Back in 3.5 there was a skill listed on everyone's character sheet. That skill was CON based, and every single spellcasting character maxed it. The ones who were a little lost on what feats to take even took skill focus on it. That skill was called concentration and it was one of the most important skills any spellcasting class had, in addition to its resoective knowledge.
Flash forward, 2009: when PFRPG happened, we had a new system put in place. If every spellcaster basically has to max out this skill in order to lay their character, why don't we just make it a game mechanic? Then, those characters effectively gain an extra skill point per level which gives the players more options. Players love that sh*t!!!
See where I'm going with this?
Pretty much every board, optimization guide, and random person on the internet will tell you to put ranks into perception, because it's the most important skill in the game. What if it wasn't? What if perception became a mechanic that worked like Concentration and scaled with everyone's level?
Naturally there are a few drawbacks to this, mainly in coming up with a way to compensate for the class skill bonus, and the option to take skill focus on it. With Concentration this was fixed by basing it off the character's primary casting stat, which self balanced.
Rather than complicating the issue, what if Perception checks were always 5 + WIS + character level. Essentially it gives all characters Perception as a class skill for free, and gives them a +2 on top of that.
How many characters waste either a feat, or trait trying to pick up this skill just to get that +3 (or +1/+4 depending on whether or not they already had it) on this check, and then waste one of their very valuable skill points every single level on this skill?
Removing perception as a skill effectively gives every character (not just casters) an extra skill point per level, and I think everyone would be okay with that.
Downside: bad guys also now have really good perception checks, which can be a pain for anyone who is stealth based. That said, what DMs don't throw bad guys at their players who have perception maxed?
Just a thought I had.
You might notice that back in 3.5 there were two skills: spot and listen.
I love how Perception now works. My monks are awesome at seeing things too now (only listen was a class skill back then iirc).
The only skills that might still be grouped together that aren't are climb and swim. Athletics might work. (But, I like the two skills separate!)
And am I the only one that finds it weird that swim is not a trained only skill? hahaha
Well.. there are more things in the game like that, seems that 'required' skills and such were kinda designed into the game on purpose. I suspect they removed Concentration as a skill mostly to make it more difficult to pull off. It was almost trivially easy to cast defensively in 3.5.
Also, giving Perception to everyone for free effectively makes Stealth useless.
Examples of other required skills and such: Spellcraft for casters, Acrobatics for rogues and the spells Detect Magic and Read Magic for casters. There is almost not a single wizard out there without two of his four level 0 spells taking up Detect and Read Magic.
Well.. there are more things in the game like that, seems that 'required' skills and such were kinda designed into the game on purpose. I suspect they removed Concentration as a skill mostly to make it more difficult to pull off. It was almost trivially easy to cast defensively in 3.5.
Also, giving Perception to everyone for free effectively makes Stealth useless.Examples of other required skills and such: Spellcraft for casters, Acrobatics for rogues and the spells Detect Magic and Read Magic for casters. There is almost not a single wizard out there without two of his four level 0 spells taking up Detect and Read Magic.
i played a sylph wizard that had
mage hand
prestidigitation
message
and sift as her 4
but she effectively tried to mimic a rogue unlike most wizards
No, spellcraft is not needed for.every caster. Wizards, witches and magi want a bit of it but dont need to max it, and anyone who wants to craft stuff also eeds a bit of it. Acrobatics is good but not that necessary.
I agree with OP though i do not like the soecific numbers ze put forward. Part of the issue with everyone maxing perception is stealth being less useful, and wedont eed to make that even worse.
I also think that awareness is one of those things martial types should e good at. I think instead a good number would be BAB+Wis, and let rogues and monks treat their level as their BAB for this purpose. Add a feat that gives a +3 bonus and nothing more than that.
Might have to rebalance some special abilities on certain classes too.
|
Personally I would like to see it (perception) as it's own ability score. Perception covers anything that can be sensed (seen, heard, etc.) including a kind of 6th sense. While wisdom would be regulated to will power, morale, and devotion. Consequently charisma would be leadership, and personal magnetism.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I respectfully disagree and think it should stay a skill.
Some people are better at noticing things than others, which is why the skill can be used untrained. However, there are lots of people, either through practice or just a part of their lifestyle, who learn to notice things more efficiently and these would be the people who put ranks in the skill.
