I have to say, after playing a Paladin with 1 skill rank a level, it sucks. The paladin is suppose to be a face with high Cha, but without skills to back it up, the Rogue or the Wizard would easily make better party faces.
I wanted to try and make some sort of homebrew that gave fighters, paladin, and the like of 2 + negative int score classes something to do outside of combat. I was thinking dividing skill points, classes would get Str and Dex skills (something the fighter would get a ton of) and other classes would get Int/Wis/Cha skill points, but that seems way too complicated and too much work.
So, I thought about what about changing the class feature. Every class gets an additional 2-4 "class only" skill points, that must be class skills. Additionally, class skill bonus of +3 doubles once 10 or more ranks are put into the skill and the bonus from score modifier is at least +1. Rogues would likely get 0 bonus skill points, High int characters would likely get 1-2, low int low base classes would get 4.
Would this unbalance the game too much, throwing fighters, paladins, and more a couple extra skill points, limited to their class skills?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Eh, you'll be fine just boosting it to 4+int. I mean the barbarian has that after all.
One easy solution is not giving them a negative int score.
Agreed.
What's being ignored here is that a character with Int dumped has other scores increased. So giving them extra skills really is just giving them free increases to hit/damage/AC/HP.
Said another way, if the PC didn't dump Int, they'd have lower "other stuff" but would have normal skills. Giving more skills that get traded for more "other stuff" is giving the PC more "other stuff".
Where are the suggestions that Fighters and the like should just get higher attacks/damage/AC/HP? No. It gets reskinned into this old "not enough skills" argument.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
What makes the barbarian so special that he's allowed to have 4+int skill points while the fighter gets just 2+int then?
One easy solution is not giving them a negative int score.Agreed.
What's being ignored here is that a character with Int dumped has other scores increased. So giving them extra skills really is just giving them free increases to hit/damage/AC/HP.
Said another way, if the PC didn't dump Int, they'd have lower "other stuff" but would have normal skills. Giving more skills that get traded for more "other stuff" is giving the PC more "other stuff".
Where are the suggestions that Fighters and the like should just get higher attacks/damage/AC/HP? No. It gets reskinned into this old "not enough skills" argument.
Except fighter higher attack/damage/AC/HP isn't the problem. Skill ranks spreads to any 2+ Int class that doesn't use int. Cleric, Paladin, Sorcerer, and Summoner all fall into the same pit fighter does. Why does the super ragey should be dumber than the fighter Barbarian get 4?
As for the negative int score, it'd be nice but point buy systems are a b##*&. I don't mind see the Wizard, Rogue, or Ranger being massively ahead over the Fighter, but having one skill point with 34 skills sucks a lot when you have a decent DM to actually tries to use the skills other than the normal perception/stealth/acrobatics.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
4+int skill points baseline for every non-int based class (fighter, paladin, cleric, antipaladin, warpriest) is a really nice starting point and doesn't really require any fancy adjudication.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Use the background skill options (or one of the others) in Unchained. At least you get extra skills to flush out backgrounds and more everyday type of skills.
Yeah, just use the Background Skill Points option, encourage your players to use their favored class bonus for skill points instead of hit points or [fill in the blank brokenness based upon niche race selections], or give Fighters, Paladins, Sorcerers, etc, in your campaigns 4 SP/lvl.
Boom done.
Really though negative INT should be penalizing. Afterall, I've never heard a player complain about how dumping their Constitution made their hit points suck, or dumping charisma made them bad face characters. Although I have heard complaints about how dumping strength made their carrying capacity suck... that problem is easily solved by bags of holding and darkleaf/mithral armor, so they usually don't gripe much after they find/buy one.
If you aren't the GM, not building stupid, unskilled fighters is pretty easy, even under point buy. Moreover even a stupid human fighter can get 3 skill points per level if they use their favored class bonus on it.
Best homebrew for low skill blues: give all PCs a +1 bonus to hit and damage. No really, hear me out.
The bonus will help all the PCs survive though the swingy low levels, and by 5th level or so will be, for the most part, obsolete, and it lets the Fighter drop his Str from 18 to 16 without losing any ground, which gives him enough points to raise his Int from a 7 to a 13. That's a 3 point swing!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I house rule all classes get 2 extra skill points than the rules indicate and I allow players to swap out class skills for other ones that become class skills for their character. Thus, a fighter can have Stealth or a good Perception check if they want.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to say, after playing a Paladin with 1 skill rank a level, it sucks. The paladin is suppose to be a face with high Cha, but without skills to back it up, the Rogue or the Wizard would easily make better party faces.
