I found a character I was wanting to recreate in this system and realized that while I would easily be able to recreate his fighting style as he is just a very skilled dual wielding swordsman type, nailing down his skills would be nigh impossible if I made his stats reflect how he is, and thus made me wonder if their was perhaps a better way to do this. The class that would best fit his combat prowess and style would be two weapon warrior as he fights with two curved swords and ZERO magic or stealth. This gives 2 skill ranks plus int. Ok not a lot to work with. The other problem throughout the adventure is that part of his character/a running gag is that he is not exactly the smartest person and is generally speaking pretty dim witted. 8-9 Int. Well crap. 1 skill point. On the other hand, throughout his adventure, he proved to be, in an odd way, a pretty effective speaker, and won people over with his resolve and idealism, gaining the favor of entire communities. Thus I'm garnering a decent Wis and Cha. While those stats do help their respective skills it doesn't change the fact that I only have 1 skill point. I highly doubt I'll ever even be capable at even PHYSICAL skills, such as acrobatics, or social skills because I'm somewhat dumb? Sure I could just make his int higher but that defeats the point. So I thought that it might have been fun to think about if perhaps you could choose what mental stat you used for skills but each provided a sort of penalty perhaps?
For instance:
Int to skills: Cha based skills take two ranks for one
Wis to skills: Int based skills take two ranks for one
Cha to skills: Wis based skills take two ranks for one
This could even mechanically show that based on what kind of smarts you have what you struggle to learn.
I by no means think that this example of how to do this should be the definitive solution as this was just a simple solution I came up with as food for thought. Is this this a decent idea perhaps For future D20 systems? Would this perhaps be to powerful of a boon for classes that use these other mental stats as part of what makes them good in combat? I also see this as a decent boon for the likes of a sorcerer, they get the same amount of ranks as a wizard and are pretty close to just being the same class, save that the wizard's casting stat provides him with a decent number of skills while the sorcerer would have to put points in an essentially useless stat for them. Any thoughts?
EDIT: Sure I suppose a slayer might be able to fill make a decent TWF type with more skills but was hoping to avoid even having sneak attack and some other class abilities they have, this however does not negate the general idea that I was hoping to see some discussion on.
PS I may have accidentally put this in the wrong thread.
Not a skill monkey, just socially inviting and could really win people over, however it seems the inverse of what you said is true about pathfinder, that my fighting style (class) has everything to do with skills. The character idea was simply what made me think of this, and the concept's validity or viability in the current system is not really what I was hoping to get a discussion on, perhaps I should have left it out as it may be a tad distracting from what I was actually hoping to be discussed.
Their are different kinds of smart. INT is book smarts, factual knowledge and easily grasping complicated concepts. WIS is common sense and willpower, willpower can be seen kinda like mental fortitude. CHA is street smarts, knowing what someone wants to hear and such. I'm curious to see what people thought of using other stats that are a form of mental aptitude, thus being mental stats, as what you would use to determine how many skills you get. While this could be said of any of the mental stats, gaining skill points from a stat that has nothing to do with a skill is kind of odd. Why does having more INT say that I am better able to progress skills like diplomacy, than the actual mental stat the skill uses. Same goes for IF CHA could be used for skill points, why would being charismatic make me better able to progress an INT skill such as a knowledge skill? This also kind of applies to all physical skills like why does being smart in any sort of way make me a better swimmer? That is beside the point though. The point is I think that being able to choose what mental stat gave you your skills, while providing a sort of penalty on skills that use what could be seen as the opposing mental skill, such as the generalization that really INTelligent people often struggle with being awkward socially, could mechanically represent what people with that kind of smarts struggle to grasp. I think this could be a neat concept to potentially include in later rule systems.
Would you be willing to have that character give up a feat? This is a way to get around a low skill modifier for a couple of skills. There are a few feats that grant a +2 on two different skills. You might be able to talk your GM into allowing you to customize a feat that grants a +2 in two skills of your choosing for this character. If you wrap it up in a convincing story explaining why this character is good at those things (despite being relatively dull intellectually speaking), you might get a good response from the GM.
Well I was looking for characters to emulate in PFS games so no home ruling would fix this as I can't seem to get into a home game. However, this topic was more meant to open up a discussion on what people would think if this sort of using other mental stats for skills was implemented into future roleplaying games, and the character mentioned above was simply what made me think of this. I put it in the wrong topic by accident and flagged it to be moved, but they mistook it for a advice question so I've remade it in the general discussion thread if you are interested. :)
No. I'm not open to other stats providing skills.