From a game mechanics standpoint, Perception is a highly useful skill for a number of reasons since Rogues use it now to find traps. It is something that I feel everyone should put at least a few ranks in so they are not taken by surprise in every combat. That being said, while useful, I do not feel that it is vital by any means and have seen plenty of characters go their entire careers without ever putting ranks in it. It all depends on the kind of character you are making.
Many people train to become good at fightin lr good at concentrating or getting good reflexes as well; being trainable does not mean it should be a skikk necessarily.
And while you can make a character without it, just like you can make a fighter that fights with a club and still is effective, while you can its obviously suboptimal. From an optimization standpoint, very very few characters should have less ranks than levels in perception.
I could see HD + level, with certain classes getting a bonus to it ala class skill.
Don't forget that Search also used to be a skill that was incorporated into Perception.
The reason I'm even saying this is because every character uses it, not just casters, not just martials, not just skill monkeys, all of them.
I could see HD + level, with certain classes getting a bonus to it ala class skill.
Don't forget that Search also used to be a skill that was incorporated into Perception.
The reason I'm even saying this is because every character uses it, not just casters, not just martials, not just skill monkeys, all of them.
I'd agree here, though I'd also give the rogue and ranger a minor, class-based bonus.
That said, what DMs don't throw bad guys at their players who have perception maxed?
*raises hand*
Unless the monster comes pre-made with a high Perception, or I'm building a scout/skillmonkey/spotter type character, most NPCs I toss at my players have moderate Perception at best. It lets the stealthy PC be actually stealthy, except when I deliberately want to challenge her. Rogues are crippled enough already, having everything and its mother able to spot them just obliterates the usefulness of the class period. And it'd be a major blow to other stealthy classes such as Rangers, Ninjas, and sneaky Alchemists as well.
Important NPCs like BBEGs and boss monsters? Yeah they'll generally have Perception out their ears, and magic items and/or feats to boost it. NPCs whose job it is to be a spotter/spy/some other occupation that requires good perceptive ability? They'll have ranks in it and boost it as they can, too. But general mooks and random monsters? Not most of the time.
This would only bugger rogues and other mundane stealthies further.
Zombie Ninja's idea is one I went with when designing my own system. Perception in it is a seventh ability score that covers senses and ranged weapon attacks. One thing that made it more needed than in PF, however, is that the system is for Deus Ex, meaning modern ranged combat with guns and plasma rifles and what not.
I'd actually disagree with giving HD+level and class bonuses or something similar. I don't really agree with giving classes a 'free' skill.
I like that skill points are limited and you have to make tradeoffs (although I'd like more ways to increase skill points, like a feat that gives more than 1 skill point/level). It makes skill point investment a strategic process with some considerations. My wizard was really careful with investing skill points and I decided on a level by level basis whether or not to invest in Perception, Fly, Appraise, certain Knowledge skills etc... I prefer to have e.g. 3 pts in Fly and 3 pts in Perception and then making the choice at level 7 in which skill to invest, rather than just mindlessly plunging more points in Fly every level.
I think it'd be kinda boring to get a free skill, freeing up those points to rather mindlessly invest them in other skills.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm, instead of skill ranks or class level, perhaps BAB + WisMod would be a better baseline for perception. Still allow for Skill Focus(Perception) for an additional bonus, and traits/racial bonuses as well.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the issue is that Perception is so much better than all the other skills that everyone feels like they have to max it out, maybe the solution is to make other skills equally valuable, rather than to make Perception free?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would agree there is an issue that some skills are far more useful than others, such as Perception and Acrobatics. (There are likewise skills hardly used. I think I've seen maybe one Escape Artist check made in the last 13 years.)
But I am very uncertain that the solution is to de-skill all such skills. (And in a way, I would argue conversely that it makes more sense to de-skill skills players seldom use, such as the aforementioned Escape Artist, and keep it from being a distraction.)
I think you're also operating under a false assumption that "everyone" needs the skill and that it is "the most important skill in the game." I disagree. It is an important skill, yes. But not everyone needs it. And not is not appropriate for every character to have it. And as a GM, no, I do not max out Perception on every bad guy I make. I max it out on bad guys who are intended to be perceptive. Not all bad guys are. I think if you are under the impression that Perception is the most important skill in the game, that is more indicative of something going on with your GM and how your group plays the game than how the game always works for everybody.
