Yeah, there seems to be a conception that Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Bluff always work if you make a high enough roll. But even CRB, RAW, they don't. They don't remove the agency of the monsters, they just help adjust a course of action that's probable into one that's possible. If the creature decides it absolutely will not listen to you, then you can't Diplomacize or Blufferate it, and if you're actively stabbing at it, it doesn't care how nicely you ask it to put down its sword.
The problem is however, having to use DM Fiat to say no.
I agree that they don't always work, but I deal with players who like to argue differently. And sometimes it's difficult to convince them that despite their roll of 70 diplomacy, the dragon still wants to eat them. But it has agreed to eat you in particular last, make your death quick, and not use your bones as toothpicks.
Because telling players that it has no intention of listening to you is pretty much fiat because you are in complete control of the way all NPCs "feel".
The unfortunate problem is that pretty much every skill except Bluff, Diplomacy, and Intimidate are binary. So players want to treat those the same way. I agree that they are not mind control, but to avoid problems with players I have to deal with I have to ban things like this in advance and I already have house rules that change how the base version of those skills work.
I'm making them available to everyone, but only at the cost of a Feat, as suggested, that (plus my giving one at 1st level) gives the Rogue 5 free Feats, and the possibility of more (via Cutting Ege) as well as applying Skill Mastery to all of them.
That plus a high number of skill points are maybe not ideal, but sufficient, to give the Rogue some solid skill options even as compared to Investigator or Bard.
I am doing the same as well. I have already added this to my homebrew rules:
You may use skill unlock from Pathfinder Unchained with the following exceptionsa. You may not choose the Skill Unlocks for Bluff or Diplomacy
b. Signature Skill ability now requires only a +5 (permanent) modifier in the skill as a prerequisite and the feat can be taken multiple times.
c. All skill Unlocks benefits are obtained at 5 ranks earlier, if you possess the Signature Skill feat or other ability to unlock them. So, unlocks benefits normally available at level 5 are now available at level 1.
d. Unchained Rogue also gain’s the Rogue’s Edge ability at 1st level, instead of at 5th, but still receives the bonuses at 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th levels. The rogue need not have a 5 modifier in a skill to select to unlock it, but does not gain the benefit of the unlock until his ranks meet the required ranks.
Huh, I actually changed it to "If you roll a natural 1 and fail to activate an item" in D1. It must have lost that bit somewhere down the line, my guess is in copyfitting.
It doesn't really matter much; the line is you can, not you must. If you roll a 1 and succeed anyways you can just choose not to take the reroll.
Huh, I actually changed it to "If you roll a natural 1 and fail to activate an item" in D1. It must have lost that bit somewhere down the line, my guess is in copyfitting.It doesn't really matter much; the line is you can, not you must. If you roll a 1 and succeed anyways you can just choose not to take the reroll.
Ah, that's probably why they snipped it, since it saves words and probably made it fit.
Ah, that's probably why they snipped it, since it saves words and probably made it fit.Huh, I actually changed it to "If you roll a natural 1 and fail to activate an item" in D1. It must have lost that bit somewhere down the line, my guess is in copyfitting.It doesn't really matter much; the line is you can, not you must. If you roll a 1 and succeed anyways you can just choose not to take the reroll.
So is this something we are going to have to FAQ or is this something you(PDT) can fix without us starting an FAQ?
If we need an FAQ I will start one.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ah, that's probably why they snipped it, since it saves words and probably made it fit.Huh, I actually changed it to "If you roll a natural 1 and fail to activate an item" in D1. It must have lost that bit somewhere down the line, my guess is in copyfitting.It doesn't really matter much; the line is you can, not you must. If you roll a 1 and succeed anyways you can just choose not to take the reroll.So is this something we are going to have to FAQ or is this something you(PDT) can fix without us starting an FAQ?
If we need an FAQ I will start one.
My personal statements are not binding or official in any way; we'll need a FAQ thread to make a FAQ. I don't get to skip things out to the front or anything like that.