However, using a slayer would resolve the majority of your issues with skill points. As far as not wanting sneak attack, is it the name that bothers you? Just think of it as an extra precise attack that deal additional damage. Because that's literally all it is. Sneak attacks are precision damage, and you aren't required to build around getting it either.
Also, if you play as you human you get 1 extra skill point per level (that is added in after any penalties from int score). And your favored class bonus can as well.
So, a human fighter with an int of 7 (-2 modifier) who uses their favored class bonus to gain extra skill points will have 3 skill points per level. This is because 2 skill point per level from class - 2 from int mod still gives a minimum of one. The other bonuses factor in after.
The two weapon warrior really isn't that good at TWF because he still requires a high dex to qualify for all the feats and can't bypass them. The bonuses he does get really aren't exceptional and the good ones really don't come until high levels 11+. If you're playing PFS it means you'll have 2 levels where you actually play with something that is worth having.
From a narrative perspective: I'm not even convinced Intelligence has anything to do with skills in general. Speaking from personal experience, it's always been the time, effort, and dedication to one's craft that made you spectacular at what you did. I mean being able to read is a bit of a boon in that regard, but outside of that you don't have to be particularly smart/wise/charming to learn how to play the flute, for example. (Additionally, one could argue that Wisdom comes from experience and has little bearing on actually learning a craft)
Mechanically speaking: While the trade-off is good in theory, when you start applying it to characters you may end up shoehorning those characters into building a certain way in regards to skills. "I'm Jonny Q. Sorcerer and my skill stat is Charisma because everything I use is based off of Charisma: better not invest in any Wisdom-based skills because it's sub-optimal".
Of course not every player would behave this way, but it'd be the apparent optimal strategy (except with maybe the exception of Perception).
That said, I think having the option to switch your skill-ability-score to another mental stat with a feat is a wonderful idea. It's there for those who want it and it doesn't have to be there for those that don't.
Sounds like Kirito. There's a strong case to be made for Spelleater Bloodrager, though TWF is bad for them generally. Skirmisher Urban Ranger could also handle it, I think, and that would give you more skills and TWF feats via Combat Style instead of needing the Dex to support them.
As far as modifying the skill system, the system becomes quite imbalanced if you shift skill points off of Int. The Johnny Q. Sorceror example is all well and good, but think about Clerics, as well. They've historically dumped Int as well.
Expending a feat to do this is a good idea I did not think of. Like I said, the "solution" I gave was merely an example. This way would also have the benefit of not having the penalty I mentioned based on which you used. I'm sure people who stuck with INT would feel a tad jipped.
The Johnny Q. Sorceror example is all well and good, but think about Clerics, as well. They've historically dumped Int as well.
She's a free-spirited Sorcerer fueled by vengeance and poor impulse control. She's a no-nonsense Cleric who plays it by the book she can't read. They fight crime.
On the subject of your build, I could see them being more low WIS rather than low INT. I mean you have a better idea of what your character behaves like, but I find that "not smart" and "dim witted" could be either low Wisdom -or- low Intelligence. At least with the former, you'd get some skill points to work with.
The Johnny Q. Sorceror example is all well and good, but think about Clerics, as well. They've historically dumped Int as well.She's a free-spirited Sorcerer fueled by vengeance and poor impulse control. She's a no-nonsense Cleric who plays it by the book she can't read. They fight crime.
On the subject of your build, I could see them being more low WIS rather than low INT. I mean you have a better idea of what your character behaves like, but I find that "not smart" and "dim witted" could be either low Wisdom -or- low Intelligence. At least with the former, you'd get some skill points to work with.
This is perhaps the best dynamic duo I have ever heard of. It is hysterical. Unfortunately low Int would probably fit the bill better as most of the moments his "smarts" are uh mentioned (made light of) it generally brings up his failures in scholastic pursuits or inability to understand something. Not to mention that he has a strange canine creature that is white and green that is big enough for him to easily ride and when asked what his pet is he simply says "He's a dog". I suppose I could see that as bad wisdom but I'm thinking more of a really bad knowledge nature check. Although frankly NO one knows what it is and you never see any similar creatures so maybe it is a pretty obscure creature, but everyone else in the party can at least tell it isn't a dog. While I can't seem to come up with the perfect example for his reasonable amount of wisdom, I would say at its lowest consideration it would be 12. However as I believe I mentioned Slayer, as well as perhaps a ranger archetype that did away with magic which I believe Serisan brought up, should alleviate the skills problem. As I said this was intended to be purely for the skills from other mental stats thing, it just ended up in the wrong forum, I do however appreciate the help on the character. :)
Is there any particular reason you can't play a Slayer instead?