Concentration as a skill was a bit of a unique bunny. Concentration was only EVER, effectively, a function of spellcasting. While there were efforts to make it a broader skill (I remember d20 Modern in particular referenced Concentration for non-spellcasters a lot for doing things under pressure, but it was more like they were trying very hard to make a very specialized skill relevant to a version of a game that didn't always have magic in it), Concentration pretty much only got rolled out to avoid losing a spell while spellcasting in certain circumstances, which is a very specific thing. Under this very specific circumstance, it makes sense to make Concentration, ergo, a function of spellcasting classes rather than a skill on everybody's character sheet. You do not need to "balance" classes good at Perception (often, those with Perception as one of their main bailiwicks are considered by the same Wise Men of the Internet Optimization Discussions as weak classes otherwise, such as the rogue).
There is also a major issue of balance here: with Concentration as a skill, max it out, and at least as written in 3.x, you were more or less guaranteed never to fail a check. With concentration as a static level plus ability score check, it only goes so high, even with a handful of feats and traits to help. This was done to make it always possible to lose a spell--it is a restriction on the potential powerfulness of spellcasting. Outside of casting defensively, it's probably not used often enough to make it the balancing element it was meant to be, but it was designed the way it was to specifically make a potentially powerful ability LESS powerful.
Perception isn't like Concentration in a number of ways. It does not apply to a very powerful class ability, a la spellcasting. It is not restricted, technically, to only certain kinds of characters, even if only certain classes get it as a class skill (but, as of Pathfinder, anyone can train it easily enough at least). It is also a very BROAD skill---concentration has one specific purpose, to give you a chance to cast a spell in difficult circumstances. Perception has a wide variety of applications that isn't specific to a particular circumstance or attempt, let alone to a certain kind of class (even with scouting and trapfinding, there are a number of classes that can be well suited to that for more varied reasons than why a spellcaster should be good at concentrating).
But more to the point, Perception is also something that not everyone is going to be equally good at. All spellcasters are probably going to be very good at Concentration because it is integral to what they do. But not everyone is equally aware or NEEDS to be equally aware. If I have a Party Face rogue and a Trapfinder rogue, both rogues do not need to have the same Perception modifier to survive or perform their party role in the way that an illusionist and an evoker both need to be good at concentration.
Doing anything that formulizes the way Perception advances basically eliminates something really IS and in my opinion should be, based on degree of talent and training (i.e., a skill). I DON'T think the wizard with his nose in a book should be as alert as the ambush-wary ranger. I DON'T think the contemplative, inward-looking cleric should have as much potential as a rogue for knowing what to look for when seeking traps. I think we end up with something far too gamist here to be sensible (I prefer a better balance between mechanical streamlining and what makes sense narratively and in terms of simulation).
If you homogenize and hard-code Perception into character advancement, it also ultimately means that at high levels, no one ever should be able to be surprised. Everyone, wizard, cleric, bard, oracle, summoner, should be able to find traps and secret doors with ease. It also means that high level bad buys will NEVER be surprised, never be trapped, never be caught off guard. This makes NO sense and is, frankly, boring. It also utterly screws over Stealth-based characters, or, alternately, ensures every Stealth based character and GM-created NPC and foe will do everything they can to have a Stealth score higher than 5+the party's APL+5, assuming the most likely highest Wisdom score you may see, and you enter a sort of strange "arms race" for who has the highest what (and the Stealth based characters will likely win if their ability is still a skill and Perception is not, since they will get ranks+class bonus as well as more feats). And for the last, since Wisdom would be the only way to ensure that your Perception would be higher than someone else's, it also ensures that more people will try to max out Wisdom, which in turn makes average Will saves higher, which then in turn borks illusionist and enchanter builds amongst many monster abilities and other things.
Finally, again, I don't think EVERYONE needs Perception. Most parties I've played in or run, we usually have a couple people who build perception, who play the roles of scouts and trapfinders. If someone else puts a few ranks in, fine. But if everybody builds it up, it eliminates the niches the scouts and trapfinders are trying to fill, and again, if everyone is effectively a scout and trapfinder, that just doesn't make sense.
If there's an issue in a game where it seems like every attack is an ambush and the people who don't have good Perception scores are screwed, that is an issue of the GM being a dick, not an indication that everyone should have this skill. But it's actually cool--and makes for a better story--when you have that one guy who notices the ambush and stops the surprise round than having Joe Stupid in the back of the party noticing it more or less as easily as Owl-eyes the Ranger.
