I saw a skill system in a thread on the boards, that i think is pretty good but i had some problems. So i change some things and I want to see how you think about it.
Firstly you gain skill points from your stat modifiers and class, you can use them on skills of the same kind or other kinds for a extra cost. So points from Strength can be used on skills like Swim and climb. For 1 to 1 ratio or too other kinds of skills for a 2 to 1 ratio.
So if you have 14 Str you can put one rank in Swim and Climb or one rank in knowledge religion.
You gain half your class skill points as free points that can be used on any thing. The maximum amount of points from a Stat is the normal skill points from the class. So a fighter whit 16 Dex will only get 2 points but a barbarian would get 3.
Secondly if you have a negative modifier you need to spend extra points to get the first rank.
So if your Cha is 8 you need to spend 1 extra point to learn Diplomacy or 2 points if they com from stat.
Note that you don't gain skill points from Con.
|
Well rounded characters seem to get extra skills, essentially letting you ignore int if you want.
It does make it more complicated, but I do like it a lot.
Assuming a human wizard with 10, 16, 12, 18, 10, 8. He has 2int skills, 1any skill, and 2 dex skills. Plus 1 from human racial. If he took a 20 int he would loose skills.
Assuming a human fighter with 16, 16,14, 12, 14, 8 using the human alternate race feature for two good stats. They have 2 str skills, 2dex skills, 1 int skill, 2 wis skills, and 1 any skills.
A class like druid can be awesome here. 16, 14, 14, 12, 16, 8
3str skills, 2dex skills, 1 int skill, 3wis skills, 2 class skills.
I like it, but I think the int based classes would need a slight boost, as their low skill points currently assumes a high int score. To say a wizard can only get two bonus points from high int to spen on int skills is too harsh IMO. I would double the skill point number for these classes (so they would, under this system, still get two "any skill" points, but have a max of four for their intelligence bonus). Wizards are supposed to load up on a ton of knowledge skills. Alternatively, give them a class ability that exempts them for knowledge skills.
There are only two strength skill and constitution skill. How does your system address this?
|
|
I like it, but I think the int based classes would need a slight boost, as their low skill points currently assumes a high int score. To say a wizard can only get two bonus points from high int to spen on int skills is too harsh IMO. I would double the skill point number for these classes (so they would, under this system, still get two "any skill" points, but have a max of four for their intelligence bonus). Wizards are supposed to load up on a ton of knowledge skills. Alternatively, give them a class ability that exempts them for knowledge skills.
They can always use their 14 Dex as an extra int skill.
I think not allowing con to be used 2:1 is a shame. And is the only change I suggest prior to testing.
There are only two strength skill and constitution skill. How does your system address this?
You can use 2 STR points for any other skill and you don't get skill points for CON. Maybe I will change that after play-testing.
Any one have a idee on how to play test this in a good way?
Have any one played tested this? and if you did what was your results?
Looks cool. Havent playtesged but looks interesting on paper.
I do think it hurts the intelligence stat though. For classes that dont get casting from it, it already does little.
Any one have a idee on how to play test this in a good way?
Here is the first level ability score array of the barbarian I am playing. You tell me what I could do when picking skills at first level.
Str 18
Dex 16
Con 14
Int 12
Wis 10
Cha 8
I do think it hurts the intelligence stat though. For classes that dont get casting from it, it already does little.
It would pretty much put int and charisma in the same boat. Not a terrible thing, but something to consider.
I do think it hurts the intelligence stat though. For classes that dont get casting from it, it already does little.It would pretty much put int and charisma in the same boat. Not a terrible thing, but something to consider.
Well, charisma is kind of bad as is, but I think there's some difference in that charisma affects the oh-so-powerful leadership feat (if it's allowed) and that there's a larger difference between untrained Bluff/Diplomacy/Intimidate +2 and -1 and untrained Knowledges +2 and -1.