Sneak Attack is just "Extra damage when I flank" and Studied Target is "Weapon Training with any weapon I want" so I'm not sure really what the issue is there.
I really just ignore Sneak Attack on my Slayer (and Sanctified Slayer), and still perform swimmingly. It's not something you need to build into or even care about.
Yea I'm starting to think either slayer or scout ranger. Idk, I really don't need to bring up why I initially wasn't wanting to because the reasons are rather silly I suppose.
|
There is a trait for almost every skill. 1 feat (additional traits) and 2 skill ranks into those skills bumps your mod up by 4. Picking traits that grant +1 trait bonus -and- considered a class skill. This alone should solve almost all your woes, if. You are willing to invest in curing your problem.
That said, I am in the 'bad idea' camp.
Using this house rule would make in a dump stat for every one that is not a int based caster(or investigator). Since skills is the only thing int Does for most classes. I Think it is a terrible idea.
Using this house rule would make in a dump stat for every one that is not a int based caster(or investigator). Since skills is the only thing int Does for most classes. I Think it is a terrible idea.Nobody complained that people already do that for charisma, since literally the only thing non CHA-based classes use charisma for are four skills.
Since Paizo just loves making traits that let you poach those skills with intelligence (Bruising Intellect, Pragmatic Activator, Student of Philosophy, Clever Wordplay, why yes I would like my 5 charisma alchemist to be a better party face than the paladin, thank you!) I'm having trouble feeling much sympathy for intelligence.
As it is, it feels like Intelligence is the same as Charisma but with an over-inflated sense of self-importance since it punishes you for not investing in it by taking away your skill ranks or locking most of the good combat maneuvers behind a 13 int paywall for no reason. Only recently has Charisma been allowed to fight back against Intelligence's sense of entitlement with the ACG classes that don't need 13 int if they want to pay the feat/stat taxes for maneuvers.
I'm not a huge fan of how every class gets punished for not investing in intelligence because your skill set gets tight and your character can't contribute as much out of combat as a result, or how that's fine because it leads to "more rounded characters" but a party of 7 cha characters meaning your party of legendary heroes are the most dull, charmless people you will ever meet is a fact of the game. Both int and cha need some more inherent value to investing in them, but in the meantime, Intelligence should stop stealing Charisma's nice things and then whining any time it's not treated as an important stat for every class.
You do realize that they are just numbers on paper and not persons, rigth?:)
But i do see your point and i agree that there have been a sad trend with int and wisdom getting some options for acting like cha when char is already the weakest stat for most classes. But with fencing grace now a thing i predict we Will get a feat(rapier wit pehaps) that allow dex to social skills:)
It's an alternative way of doing skills. In theory, the variance in mental stats already reflects how good a character is at them: eg low Charisma gives a penalty to social skills.
The big problem is the lack of skill points for most classes unless they have a high Int. The simplest fix is to say that 4 points is the minimum instead of 2 for the classes.
Another method would be to drop skill points entirely and just go with a level bonus for a selection of skills based on a mix of which class they are and their stats.
There are lots of ways to do this, but some are complicated and all change the game. Discuss with your group and see what they fancy.
The ability to reroll failed checks can also cover for a lack of actual skill ranks.
I wish they just made it were skill base numbers were based on your class category.
All Spellcasters- 4+Int
All Martial- 6+Int
All Skill Monkey- 8+Int
|
I've read once that the current, somewhat low, numbers were a deliberate design choice. The idea was that by not giving out all that much skill points, no PC would be self-sufficient, and that everyone would get the chance to grab a niche.
That's an interesting idea, but it works out quite differently in on the one hand a home campaign, with a persistent party - there it can work. In PFS on the other hand you have changing party lineups and there's much more incentive for everyone to cover the same high-priority skills (perception, diplomacy) because you can't count on a competent fellow PC being present every adventure.
That then leads to a few annoying situations: nobody having a needed skill (we had to bring in Lem 7 to fill out our party for Stranger Within because none of us had appropriate social or knowledge skills). Also: nobody getting a nice niche because everyone has focused on the same skills (how many high-diplomacy PCs do you really need?).
What about Ranger? get the skirmisher archetype and if no animal companion no problem.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I've always felt that there is a lot in this game that's mainly there because it's "always been there". But the more I play the more I want to get away from all of the rules, so take my opinion as you will.