You also begin to fuzz over what the line should be between a skill and a class ability. It might be simpler to make all skills be based on a level check and ability score, but it means everybody improves at everything at the same rate, and again, that isn't really how people improving their abilities works. You eliminate the point of skill building and what I feel is a need for specialization. (I hated "non-weapon proficiencies" where you barely improved and couldn't specialize.)
TL;DR: Not everyone should be good at Perception in the way all spellcasters should be competent at Concentration, and giving Perception the Concentration treatment could unintentionally break other things.
I would say that if you FEEL like Perception is TOO important, it may behoove us to look at game and adventure design to see where it may be used in disproportion.
One issue is that we have the GM often saying, "everyone roll Perception." (And actually, if you read the rules, the GM is supposed to roll everyone's Perception and not tell people that he or she is doing that and whether the PCs succeed or fail (they figure it out soon enough.)) Either way, how often the GM does this may be up for question. Sometimes I think--looking at my own GMing style as an example--we call for or make those rolls too often. Somebody says, "I look to see how many pockets this guy has," and you immediately respond, "Okay, roll Perception." We should probably be willing to be a little more disclosing about certain pieces of information and not ask for a Perception roll EVERY single time a character wants to notice something. We should probably be more careful about restricting Perception checks to truly difficult things--noticing a rogue's ambush, finding traps, trying to discern what a figure in the far away distance is in terms of creature type and bearing, etc. We perhaps should trust more often that people take their time--and encourage players to describe what they are doing to be careful when they are looking for something and grant bonuses for good roleplay and description.
Likewise, as someone else noted, make other skills useful. If Perception is the only skill you're rolling, that's a gameplay/adventure design issue to. Same goes for any skill. I was in a game where we were in a scenario where the only skill of value was basically Diplomacy. My dwarf barroom brawler with a negative Charisma modifier had nothing to do at first -- ultimately came up with a way I could help between me and the GM, but as written in the module it was basically, "Anyone with not this skill trained can go sit on their thumb for an hour." That shouldn't happen (at least not frequently) with ANY skill, whether it's Perception or Fly.
If you feel like EVERYONE has to have Perception in the same way that you feel EVERY spellcaster must have the potential to concentrate, again, I posit that is a problem more with adventure design and balance than the mechanics and intent of the rules as written.
Perception is a very useful and valuable skill, but not all characters have it, or have it maxed. You might find that what "every board, optimization guide, and random person on the internet" says is not necessarily true.
Also, I had plenty of spellcasters with no ranks in Concentration.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel very backwards by re-breaking perception back into spot and listen.
why would you do that
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I like to do is give each class some bonus skill ranks in the skills they logically need in order to really do their jobs. In some cases, this means their number of discretionary points can be lowered and they still come out ahead. So, while in PF, casters essentially get free Concentration ranks and no one else gets a free ride, I'd give rogues and rangers free Perception ranks (among other skills), and give clerics free ranks in Heal, and so on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the issue is that Perception is so much better than all the other skills that everyone feels like they have to max it out, maybe the solution is to make other skills equally valuable, rather than to make Perception free?
In an ideal game, all skills have the same level of "usefulness" for the genre that the game is catering to. But D&D/Pathfinder already "automates" certain progressions that are central to the game, such as HPs, BAB, saving throws etc.
Actually, most tests that are called for by the DM (or else "something" goes bad) usually take the form of a saving throw. I believe Perception as reactive "skill" could make sense as a saving throw, which can be complemented by a "search" skill for when the players make their own call.
In my home-brewed system (my own findelfinder, so to speak), there are five saving throws - one for each stat (yes I removed a stat) - serving for situations you can avoid by being strong/though enough, quick/agile enough, acute/insightful enough, alert/perceptive enough or strong-willed/self-controlled enough.
Some skills can be used to substitute a save in certain situation. High Perception skill? Substitute your Alertness save with your Perception skill against enemies sneaking being you.
Not to fire the first shot in an edition war, but D&D Next has rolled attack BAB, saving throws and skill advancement into a level based Proficiency Bonus wich ranges from +1 to +6. Most rolls are just ability checks, with the proficiency bonus counting only for weapons, saves and skills a class is proficient with.
I guess I'm saying that if Perception (and everything else, eventually) is a non skill mechanic, you just remove skill points from the game.
Which stat did you remove, Laure?