I think too many people are discounting the usefulness of these. The rogue's big buff is the Dex to damage and finessable stuff, along with a number of buffs to Rogue Tricks. These are minor buffs at best at 5-10, but that's still nice to have. :)
Minor buffs that in some cases actually don't do anything to appropriately scaled challenges. Like the Climb unlock. In my games we've run Weapon Finesse as Dex to damage for years, so rogues have always had that, and it still wasn't nearly enough to make them a viable class. Now, though, it does free up a feat for the rogue at 1st level, which has opened up Two-Weapon Fighting at level 1 for races other than human, and at 3rd level I'm ruling that they add 1.5 Dex to damage. Coming from experience, Dex to damage isn't nearly as impressive as people seem to believe. Most other forum goers I've talked to here that do what I do have reported similar findings.
However, the Unchained stuff is a great fix. And I think Skill Unlocks are a fantastic addition, but they really need to get those first tiers around level 1-3, otherwise by the time the rogue gets it they've already leveled past its usefulness.
I find most of the skill unlocks to be underwhelming, especially when you consider it requires a feat to get them.
I would be curious to know how automatically allowing them to all characters would affect things. Would this help put skills more on par with magic?
|
Question on Sense Motive, the rank 10 says as Detect Thoughts, since it doesn't state how it functions, is it SP?I'd make them all EX. They are not that powerful and shouldn't stop working in no-magic zones as they are skills, not spells.
I would prefer Ex being a long time rogue player. But I might have to bring this up over in PFS for the ruling there unless someone read/saw something I missed.
No reason they wouldn't be Ex. You're just that awesome at Sense Motive that you can figure out what they're thinking through deduction. It's elementary, my dear rogue!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find most of the skill unlocks to be underwhelming, especially when you consider it requires a feat to get them.
I would be curious to know how automatically allowing them to all characters would affect things. Would this help put skills more on par with magic?
No, it would make the Wizard as good as the Rogue at skills. Again. This is kinda what the system was designed to avoid.
I think the best way to do it is "Rogues get it for free, full BAB characters can feat into it". If you have spells beyond 4th level you don't get skill unlocks, period.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you want to go real far in favor of giving lots of skill stuff to the rogue, you could say that rogues get all of them (use the minimum of your rogue level and ranks to determine the benefit) and then whenever you select a Signature Skill, add +5 to your effective ranks and rogue level for the purpose of unlocks on that skill. That will open up tons of stuff.
Yeah, there seems to be a conception that Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Bluff always work if you make a high enough roll. But even CRB, RAW, they don't. They don't remove the agency of the monsters, they just help adjust a course of action that's probable into one that's possible. If the creature decides it absolutely will not listen to you, then you can't Diplomacize or Blufferate it, and if you're actively stabbing at it, it doesn't care how nicely you ask it to put down its sword.The problem is however, having to use DM Fiat to say no.
I agree that they don't always work, but I deal with players who like to argue differently.
Get out your rolled up newspaper. Just because a player wants to use Acrobatics to tiptoe across lava doesn't make it so.
And sometimes it's difficult to convince them that despite their roll of 70 diplomacy, the dragon still wants to eat them.
Benefit Cumberbatch will give them one last opportunity, because he is amused, to run for their lives, or to die with dignity.
My personal statements are not binding or official in any way; we'll need a FAQ thread to make a FAQ. I don't get to skip things out to the front or anything like that.Ah, that's probably why they snipped it, since it saves words and probably made it fit.Huh, I actually changed it to "If you roll a natural 1 and fail to activate an item" in D1. It must have lost that bit somewhere down the line, my guess is in copyfitting.It doesn't really matter much; the line is you can, not you must. If you roll a 1 and succeed anyways you can just choose not to take the reroll.So is this something we are going to have to FAQ or is this something you(PDT) can fix without us starting an FAQ?
If we need an FAQ I will start one.
I was hoping since what you wanted was snipped. I will make the FAQ now.
Yeah, there seems to be a conception that Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Bluff always work if you make a high enough roll. But even CRB, RAW, they don't. They don't remove the agency of the monsters, they just help adjust a course of action that's probable into one that's possible. If the creature decides it absolutely will not listen to you, then you can't Diplomacize or Blufferate it, and if you're actively stabbing at it, it doesn't care how nicely you ask it to put down its sword.The problem is however, having to use DM Fiat to say no.