That said I've thought about how being intelligent doesn't really reflect how many "skills" your character has. For the intelligence based skills, sure. But why would a more intelligent person be better at climbing? And someone who's trained to be a soldier in an army might not be the smartest person in the world, but I'd think the army would have trained them for basic battlefield conditions which (might, though probably not) include climbing, swimming, and acrobatics. Which a first level 8-int fighter can't be trained in.
One solution would be to group the skills up and give each of those skill groups different attributes that you base your bonus skills off of. Fighters get 2 "Physical" skills, 1 "Nimbleness" skills, and 1 "Intelligence skills" along with their normal skill bonuses.
A second solution be just increasing the base amount of skills certain classes have.
And a third would be changing the attribute certain classes use for their bonus skills. (Fighters can use the lower of their strength or dexterity for skills, for balance or something).
These are just my thoughts. And I hope you find a way to work with your DM to reflect the character concept you want to play. Which in my opinion shouldn't be hindered by rules.
|
That said I've thought about how being intelligent doesn't really reflect how many "skills" your character has. For the intelligence based skills, sure. But why would a more intelligent person be better at climbing? And someone who's trained to be a soldier in an army might not be the smartest person in the world, but I'd think the army would have trained them for basic battlefield conditions which (might, though probably not) include climbing, swimming, and acrobatics. Which a first level 8-int fighter can't be trained in.
One solution would be to group the skills up and give each of those skill groups different attributes that you base your bonus skills off of. Fighters get 2 "Physical" skills, 1 "Nimbleness" skills, and 1 "Intelligence skills" along with their normal skill bonuses.
That's not a bad idea, though it would take some work to define the different skill groups and how many of each group each class gets. It would also overlap a bit with the class skill system.
Physical: climb, swim, ride, acrobatics
Nimbleness: disable device, escape artist, fly, sleight of hand, stealth
Magic: craft (alchemy), knowledge (arcana, planes), spellcraft, UMD
Intelligence: appraise, craft (other), knowledge (other), linguistics
Social: bluff, diplomacy, disguise, intimidate, perform, sense motive
???: handle animal, heal, perception, profession, survival
Another suggestion I've seen is that ability scores each give you a certain amount of bonus skill points to be used for skills tied to that attribute - if you use them for other skills you need to spend twice as many points per rank. I think you got bonus ranks equal to half your modifier, because you end up with a ton of ranks otherwise. So a character with 18 strength would have 2 extra points to be spend on climb or swim, or could spend both those points to get 1 rank in ride, knowledge, etc. Your class skill ranks could be used for any skill.
Also, caharcters in books are sole heroes.
Perfect people who can do anything only if their author decides that they can.
In the same way a player can make an int 5 Ork fighter who then goes on to somehow solve every logical puzzle in the dungeon with his amazing talent for logical thinking, math, deductive problem solving and general sherloc holmes behaviour.
It is possible for an author to write up a clumsy person with no hand-eye-foot corordination in the first half of the story who then goes on to perfectly execute amazing feats of agility, speed and accuracy in the latter half.
(Or more appropriately, a silly, childlike, clueless oaf who somehow gets everyone to like him and go along with his ideas and love him (Hm, sounds like an Anime I once saw)).
.
Back to the point, the pathfinder system doesnt allow for perfect heroes, it's meant to accomodate archtypical heroes. One person is charismatic, another is strong and the third is wise (And then I am not accounting for lots of other archetypes and the innumberable ways that the balance between the archetypes can be befuddled and smeared).
To make exactly the guy you described you can go with a refluffed Bard (make his bardic performance not be singing anymore and youre good, Archaeologist does this pretty well too) or a Ranger. The only issue is spells, but honestly why WOULDNT you want spells?
|
|
Literally the first sentence in the CRB about what Intelligence does:
Intelligence determines how well your character learns and reasons.
It makes perfect sense that the amount of skill points you get is based on how good you are at learning new things.
Now if you're wondering why a fighter doesn't get the breadth of skills that you'd expect from a modern military type: because that's not what the fighter class is. Fighters are absurdly specialized, in combat and only combat. If you're looking for something like modern-day special forces (or even the normal soldiers of a first-world army), you should be looking at the Ranger and Slayer classes instead.
I think everyone agrees that you don't need to be Einstein to be good at Acrobatic, Swimming and Climbing at the same time.
|
|
Instead of using the general intelligence model of intelligence you could switch to the multiple intelligence model. This would basically mean that each stat would produce it's own SP that could only be spent on the skills under it's jurisdiction instead of having an inherent bonus to the skill, which would be better in the long run for everyone I think. If skills became more useful, then skillmonkey characters with balanced stats would be viable instead of min-maxing.