Make it a save. It would scale differently with different classes. Wizards would be too lost in their books to notice something, so they scale slow. Monks could smell something askew from a mile away, so they scale fast.
Leave a skill in as search.
Problem solved.
Not to fire the first shot in an edition war, but D&D Next has rolled attack BAB, saving throws and skill advancement into a level based Proficiency Bonus wich ranges from +1 to +6. Most rolls are just ability checks, with the proficiency bonus counting only for weapons, saves and skills a class is proficient with.
I guess I'm saying that if Perception (and everything else, eventually) is a non skill mechanic, you just remove skill points from the game.
My problem with skill-less systems is that I prefer to be able to customize and specialize. While it makes things more complicated, I LIKE to have, for example, one bard who kicks ass at social skills more than anything else, another bard who kicks ass at knowledges more than anything else, and another who is is a kickass gymnast more than anything else, etc. If all bards (or any given class) just all get the same bonus that increases per level, and the only thing that affects what they're good at, effectively, is their ability score, then it reduces how creative you can be with builds. I means I'm only going probably to ever play one bard, one fighter, etc. In Pathfinder I've played a few different bards, rogues, fighters, rangers, etc. and they've all felt wildly different and I LOVE that, and skill distribution is a major (though of course certainly not sole) part of that.
A system that embeds skills into inherent class bonus also is going to struggle even harder, IMO, to make "expert" type characters (rogues, bards, etc.) stand out versus spellcasters, unless you're giving them lots of skill tricks as class abilities. And THEN that leads to the eternal questions along the lines of "why can only my rogue find traps when anyone should be able to notice and cut a tripwire," etc. sort of argument.
Honestly, my ideal game would get rid of ability scores and keep skills, rather than the other way around.
Not to attack D&D Next -- whatever works for them, awesome, but speaking as a Pathfinder player, that is NOT the direction I would want THIS game to go in.
There's a big difference here ... a low Perception score doesn't bring your class abilities to a halt.
@ Orthos...Honestly I always liked having more skills,complexities and what not. I survived 4th edition for a year or so...stream lining is not my friend.
I've found that in the 3.5 games I played, Spot and Listen were used a lot less than in PF. They were legitimate skills, mostly due to the .5 rank system, it made it not worth it to have ranks into them for certain characters. It also made the need for a scout-y kind of character a lot more important.
If PF could turn into a game where you have someone take on the role of the scout who's job was to find things and look out, then I would be fine with leaving Perception alone as is, but the way the games I've played all feel, it's just too damn important.
A lot of that I feel comes from the mindset where players make their characters to all be self-sufficient, mostly due to PFS or some other scenario where you don't know what the other guys are making, and you can't really risk not having ranks into it.
Perhaps things like Acrobatics, Perception, and other skills that are often considered max or leave could all be incorporated as game mechanics, letting players use their skill ranks on things role playing related like varying crafts, knowledges, professions, and the like.
Looking back and above, I do like BAB + WIS, and we could even create a special transcendent class ability (such as evasion) for classes like the rogue or monk that allows them to use character level in place of BAB for the check.
i also miss skill synergies :(
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Which stat did you remove, Laure?
BRAWN for hp, attack/damage bonus and strength-related skill. FORTITUDE is its derivative save for resiting everything physical you cannot avoid (typically with reflex), from poisons to physical spells to grappling.
AGILITY for AC, attack/damage bonus with finesse weapons and dexterity-related skills. REFLEX is its derivative save for avoiding things by moving away/catching yourself.
ACUMEN for understanding, learning and perceiving things, and typically intelligence-related skills. AWARENESS is its derivative save for perceiving incoming dangers.
INTUITION for empathy, connecting with the wild and the divine, and typically wisdom-related skills (except perception). INSIGHT is its derivative save for "not being fooled" by skills, illusions or deception spells.
PRESENCE for personality, force of will and social skills. WILLPOWER is its derivative save for resisting fear and most mind-affecting spells.
Which stat did you remove, Laure?** spoiler omitted **
Well, a bunch of stuff got redacted, but regardless, I always figured folding Str and Con into one stat made a lot of sense. And I like your Ability-Score-to-Save conversion if you see what I mean. :)
Back in 3.5 there was a skill listed on everyone's character sheet. That skill was CON based, and every single spellcasting character maxed it. The ones who were a little lost on what feats to take even took skill focus on it. That skill was called concentration and it was one of the most important skills any spellcasting class had, in addition to its resoective knowledge.