I agree that they don't always work, but I deal with players who like to argue differently.
Get out your rolled up newspaper. Just because a player wants to use Acrobatics to tiptoe across lava doesn't make it so.
Benefit Cumberbatch will give them one last opportunity, because he is amused, to run for their lives, or to die with dignity.
And sometimes it's difficult to convince them that despite their roll of 70 diplomacy, the dragon still wants to eat them.
That's like saying, "Well, I was very persuasive, but the enemy soldiers still wanted to shoot me. What gives?!" Yeah. They're enemy soldiers. That's their goal, and your sweet talking doesn't make it otherwise all the time.
|
Do a lot of GMs really stick that hard to the Diplomacy rules and treat it like Charm? I've always thought it was never intended to be a "forced" act, just... very persuasive if persuasion is even possible. I mean, there's this from the skill:
"Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future."
Even with a skill trick that lets you do it in 6 seconds, that line doesn't change. If the guy is very intent on harming you, Diplomacy is probably going to fail.
Do a lot of GMs really stick that hard to the Diplomacy rules and treat it like Charm? I've always thought it was never intended to be a "forced" act, just... very persuasive if persuasion is even possible. I mean, there's this from the skill:
"Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future."
Even with a skill trick that lets you do it in 6 seconds, that line doesn't change. If the guy is very intent on harming you, Diplomacy is probably going to fail.
From what I've seen on the boards over the years, yeah. I get the impression that a lot of DMs take away a monster's agency on a successful roll. Most players, too, think that a successful diplomacy check will always let them get their way, which isn't the case. If a creature simply does not want to do that course of action, no matter how well you might speak, it won't do it. It's something that shows up quite often in literature, myth, fantasy, and the real world, so there's no reason not to accept DM fiat on something like a Diplomacy check.
Again, just because you're able to diplomacize quickly doesn't mean someone will happily drop their sword and let you stab them. That's not diplomacy, and I'd even say that at that point any kind of diplomacy check that isn't offering a truce is going to fail. Even then, something that says "fights to the death" would more than likely see that as a weakness and press rather than capitulate.
From what I've seen on the boards over the years, yeah. I get the impression that a lot of DMs take away a monster's agency on a successful roll. Most players, too, think that a successful diplomacy check will always let them get their way, which isn't the case. If a creature simply does not want to do that course of action, no matter how well you might speak, it won't do it. It's something that shows up quite often in literature, myth, fantasy, and the real world, so there's no reason not to accept DM fiat on something like a Diplomacy check.Do a lot of GMs really stick that hard to the Diplomacy rules and treat it like Charm? I've always thought it was never intended to be a "forced" act, just... very persuasive if persuasion is even possible. I mean, there's this from the skill:
"Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future."
Even with a skill trick that lets you do it in 6 seconds, that line doesn't change. If the guy is very intent on harming you, Diplomacy is probably going to fail.
Agreed. Which is why I just curtail it from the onset to avoid arguments.
I find most of the skill unlocks to be underwhelming, especially when you consider it requires a feat to get them.
I would be curious to know how automatically allowing them to all characters would affect things. Would this help put skills more on par with magic?
No, it would make the Wizard as good as the Rogue at skills. Again. This is kinda what the system was designed to avoid.
I think the best way to do it is "Rogues get it for free, full BAB characters can feat into it". If you have spells beyond 4th level you don't get skill unlocks, period.
Yes I agree,
There is no point to the Unchained Rogue if its unique abilities are going to be mined and go to other classes.
Keeping skill unlocks just for rogues, will get people playing rogues again, otherwise it will just be a dip class at best and never be able to stand on its own two feet.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Keeping skill unlocks just for rogues, will get people playing rogues again, otherwise it will just be a dip class at best and never be able to stand on its own two feet.
While I agree with the overall sentiment, skill unlocks wouldn't even be on my top five reasons to play an unchained rogue, which is a shame because I got really interested based on the blog post.