To balance you would probably only want every +1 to give 1/2 a skill point
Ex:
Human Fighter 2 sp/lvl -this can be spent on anything
Str 12: .5 sp/lvl
Dex 16 1.5 sp/lvl
Con 12 .5 sp/lvl
Int 8 -.5 sp(int based skills cost an extra .5 to buy per rank)
Wis 14 1 sp/lvl
Cha 14 1 sp/lvl
At level 2 the fighter has
1 Str rank
3 Dex ranks
1 Con rank
2 Wis rank
2 Cha rank
4 Any rank
Total: 13 ranks/2 levels= 5.5 ranks/lvl(balanced because no inherent bonus from stats)
Human Wizard 2 sp/lvl -this can be spent on anything
Str 8 -.5 sp
Dex 14 1 sp/lvl
Con 12 .5 sp/lvl
Int 18 2 sp/lvl
Wis 10 0 sp/lvl
Cha 10 0 sp/lvl
at level 2 the wizard has
2 Dex rank
1 Con rank
4 Int rank
2 Any rank
Total: 9 ranks/2 levels= 4.5 ranks/lvl(wizard is no longer great at a bunch of skills)
I am generally against the principle of getting "x to y" outside of the smallest circumstances (getting wisdom to knowledge checks, for example)
When you try to substitute stats for the basest purposes, you get to the question 'what is the old stat good for?' It was good for that basest purpose, but that was taken away.
Why take int? To get bonuses to int skills and get skill points. There are already plenty of ways to get different stats to the checks, take the skill points too and int is just 'the stat my wizard class makes me take'. That is how people view charisma (and now you have 2 of the three mental stats in this state of affairs).
Wisdom is generally much, much more useful than intelligence without the skill point thing. It gives you saves, and you can use it for AC if you dip into a monk level. So why shouldn't you just dump int then?
I just generally dislike this trend of stripping stats of their main purpose. If you take it to the logical end (or my straw puppet end), you just end up with 'the punchy stat' and 'the thinky stat'. And that is an oversimplification that I do not think we need.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now now this character was by no means a perfect hero, he could fight, and he was a friendly idealist with views on changing the world people could really get behind. However, without the help of some of his more intelligent compadres he could never have figured out how to make these things happen. If you want to put it in pathfinder terms he was a front liner/party face. He certainly didn't have everything covered, nor was creating a system where one hero could do everything what I was going for since not even he had everything covered, not even in combat. It was an Rpg, even the most inexperienced rpg player will learn the merit of a healer.
Out of everything mentioned I think simply not having any classes get less than 4+int skill ranks per level would be nice. I mean they made wizards and sorcerers get more than d4+con health per level I'm assuming because that was to extreme, well frankly I feel only 2 ranks per level is to extreme. <_<
I always thought the reason the Intelligence stat pertains to skills is because the Intelligence stat pertains to your character's ability to retain and apply information. Which makes sense as to why it applies to things that you have to remember how to do.
Wisdom is based more around practical sense, sensory input, and intuition (which is why it pertains to professions, in which you are usually performing a service rather than creating a good, which is what the craft skill is), while Charisma pertains to your ability to express yourself and communicate (which is why it has to do both with social skills like bluff and diplomacy, and non-social skills like handle animal use magic device).
There's virtually no other use for Int than skills.
Then regale me with how many uses there are for Cha... Especially since traits can be taken to make the few skills that use to use Int. Int even has a lot more skills that use it than Cha on top of that. So I find that argument to be lacking.
There's virtually no other use for Int than skills.Then regale me with how many uses there are for Cha... Especially since traits can be taken to make the few skills that use to use Int. Int even has a lot more skills that use it than Cha on top of that. So I find that argument to be lacking.
And what stat do you think gets dumped most? What stat do you get yelled at by optimizers if you have it as even a 10 unless you absolutely need it?
The existence of another problem does not make this issue less of a problem. It does it even more so, in fact. We already have one of the mental stats in the situation. Again, I do not want to reduce everything down to WIS.