1. Don't make stupid Paladins then.
2. If you're a Human, you get an automatic 2 minimum per level, 3 if you spend a favored bonus to do so, no matter how much of an idiot you make the character.
I wish I believed for a second there's a single fighter player out there that would say "oh hooray a bonus to attack and damage! Now I can lower my strength!"Best homebrew for low skill blues: give all PCs a +1 bonus to hit and damage. No really, hear me out.
The bonus will help all the PCs survive though the swingy low levels, and by 5th level or so will be, for the most part, obsolete, and it lets the Fighter drop his Str from 18 to 16 without losing any ground, which gives him enough points to raise his Int from a 7 to a 13. That's a 3 point swing!
That's usually true, but then they'd have no room to complain.
If a Player would rather have a marginal bonus to damage than 3 skill points per level, they didn't really want the skill points in the first place.
Not really. They want the skill points, they just don't want it enough to give up combat potential because frankly the whole idea is kinda b#*#+#$$ to begin with. It's a trap you're setting.That's usually true, but then they'd have no room to complain.
If a Player would rather have a marginal bonus to damage than 3 skill points per level, they didn't really want the skill points in the first place.
Some players *think* they want skill points, but if given the choice between skill points of something else, they'll pick something else every time.
Many posters are recommending giving classes with only 2 skill points per level an additional 2 skill points per level. I'm offering 3 additional skill points per level OR +1 to hit and damage.
My rule is more favorable to the player in every way conceivable, but still, some players won't choose to have more skill points. If the only way to get a player to choose something is to make it their only choice, they don't actually want it anyway.
Best homebrew for low skill blues: give all PCs a +1 bonus to hit and damage. No really, hear me out.
The bonus will help all the PCs survive though the swingy low levels, and by 5th level or so will be, for the most part, obsolete, and it lets the Fighter drop his Str from 18 to 16 without losing any ground, which gives him enough points to raise his Int from a 7 to a 13. That's a 3 point swing!
This is true only if your players are dropping their strength from 20 to 18 or 16 to 14. Strength contributes 1.5x to damage so dropping from 18 to 16 costs 1 attack 2 damage. It's also only true if your players are dumping intelligence all the way to 7. If you have 10 int you only gain 2 skill points. If you already have 13 int for eg. unsanctioned knowledge you only gain 1 skill point. If you're only buying a 16 because you're a +2 strength race and 18 is the sweet spot you also gain less. Just a single skill point if you were previously dumping int to 7. Also, it's only a solution if you're not tracking encumbrance. Carrying stuff is part of the BSF duty.
So, no. Your "solution" is not a solution except for the most extreme stat arrays. It's just an excuse to shift the blame for poor game design to the players.
If they didn't dump Int at all then they have 3 skill points per level with FCB, 4 if they're Human; that's enough skills for anyone.
If their highest stat is 16 then there's absolutely no reason for a PC to dump Int to a 7. 5 points from a 16 to a 14 brings an 8 (the lowest stat on the Elite Array) all the way up to 13.
Not only that, but a 13 with 2+INT/level yields 3 skill points, while a 7 with 4+INT/level yields only 2.
Post Script
Encumbrance, LOL. Yeah, Martials have 20 Str fot Carrying Capacity. That's why archers still keep 18-20 Str at level 1, ya know, for carrying capacity
4+Int and background skills. I'm a bit less keen on giving 4+ to paladins, sorcerers and clerics because they're already better than fighters, but it won't do any harm.
Even numbers would make it easier on the math, also an exception to the rule (only one class get 3+Int) would be absurd.
Also in 3rd Edition skills had a x4 modifier at level 1, so you could get a fair number of skills as long as you didnt dumb-stat into oblivion.
...and just because it suddenly reminded me of it, there was this fellow on the Old WotC forum that showed that a Fighter with minimal intelligence (13) could have decent enough Skill Modifiers in many skills by paying note to the fact that most skills have set Difficulty Checks and your Ability Modifiers (and any other modifiers you can get) can mean that your Skill Ranks have almost no need to be more than 10 at the very most (and if I recall his work well enough, he had most skills at around 3-5 Ranks and still could meet the DCs 9 out 10 times).
