I was thinking about how easy it is to actually be good at a skill as long as you dedicate ranks to it every level, and more so if you pick up a trait that gives you a +1 bonus and makes the skill class.
So, what do you think would be a fun class/unconventional skill combination?
I'm thinking Barbarian + Bluff. No one would see it coming.
A wizard maxing out acrobatics is actually pretty damn amazing for casting spells when threatened.
A paladin maxing stealth. or anyone wearing heavy armor, really. super useful.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I never cared much about class names and description (or any official fluf, for that matter). For me, they are just a good suggestion from the developers.
I don't need to play a Rogue to be the charming scoundrel, play a Paladin o be a sacred defender of justice and good or play a Samurai to be the honor-bound warrior with a katana.
You don't walk aroun with a neon sign on your forehead telling the world which class you belong to. Fluff is what you make of it.
Thankfully, PF skill system supports this really well. Not having to pay twice as much for cross-class skill is woderful, and with traits, we can all have Barbarian diplomats and sneaky clerics.
I usually assign skill ranks to Bluff, Diplomacy and/or Sense Motive no matter which class I'm playing, mostly because I really enjoy social encounters.
Why should Bards have all the fun? ^^
I was thinking about how easy it is to actually be good at a skill as long as you dedicate ranks to it every level, and more so if you pick up a trait that gives you a +1 bonus and makes the skill class.
So, what do you think would be a fun class/unconventional skill combination?
I'm thinking Barbarian + Bluff. No one would see it coming.
An old thread I have discusses some of this, though it is focused on understanding how to get the most out of the system and build the character that you want to play while following the rules.
Ashiel, your topic seems to be spot on in terms of what I was thinking in being using skills with classes that don't have a natural advantage to them.
And very true Lemmy, you don't have to wear your class name on your sleeve.
A fighter could easily wear tribal fetishes and have tattoos, or be LG with a personal code of conduct the same as a paladin's, just without the actual divine endorsement a paladin has.
I just don't see that as often as I see Fighters played as a merc, guard, soldier, or more traditional backstory.
That makes sense, Petty Alchemy, those classes were made with that fluff in mind, so they are great fits for those flavor choices, which is good! If I see a class named Barbarian, I'll expect it to make a good Barbarian. Which reminds me, one of the biggest problems with monks, IMO, is how they fail to live up to their class description.
But that's the catch. The class/feat/spell/whatever description is a suggestion. Usually a good suggestion.
But it's not a limiter. That is a strength of the system, having classes who can live up to their intended fluff but are still versatile enough to allow for more creative characters.
I've made Barbarian gentlemen, Druid diplomats, Summoner knights and Magi kung-fu masters (I even made an archetype for the last one).
For example, I really like this build. A Halfling Urban Barbarian who sees herself as a duelist, not a fun-sized berseker.
I admit Urban Barbarian are much less... well, barbaric... than their more conventional cousins, but still... Barbarian is her class, but not what she is.
And I'm pretty sure many NPCs (and even PCs) wouldn't be able to correctly guess her "class" without metagaming. ^^