No no, I don't want to degrade the value of any of the mental stats with any changes I suggest, I obviously rushed that post and portrayed my tone all wrong, all I was pointing out is that Intelligence actually has it pretty decent when it comes to being important, wisdom has it the best, intelligence is in the middle, and charisma on the bottom. Perhaps I should've went on that I'm starting to think at least along the lines of the first post, that the choice for what you get your skills are from be either Int or Cha, not giving the option to choose wisdom as that would be the optimal choice for the majority of classes. This way both aren't just free dump stats, only one is. Thus bringing them to relatively equal importance, having the option to shift what makes INT important to most classes to cha, meaning martials can't easily dump both, and casters such as the sorcerer or eldritch scion archetype don't struggle with ranks since they can use their casting stat for ranks, much like a Wizard or regular Magus would.
However I feel simply buffing the minimum skill ranks a class can get per level to 4+INT, rather than 2+INT, would be a simpler solution for some classes. I mean they buffed the minimum health of weaker classes, why not buff the ranks of not skill monkey classes. (in 3.5 wizards/sorcs got 1d4+con health while rouges got 1d6+ con per level and so on)
Halve the # of skill points each class get's per level. So, Fighters/Wizards get 1, Rogues get 4, Bards get 3, etc.
Grant everyone skill points equal to their stat bonuses that can only be spent on skills associated with that stat.
So, someone playing a fighter with the following stats :
Str : 16 (+3)
Dex : 14 (+2)
Con : 16 (+3)
Int : 10 (+0)
Wis : 12 (+1)
Cha : 8 (-1)
Would have the following skill points to distribute :
Class : 1
Str : 3
Dex : 2
Wis : 1
Cha : -1
So they'd be very good at physical stuff, not so good at mental, and awful at charisma things.
You were allowed to trade 2 of one stat skill points to get 1 of another (so 2 str's to get one cha for example) to indicate concentrating more on diplomacy than on climbing or swimming.
Finally, if you had a negative stat, and you wanted to spend points on it, you had to spend enough that level to 'overcome' the negative. So from our example, if you wanted to put a point into diplomacy, you had to put spend your class point (1) to negate the -1 charisma skill level, then trade in two attribute skill points (1 str/1 dex, 2 str, 1 dex/1 wis, etc) to get another Cha skill point.
This worked really well, it gave people more skill ranks overall, but it also meant they usually ended up with skill curves that fit their stats, those who were smart ended up with lots of INT based skills, those who were really strong but not so bright (18 str/8 int) usually ended up with lots of climb and swim and not so many Knowledge skill.
EDIT : Note class skill points were 'unaligned' and could be spent on any skill.
|
There's virtually no other use for Int than skills.Then regale me with how many uses there are for Cha... Especially since traits can be taken to make the few skills that use to use Int.
This is true, but the solution would seem to be to empower Charisma, not depower Intelligence. It's already the second or third most dumped stat (after Cha and maybe Str), making it worse is counter-indicated.
For powering up Charisma, my quick and dirty solution is to allow it to be used instead of Wisdom on Will Saves, if you like (ie: you pick which of those stats Will Saves are based on per character). This has really lowered the number of Cha dumps in my games (and made Wis a valid, and amusing, dump stat).
Other possibilities include making Traits of the sort you mention for Charisma ('Takes One To Know One' which makes Sense Motive Charisma based, for example), and otherwise increase its usage via Feats, Traits, and other House Rules.
Int even has a lot more skills that use it than Cha on top of that. So I find that argument to be lacking.
Sure, but IME Charisma skills come up at least as often, which actually means points invested in Charisma skills are better, since any one Charisma skill comes up more than any one Intelligence skill (okay, Spellcraft may be an exception here, but it's true in general).
@Deadmanwalking: Yea as I mentioned I rushed that and came off far different than I meant to, was slightly preoccupied when I posted this. I made corrections in a later post.
|
|
Mechanicly speaking Int does not strictly govern (ignoring certain spells, class features and feats) Attack bonus, damage, saves, AC and is the primary casting stat of Wizard, Witch, Magus and Kinda the Arcanist. Game wise it and to a lesser extent Cha doesn't have much of a massive impact on the kinds of things that can be game changers.
I think Int governing the number of skills is fine myself. Experience and level determines how skilled one is with ones skills more then int a skill that mostly governs knowledge based skills. Int governs ones mental capacity and yes may very well govern the width and breadth they can expand that knowledge to. However understanding the basics of acrobatics well hardly means you have the agility or time spent to be truly skilled in it.
That said Ive never found that I need to max every skill especially ones like climb or swim to get the most out of them. Not all skills are governed by exceedingly high DCs and its not as detrimental to ones skill sets or checks to not always maximize every skill rank at each level especially if one has an above average or high ability governing it.