Honestly with the Class (Skill) Bonuses and the Skill Compression its much easier to do 'skilled' Fighter than before.
For example of the differences between the editions with 3 Skill Points you can put Ranks into:
Perception (Search, Spot, Listen)
Stealth (Move Silently, Hide)
Acrobatics (Jump, Tumble)
Even without the Class Bonus (traits can help there though) your aren't quite as unskilled as you may think...especially if your character isnt a complete frak-headed waste-of-space.
To through me hat in the pile I agree with the others: Don't make dumb (stereotyped) Fighters...if you don't want dumb (stereotyped) Fighters!
I usually use background skills and making 4+int skill points per level the minimum for non int based classes/archtypes.
I do agree that 2+ for int casters anyways is fine. I've never once understood how wizards must study every day somehow get more skills than a sorcerer who's magic is innately in his blood.
That's not so hard, the wizard studies to get more spells, The sorcerer self-trains to keep himself from exploding. And given that wizards generally boost intelligence, they will have more skill points than most sorcerers.
AS a quick add-on regarding 3.5, not only was the 1st level x4 points, but Synergy bonuses of +2 to certain skills based on other skills having 5 or more ranks in a skill was also a nice boost as you could technically have 5 ranks in a skill by 2nd level (level +3 ranks in 3.5).
Background skills make for a nice option for all classes. Fighters don't need a bone. They have power attack and vital strike.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my group we just gave every class +2 skill points a level and the two background skills.
It has yet to be a problem for us. Mostly just gets used on hobbies, like Perform. Makes it much easier for my Samurai to write poetry and paint in his spare time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
my favorite i've found
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.
Here's a couple of my house rules aimed at making the Fighter more competitive (as well as just generally being QoL improvements: )
Skills:
Acrobatics: Jump is no longer a feature of Acrobatics; instead, Jump is now part of the new skill, Athletics. Fly is now part of Acrobatics.
Athletics (Str): Climb and Swim are now part of this new skill. The Jump rules are also now part of Athletics.
Climb: No longer a skill: see Athletics.
Fly: No longer a skill: see Acrobatics.
Swim: No longer a skill: see Athletics.
Class Changes:
Fighter:
Fighters receive 4 + Intelligence modifier skill points per level rather than 2 + Intelligence modifier.
Add Acrobatics, Bluff, Escape Artist, Heal, Knowledge (Local), Knowledge (Nobility), Perception, and Sense Motive to the list of fighter class skills.
Will is a favored save for Fighters, along with Fortitude.
At 10th level, Fighters gain the following ability:
Mettle (Ex): At 10th level, a fighter can use mental and physical resiliency to avoid certain attacks. If she makes a Fortitude or Will saving throw against an attack that has a reduced effect on a successful save, she instead avoids the effect entirely. A helpless fighter does not gain the benefit of the mettle ability.
Many might consider throwing Mettle (from the 3.5 Crusader) a bit over the top, but even ignoring all that, if you just look at the skills...
Why is it that a trained fighter can't feint? Many fighters are/were highly trained soldiers or city guards, shouldn't perception be their bread and butter? Wouldn't a guard be potentially good at sniffing out a lie?
The real winner for us has been Athletics (stolen from 4E.) Athletics is such a great skill for martials. Climb, Jump, and Swim are usually - let's be honest - last picks, except on maybe a couple gimmicky builds that rely on them. Throwing them all together has just been really *nice*.
Playing a "dumb" fighter is player choice. It is trivial to get 6-8 skill points/level on a fighter, starting at first level.
All of which are either limiting or cut directly against doing your primary job as a fighter.
It has never limited my fighters in combat. Quite the opposite, I remain effective in combat while contributing out of combat. If anything, my group accuses him of being overpowered.
The character is question is a Lore Warden 6 / Trapper 2 using archery. He is both the party scout and, obviously, trapper. His knowledge skills are respectable and frequently come in handy. Social skills are high enough that he does not feel an urge to go silent when the talking starts.
If you are stressing over the FCB, take Fast Learner or Toughness, or both.
The skill points are there. If a player makes the choice to not take them, they have zero sympathy from me. They chose to minimize their skills while maximizing combat, they can live with their choice.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But why should it be that choice? Why should someone need a specific race, archetype and class options just to break even? That's dumb, and giving fighters 4+int baseline doesn't hurt either end of the spectrum.