Flash forward, 2009: when PFRPG happened, we had a new system put in place. If every spellcaster basically has to max out this skill in order to lay their character, why don't we just make it a game mechanic? Then, those characters effectively gain an extra skill point per level which gives the players more options. Players love that sh*t!!!
See where I'm going with this?
Pretty much every board, optimization guide, and random person on the internet will tell you to put ranks into perception, because it's the most important skill in the game. What if it wasn't? What if perception became a mechanic that worked like Concentration and scaled with everyone's level?
Naturally there are a few drawbacks to this, mainly in coming up with a way to compensate for the class skill bonus, and the option to take skill focus on it. With Concentration this was fixed by basing it off the character's primary casting stat, which self balanced.
Rather than complicating the issue, what if Perception checks were always 5 + WIS + character level. Essentially it gives all characters Perception as a class skill for free, and gives them a +2 on top of that.
How many characters waste either a feat, or trait trying to pick up this skill just to get that +3 (or +1/+4 depending on whether or not they already had it) on this check, and then waste one of their very valuable skill points every single level on this skill?
Removing perception as a skill effectively gives every character (not just casters) an extra skill point per level, and I think everyone would be okay with that.
Downside: bad guys also now have really good perception checks,...
You remove Perception from the skill list, then X becomes the "go to" skill, so it gets removed, then Y, then Z.
Do the same with feats, and you have AD&D 2.
Perception as a skill in Pathfinder makes no sense.
Firstly, seeing things and hearing things are two very different animals. It is illogical to put the two together. This is not to say I don't like combining skills. I like Acrobatics (except for maybe Jump which has little to do with dexterity and a lot to do with strength), Stealth and some of the other ones. This aspect of perception, while illogical, I can let go.
Secondly, and the one I can't let go, is the fact that they rolled search into it. Search has absolutely no bearing on the other two, which is why it was Int based. In 3.5 the only classes likely to have a high search were Rogues, Barbs, and possibly Wizards or Bards. This fact created a niche for a scout like character. Now every character(or most of them) put as many points as they can get away with in perception. I've noticed that every time players enter a new room there is 1-2 minute waste of time as every player rolls perception to actively look for traps, whereas in 3.x there was one or two party members who would do that.
This particular skill streamlining has made the game worse off in that it has reduced party rolls somewhat. When everyone tries to have massive perceptions it is highly likely that every trap/secret door is going to get discovered. When it was one, he could roll poorly and what have you. To me it just feels goofy.
Varathiel
Perception as a skill in Pathfinder makes no sense.
Firstly, seeing things and hearing things are two very different animals. It is illogical to put the two together. This is not to say I don't like combining skills. I like Acrobatics (except for maybe Jump which has little to do with dexterity and a lot to do with strength), Stealth and some of the other ones. This aspect of perception, while illogical, I can let go.
Secondly, and the one I can't let go, is the fact that they rolled search into it. Search has absolutely no bearing on the other two, which is why it was Int based. In 3.5 the only classes likely to have a high search were Rogues, Barbs, and possibly Wizards or Bards. This fact created a niche for a scout like character. Now every character(or most of them) put as many points as they can get away with in perception. I've noticed that every time players enter a new room there is 1-2 minute waste of time as every player rolls perception to actively look for traps, whereas in 3.x there was one or two party members who would do that.
This particular skill streamlining has made the game worse off in that it has reduced party rolls somewhat. When everyone tries to have massive perceptions it is highly likely that every trap/secret door is going to get discovered. When it was one, he could roll poorly and what have you. To me it just feels goofy.
Varathiel
And basing Acrobatics and Disable Device on the same stat makes no sense either. I've known a lot of clumsy people that were very good with their hands.
That said, what DMs don't throw bad guys at their players who have perception maxed?*raises hand*
Also raises hand
- Torger
Me three.That said, what DMs don't throw bad guys at their players who have perception maxed?*raises hand*
Also raises hand
- Torger
Well then you've never had many munchkin players who do shenanigans with stealth by the sounds of it.
When I make games, I like to have my encounters challenge my players in some way, and if a stealthy character completely shuts down any chance that the players may have to actually play the game to succeed, then I feel the need to have at least one bad guy have ranks in perception at least to make the PCs sweat a little.
If maxing stealth guarantees victory, then what kind of game are you running?