Personally I'd either roll with Mark's suggestion of all free from level 1 and +5 at level 5, or use another suggestion I've seen tossed around; letting the rogue apply 1.5 times his skill ranks at level 5, 2 times his skill ranks at level 10, and so on.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my opinion, the unchained rogue has some other very nice goodies, and skills in general are somewhat weak. I think letting everyone have skill unlocks, but the rogue getting more/earlier strikes a fair compromise. I think I'm going to go: everyone gets to chose a number of skills equal to half their base skill points as favored skills, and can feat into more, while rogues also get their class feature unlocks and count as five point higher (ten at tenth level) for unlocks. Everyone can make use of them, but rogues are the best at it.
So, possibly my favorite thing from Unchained is the Grouped Skills Variant. I've rarely played a character where I didn't have loads of skills that I felt they *ought* to have, but simply couldn't afford. But I'm trying to work out the best way for the Skill Unlocks to work with Grouped Skills. My thoughts so far:
1) Skill Unlocks are Rogue only. *Maybe* allow other classes to pick up one set of Unlocks with the Signature Skill feat, or take Cutting Edge if they have access to Rogue talents.
2) Taking the Signature Skill Feat requires that the selected skill be one of your specialty skills already. I'm considering allowing Rogue's Edge and Cutting Edge to make the skill a bonus specialty if it wasn't a specialty already.
3) If the skill's a specialty and in one of your groups, then it autoscales already; I'm trying to decide if it should get the full benefit if it's a specialty from a group you don't have, or if it only gets half-strength. Leaning towards the full benefit.
Thoughts?
Do a lot of GMs really stick that hard to the Diplomacy rules and treat it like Charm? I've always thought it was never intended to be a "forced" act, just... very persuasive if persuasion is even possible. I mean, there's this from the skill:
"Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future."
Even with a skill trick that lets you do it in 6 seconds, that line doesn't change. If the guy is very intent on harming you, Diplomacy is probably going to fail.
Some GM's don't know diplomacy can be an auto-fail, which is why we see complaints about how powerful it is at times.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find most of the skill unlocks to be underwhelming, especially when you consider it requires a feat to get them.
I would be curious to know how automatically allowing them to all characters would affect things. Would this help put skills more on par with magic?
No, it would make the Wizard as good as the Rogue at skills. Again. This is kinda what the system was designed to avoid.
I think the best way to do it is "Rogues get it for free, full BAB characters can feat into it". If you have spells beyond 4th level you don't get skill unlocks, period.
Yes I agree,
There is no point to the Unchained Rogue if its unique abilities are going to be mined and go to other classes.
Keeping skill unlocks just for rogues, will get people playing rogues again, otherwise it will just be a dip class at best and never be able to stand on its own two feet.
These skill unlocks are not enough alone to get people playing rogues that were not doing it before. I would just give the more of them than anyone else. I don't even see this as a "rogue" ability. It is another new ability the rogue has better access to.
I'm going to let Rogue automatically pass rank pre-reqs so long as they take them in order.
Other classes can take the feat and qualify with ranks normally.
I'm not sure if this would actually help any? Most of the skill unlocks have hefty DC's to do their thing, so you're going to want max ranks in the skills you unlock anyways.
|
|
That's like saying, "Well, I was very persuasive, but the enemy soldiers still wanted to shoot me. What gives?!" Yeah. They're enemy soldiers. That's their goal, and your sweet talking doesn't make it otherwise all the time.Yeah, there seems to be a conception that Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Bluff always work if you make a high enough roll. But even CRB, RAW, they don't. They don't remove the agency of the monsters, they just help adjust a course of action that's probable into one that's possible. If the creature decides it absolutely will not listen to you, then you can't Diplomacize or Blufferate it, and if you're actively stabbing at it, it doesn't care how nicely you ask it to put down its sword.The problem is however, having to use DM Fiat to say no.
I agree that they don't always work, but I deal with players who like to argue differently.
Get out your rolled up newspaper. Just because a player wants to use Acrobatics to tiptoe across lava doesn't make it so.