Knowledges more or less require you to invest in them to be useful, but the difference for B/D/I is easy to see. Oh, also, a single skill point for UMD can be very useful, but I don't see any int skill that is as good for a single skill point.
So yeah, they're close (at least if Leadership isn't allowed) but I think intelligence is even worse of.
Regardless, I think both Cha and Int needs an out-of-class boost.
As far as the system itself, it seems like it hurts skill monkeys some. Assuming everyone builds a well rounded character the classes with the most skill points would lose the most (half of 8 is more then half of 2) but everyone gainst the same amount.
If we assume a standard array of
15
14
13
12
10
8
Lets say everyone puts the 12 into con (for argument sake)
A fighter loses 1 skill point from his class, but gets 2 skill points in strength, 2 in dex, and maybe one in int or wisdom. He has a total of 6 skill points per level, he would normally have 3 (with a +1 int)
The rogue, loses 4 skill points (half of 8), and get similar amounts back, with 9 skill points where he would have had 9 anyway (with a +1 int).
While I am pro giving everyone more skills that match what they ought to be good at. I am opposed to reducing the advantage skill monkeys have in skill points. I'd say instead of the lost skill points being a fraction of the skill points the class gains, they be a flat amount, probably 2, so every class gets -2 skill points per level (so 2 per level classes get none, maybe set the minimum to 1 per level) and then leave everything else the same.
Kolok that is very true when it comes to balanced stat sheets, but its quite common not to use he standard array (and even there, you missed the racial bonus most put in a high stat). With +2 human race bonus increasing the 15 to a 17, the rogue gets an extra but the fighter doesnt. The rogue also has much greater freedom in what to train, having 4 general insteaf of 1 means it can much quicker get base training in all class skills, even those that are stat dumped. If the fighter puts the 8 in int, itll take 4 levels to get the class bonus for both knowledges. The rogue can do that in one level.
Kolok that is very true when it comes to balanced stat sheets, but its quite common not to use he standard array (and even there, you missed the racial bonus most put in a high stat). With +2 human race bonus increasing the 15 to a 17, the rogue gets an extra but the fighter doesnt. The rogue also has much greater freedom in what to train, having 4 general insteaf of 1 means it can much quicker get base training in all class skills, even those that are stat dumped. If the fighter puts the 8 in int, itll take 4 levels to get the class bonus for both knowledges. The rogue can do that in one level.
Yes the rogue has much greater freedom on what to train but he already has that. My point is that non-skill based classes gain more from this then skill based classes in some circumstances. Replace the fighter with a cavalier. He has 2 skill points per level from class, and can gain up to 4 from a single stat. So he would normally have 5 skill points per level with a +1 int, and instead has 7, only 2 behind the rogue in the above example. Its the fractional loss that is the problem, make that a flat amount and I think you have a good system. I dont think any skill system should allow for non-skill based classes to gain ground on the skill based classes in skills.
I see what you mean.
I think part of the issue is that it's not until very late game where a restriction of +4 from a single stat will really make that big of a difference compared to +6 or +8.
The difference between a fighter and a cavalier NOT on the standard array will be quite large, as will the difference between a druid and a cleric be, but the gap between those and rangers/bards and rogues isn't that large at all.
I have no problem with fighters gaining ground in skills generally, because they still kinda blow out of combat. I've given fighters 4+int skills before without issues. I think the issue isn't so much that skilled classes suck (several don't) as that rogues and monks suck on a more individual level. Rangers have skills as a backup and bards have abilities that work well together with their skills so they don't have as much issues.
I've been thinking about some other changes to skills lately, but will see when I get time to post them. Don't know how well compatible they'll be with this system, but the short version is to give a special skill trick when your ranks+ability mod (no other mods) equals 10 and 20, and making the class skill bonus equal to the ability bonus. Since the primary goal of that rule change is to increase the usefulness of skills and skilled characters, if these are compatible they might fit well together.