a class skill. You can put ranks in that skill, you do not get the bonus +3 for doing so.
ex. Rob the Rogue puts 1 rank in Spellcraft. His skill in spellcraft is now 1 (from rank) + Int Mod.
An trained only skill may only be rolled if you actually have 1 or more ranks in that skill.
ex. Rob the Rogue can now roll a spellcraft check.
A bonus that allows you to make checks on untrained skills, such as the Bardic Knowledge ability, or the Breadth of Experience feat from the Advanced Players Guide, lets you make certain types of checks regardless of the investment of ranks.
ex. Barbra the Bard can make the DC 12 Knowledge Religion check to identify the weaknesses of a skeleton, even though she has no ranks in Knowledge Religion, because Bardic Knowledge says she can make those skill checks untrained.
So, in short:
A skill does not have to be a class skill, whether or not it is usable trained or untrained, in order to put a rank into said skill.
A skill that is a class skill in which you put at least one rank will get a +3 class skill bonus.
You may check any skill that is usable untrained whether or not it is a class skill.
You may not check a trained only skill unless you have at least one rank in that skill, unless you meet some exception. Most common exceptions are, (1) Knowledge Skill Check, DC 10 or less. (2) Bardic Knowledge, and (3) Breadth of Experience.
|
It must be. It's not only the rules I'm used to, from several different gaming systems in addition to d20, but it's also real life knowledge that you must be "trained" in some things. You just can't learn them on your own.
I appreciate all the attempts to "break it down", but I understand the rules. It's just this one thing I've been hung up on. It's a plus, really, so I'll just move on.
|
I just really wish the language was less ambiguous. I can't be the only person that has been tripped up by this (my group will love hearing this, too). If there are future printings, get rid of the subscript "Trained Only", and reword Bardic Knowledge so that it just grants the +1/2 level bonus rather than being able to use all Knowledges untrained. I know there are other areas, too.But that's a topic for General Discussion.
[/rant]
I'll disagree with this. As someone who never played 3.0 or 3.5, I learned about skills from the Pathfinder Core Rulebook, and I had no problem understanding them. The hard part isn't the wording of the rules. It's the fact that some people come into the game with assumptions that don't apply.
Your problem in several posts seems to revolve around not understanding the Pathfinder definition of the word "trained". In Pathfinder, "trained" means "having one or more skill ranks assigned to that skill". That's it. It has nothing to do with whether or not it's a class skill.
So a level 1 player usually won't have enough skill ranks to put a rank in every knowledge skill, especially if they want to put ranks in other things, too. Those that he does put a rank in are "trained". Those that he doesn't put a rank in are "untrained". For most classes, this means they can only make knowledge checks in the ones that they have ranks in. For bards, they can still make the checks in all of them, because of bardic knowledge, regardless of whether or not they have ranks in them. They just have a better bonus (including +3 for being a class skill) in those that they have trained (put a rank in).
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I've realized that, pretty much every time I play Pathfinder, I discover some subtle rules difference compared to 3.5. It's always a learning experience. ;-)
I do that every time I GM at a new location.. One of the great things about GMing!
I must admit, I often find myself glad to have not been into 3.5.
|
|
I must admit, I often find myself glad to have not been into 3.5.I've realized that, pretty much every time I play Pathfinder, I discover some subtle rules difference compared to 3.5. It's always a learning experience. ;-)
I do that every time I GM at a new location.. One of the great things about GMing!
Agreed.
|
Contributor
|
I'm with Fromper and Jiggy. I never played 3.0/3.5 and actually have kind of a weird opinion about it because when I judge Pathfinder I frequently run up against things like the skills assumption in this thread, with 3.0/3.5 veterans operating on rules interpretations that, to me, seem to come out of nowhere.
|
|
I'm with Fromper and Jiggy. I never played 3.0/3.5 and actually have kind of a weird opinion about it because when I judge Pathfinder I frequently run up against things like the skills assumption in this thread, with 3.0/3.5 veterans operating on rules interpretations that, to me, seem to come out of nowhere.
Yeah, there is some benefit from playing earlier editions though. For example, full round actions are confusing in pathfinder, but they are clear from experience with previous editions.
|
|
Well one of the common mistakes has to do with action economy during a turn. I pretty regularly see people with TWF try to move and attack twice. I don't see people who used to play 3.5 doing that.
There are other staple rules that have been around since 3.0 that a lot people who didn't play the older editions have to learn. I'm looking at you 5' step.
ooo another of my favorites is people trying to tumble through difficult terrain.
|
|
Well one of the common mistakes has to do with action economy during a turn. I pretty regularly see people with TWF try to move and attack twice. I don't see people who used to play 3.5 doing that.
There are other staple rules that have been around since 3.0 that a lot people who didn't play the older editions have to learn. I'm looking at you 5' step.
ooo another of my favorites is people trying to tumble through difficult terrain.
That just sounds like newbies needing to learn the rules. It has nothing to do with the rules in Pathfinder specifically being confusing. I didn't have a problem learning this stuff.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
That just sounds like newbies needing to learn the rules. It has nothing to do with the rules in Pathfinder specifically being confusing. I didn't have a problem learning this stuff.Well one of the common mistakes has to do with action economy during a turn. I pretty regularly see people with TWF try to move and attack twice. I don't see people who used to play 3.5 doing that.
There are other staple rules that have been around since 3.0 that a lot people who didn't play the older editions have to learn. I'm looking at you 5' step.
ooo another of my favorites is people trying to tumble through difficult terrain.
This.
None of those things are unclear in the Pathfinder rules. Being experienced in 3.5 just means you didn't have to read those particular rules, and by chance those just happen to have stayed close enough to the same that the 3.5 players are accidentally correct. All of those rules function just fine without a D&D background, if the player simply reads.
See, this is the weird thing for me... I started on 3.0/3.5 and played the entire run of those editions and I have never had problems like that. Most of the time my reaction is "OMG, they made it better!" There are a few things now and then that are similar enough to the old rules that lead me to miss the subtle changes (I think the wording for Endurance was one of those)... but for the most part it isn't that bad.
Total off topic moment done now.
On topic, thanks for explaining the rules for regional languages, I was kinda lost on the whole thing myself.
|
|
For those skill point deprived classes one of the best way to pick up some languages is to buy a headband of intellect +2 with the linguistics skill attached. Turn that 8 Int barbarian into a walking Rosetta Stone overnight. Considering how most clues in PFS scenarios are in some oddball language, it is probably the best 4000gp you could spend. This is the sole reason why my Shaonti Barbarian knows 14 languages.