Benefit Cumberbatch will give them one last opportunity, because he is amused, to run for their lives, or to die with dignity.
And sometimes it's difficult to convince them that despite their roll of 70 diplomacy, the dragon still wants to eat them.
But maybe now they will fill bad about it a little. And loose a little sleep while they reevaluate their life after they kill you. Also shirking your duties as a soldier in the medieval era and into the recent past didn't result in inquests and court martials, but a rather summary execution.
Sure, just give them the "PTSD" or "Guilty Conscience" debuff. When their age category increases, the penalties take effect.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you want to go real far in favor of giving lots of skill stuff to the rogue, you could say that rogues get all of them (use the minimum of your rogue level and ranks to determine the benefit) and then whenever you select a Signature Skill, add +5 to your effective ranks and rogue level for the purpose of unlocks on that skill. That will open up tons of stuff.
I like this a lot.
I'm thinking I'll also let the Signature Skill Feat give the unlock to two skills. With just one it's okay, but it's unlikely to sway other classes away from taking a more combat oriented feat.
If I do that I was thinking of making Skill Unlocks available as a trait (perhaps under the social category). Examples below:
"You were the doctor/medicine man in your village, Heal is considered a class skill for you and you may use it as if you had selected with the Signature Skill Feat."
"One of your parents was a successful pawnbroker, on his knee you learned to have a keen eye for detail. Appraise is considered a class skill for you and you may use it as if you had selected with the Signature Skill Feat."
|
Giving them to everyone for all skills seems excessive. All that does is power up skills in general, which, while cool, doesn't really seem to be the design goal, or help out Rogues much at all.
Still, giving some to everyone seems like a valid route to take. Give everyone one each at 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th, and Rogues additional ones at, say, 1st, 3rd, 8th, 13th, and 18th as well, for example. That'd work well with my suggestion of dropping the prerequisites by 5 ranks.
|
|
Huh, I actually changed it to "If you roll a natural 1 and fail to activate an item" in D1. It must have lost that bit somewhere down the line, my guess is in copyfitting.It doesn't really matter much; the line is you can, not you must. If you roll a 1 and succeed anyways you can just choose not to take the reroll.The line in Use magic device says "you take" not "you can take" so it does matter.
Mark's comment means it was not an intentional nerf, but unless it is faqqqed or errata'd it is a nerf if you play RAW.
The ability is as follows:
If you roll a natural 1 when activating an item, you take a –10 penalty on Use Magic Device checks with that item for 24 hours instead of being unable to activate it. This penalty stacks with itself.
If you roll a natural one and succeed, you are not unable to activate the device, and the ability does nothing. It's not a nerf, the text only applies if you roll a natural 1 and fail.
Just got my copy of unchained and have begun to read it through.
But the signature skill stopped me, is it just me or are they very underwhelming? I mean sure the rank 15 and 20 are good but very few games reach lvls 15-20.
Was just wondering if anyone else thought the unlocks should be something like 3,6,9,12 or 4,8,12,16 etc.
Any thoughts?
I think they should be 15 and 20 where the good stuff comes in. That's when you would want a skill do more since skill use become kind of trivial at that point. Diplomacy has been doing the same thing since level 1. Only difference now is at high level it's an auto success. This great for rogues as skill monkey, it keeps skill valid at the higher levels. At the low levels skills work fine, no need for a boost.
|
And, at the same levels, lots and lots of people have access to nondetection. Which, coincidentally, the rogue will also need, unless he wants the vast collection of magic items he carries to be spotted by something as basic as detect magic. Divination isn't only an issue to magic users; it will completely invalidate mundane disguises just as quickly if and when it comes into play.Skill Unlock (Disguise) is especially egregious; the 20th level ability is "can create a disguise as a standard action", which is the same basic effect as a 1st level spell (disguise self) or an 1800 gp item (hat of disguise).At 20th level, lots and lots of things have true seeing. Those things will have no special ability whatsoever to see through the rogue's disguise.
not all skill unlocks are uber in their own right, but mixed in the right combination, could be amazingly effective (like the disguise skill unlock with a two level dip in Master Spy PrC...)
Skill unlock 20: create disguise as standard action
Master Spy, Master of Disguise (Ex) - A master spy can create a disguise in half the time normally required: now can create disguise as move action (my assumption here)
Master Spy, Mask Alignment (Su) - A master spy of 2nd level or higher can alter her alignment aura to deceive spells that discern alignment (such as detect evil). She may choose to detect as any specific alignment, or to detect as no alignment at all.
This ability to disguise so quickly is even more disturbing if the Master Spy takes all 10 levels of the PrC:
Hidden Mind (Sp)
At 9th level, a master spy gains the benefit of a constant mind blank spell at a caster level equal to her character level. The spy can suppress or resume this protection as a standard action. If dispelled, the spy cannot resume the mind blank for 1d4 rounds.
Assumption (Su)
The ultimate ability of the master spy is to take over another persona entirely, making it her own. As a full-round action, the spy can touch a helpless creature and shift her aura to that of her target. This confuses divination effects and spells, even ones as powerful as discern location, such that they register the spy as being the creature she has touched. This ability is not proof against the actions of deities or similarly powerful beings. The assumption of an identity lasts until the master spy ends it (a standard action) or she uses the ability on another creature.
So Master Spy kills/knocks out a guy around the corner, and steps out looking exactly like the guy he just fell... and only gods can see through this.
|
|
...also, anyone notice the 20 ranks craft skill unlock? you can now craft magic items without any feat and without any spellcaster levels:
magic rings, and wondrous items that fall under your
category of Craft using the normal Craft rules.
Now, if I was a designer, smart money would be design a feat with Signature Skill feat or Rogue's Edge class feature as a prereq, that lets you use all skill unlocks as if you had 20 ranks in it (and with a super boost ability when you *do* reach level 15 and 20...)
That would make rogues awesomer, and actually make the Signature Skill feat worthwhile for non-rogues (like a fighter or barbarian who wants to craft his own magic weapons at 1/4 cost... the two feats needed would balance out the cheap magic weapons advantage...)
I think I will reduce all unlocks by four levels, so that you benefit at 1, 6, 11 and 16 ranks, and give the Rogue an extra Rogue's Edge at 2nd-level. That way, they're a skill master almost from the off and they get to use those high-level bonuses at a reasonable level (i.e. not 20th).
|
|
I think I will reduce all unlocks by four levels, so that you benefit at 1, 6, 11 and 16 ranks, and give the Rogue an extra Rogue's Edge at 2nd-level. That way, they're a skill master almost from the off and they get to use those high-level bonuses at a reasonable level (i.e. not 20th).
Or keep it at 5th level to avoid succulent dipping, and go with "a rogue is considered to be 10 ranks higher than his current rank in regards to skill unlocks, and can unlock two additional abilities when her effective ranks are equal to 25 and 30"
I think that if people take two levels of the new Rogue just to gain one free skill unlock, the subsystem has succeeded.
I greatly disagree to the idea of making skill unlocks Rogue only.
Who cares if casters get access to them when they are, at most, equivalent to (and in many, many cases weaker than) spells they could already cast anyway?
Skill unlocks should be automatic after reaching a specific ranking, for everyone.
I greatly disagree to the idea of making skill unlocks Rogue only.
Who cares if casters get access to them when they are, at most, equivalent to (and in many, many cases weaker than) spells they could already cast anyway?
Skill unlocks should be automatic after reaching a specific ranking, for everyone.
a) Play a Rogue, or....
b) They are optional rules...You could indeed house-rule that everyone gets the unlocks and that the "Rogue Edge" is that they get them 4 levels earlier, and/or get more them.
That's certainly a valid school of thought, but I wasn't suggesting a position on that either way.
the best idea i think. Also, for the rest of the classes, instead of a feat, maybe it could cost one ore two skill rank per specialization at all. I hate feat deppendency and all feat-o-holic ppl
Two to three skill points spent per trained class skill to each gain the various skill unlocks doesn't sound too onerous. Maybe even 4 skill points each - one for every potential power unlocked in each skill.