So my group just finished a 1-20 campaign that took us over three years. In the process we got to know Pathfinder pretty well (we think), and really got used to things about it we liked and didn't like. One of the things that we realized that we didn't like were how skills work.
Basically, we didn't like that, unless you heavily invested in skills, they basically became useless after the first few levels. No ranks in stealth? Better not try to sneak past anything by level 6. No ranks in diplomacy? Better let the paladin do the sweet talking instead, even though you are the one needing the information. We didn't like that incompetence was the norm and competence required heavy investment.
As a result, we looked at maybe incorporating a method of having skills scale with level. This way your 20th level hero was better at any skill than a level 2 schmuck, regardless of the skill. He just should be, he's nearly a demigod. However, investment should still be rewarded. The rogue should be a better sneak than the clumsy fighter.
Here were our thoughts:
Each class is awarded a number of trained skills at first level equal to the number of skill ranks they would normally gain. Rogues would get 8 + INT, clerics get 2 + INT, etc. At first level, the character chooses which skills he wants to "train". Trained skills and class skills are not synonymous. You may train whatever skills you like, just like you can put skill points wherever you like under the standard rules. Any skill not "trained" is considered untrained.
Trained skills progress at a rate of 3/4 level (the same as medium BAB). Untrained skills progress at a rate of 1/2 level (same as poor BAB). This base skill bonus (previously skill ranks) is known as BSB, and this number is used for qualifying for feats or prestige classes or whatever may require it.
Class skills still offer their +3 bonus if a class skill is trained. This is not a bonus to the BSB, but simply a bonus to the overall check, the same as Weapon Focus does not increase BAB. Feats like Skill Focus, which add a bonus to the skill, work similarly; the bonus from these feats normally increases at 10 skill ranks, but instead increases at +10 BSB.
A new feat, Superior Skill Training (or some such name), will be introduced. This feat increases a trained skill from 3/4 level to 1/1 level (same as full BAB). This feat will have the requirements of skill focus in that skill, and that the skill be trained.
Prestige classes, feats, abilities, etc. which require a specific number of skill ranks instead require an equivalent BSB.
The favored class option to add a skill point instead gives an untyped bonus to any skill (trained or untrained).
Increases in intelligence that would normally grant additional skill points instead grants an additional trained skill. Headbands of intelligence (or similar items) grant trained skills rather than max skill ranks in the noted skills.
Monsters are considered to be trained in all skills mentioned in their bestiary entries. This is for simplicity. A full rebuild of all monsters would honestly be needed to make these correct, but since monsters don't usually last that long and their skills rarely make or break an encounter, it's often more work than necessary. Special monsters (those that will be interacted with rather than just killed) probably deserve a proper rebuild of skills.
I had considered using the good/bad save progression, or simply a full/half BAB, but the former ended up with skills being about 60% of their previous levels and the latter created a bigger gap than I thought made sense. At 1/2 and 3/4, skills are still disparate, but close enough that a few points really matters. For example, a level 12 rogue trained in stealth would have a stealth bonus of around +20 to +25. An untrained perception score (a dumb idea) of a non Wisdom class at the same level would be around +7 or +8. So, if the rogue rolls low and the other guy rolls high, the rogue could be detected, but normally the rogue wouldn't have a problem sneaking past - as it should be. However, the guy with the +8 doesn't feel completely useless because it's not just a +1 or +2. Heavy investment is still rewarded, but not so much so that things get out of hand.
We might need to look at spells and items that grant bonuses to skills, because their value goes up under this system. A +5 to stealth from the Boots of Elvenkind matters more when the top levels of skills are reduced.
-----
So, what did we miss? Does this help? Does it hinder? What implications are there that we've overlooked? Is it overly complicated?
|
While I agree that if you haven't really focused as much on skills (typical fighter) that you probably wont want to try opposed checks later one, there is a good reason for that. Allowing characters to gain ranks in skills without investing in them effectively lowers the powers of monsters, unless you do the same for them as well, which as you stated is more work than its worth. That's a lot of calculations, and not only that, it outshines characters that DO focus on their skills. A Wizard that has spent his entire adventuring life studying the arcane and gets a bad roll on a Knowledge: Arcane check will be pretty upset if dumb fighter gets lucky on it with his low progression. At the very least, I would ensure that skills that cannot be used untrained do not increase. Honestly, though, just because you haven't maxed a skill, doesn't mean you shouldn't try it. IMHO, the current system is best because it allows you to change things. If you lock yourself into the "I train in this" system, then what happens 5 levels from now when you realize "Swim would have been good, since we are now on a boat and the campaign wasn't planned to go this way..." I would really think hard before implementing something like this in one of my games, and talk it over extensively with the group.
|
Hmmmmm, I'm usually pretty against giving PC freebies as a solution to any kind of problem perceived or otherwise in a game. Especially when it's something that might be slightly/moderately/totally their fault. If everyone is playing the dump stat game with Intelligence, it certainly isn't Pathfinder's fault for that. Automatic scaling of things historically has been a problem cause far more then it's been a solution from my personal experience.
If anything I'd consider looking at CR appropriate monsters and re-evaluate what kind of bonus they get to perception. Stealth did have a play test for a rebuild a while back too, that might be something look into.
A lot of the skills in the game have a good point where you don't need to put more points in to know you'll have a solid investment. Feats exist that give bonuses, traits are out there. Plenty of pre-existing resources to help with the skill situation.
Then you get into the whole high level silliness, which I don't have experience with.
With monsters, they are considered trained in skills they have listed and untrained in skills they don't. So non-listed skills are Ability + 1/2 HD. Listed skills are Ability + 3/4 HD.
If you get a character who decides he wants swim later, he has three choices. Take the feat that makes swim a trained skill, buy a headband/ioun stone of intelligence, or just go with his already decent skill modifier. In a normal game, if I have no ranks in swim at level 10, I have a +0 to that skill. If I'm suddenly on a boat, I sink and drown. Under this system, if the same character is suddenly on a boat with no prior preparation, he's got a +5 to swim.
This system actually makes it easier to suddenly change scenarios and have characters adapt since no one ever really sucks at a skill so bad that they won't even attempt it.
If you are the wizard who has trained his whole life studying arcane magic, you have a high Int (wizard and anyone focusing on knowledges), it's a trained skill, a class skill and you probably have at least Skill Focus in arcana. At level 10, the fighter (int penalty, untrained) has a +5 to his arcana check (likely a +3 if he dumped his intelligence like most fighters). You have a +20 (+6 int, trained class skill, skill focus) or a +23 if you took Superior Skill Training. So the likelihood of him rolling higher than your wizard are very low. But, also, that occasional surprise is kind of fun and a trope in literature.
Also, if he's a fighter worth his salt, at level 10, he's been adventuring with arcane casters for a long time and should have picked up a thing or two about arcane magic, dragons, constructs and the like. It's illogical to assume that he should know nothing about foes he has likely fought or things he has likely encountered.
The same if he attempted to sneak, or get a sense if someone is lying to him, or intimidate a foe. A hero, and we are playing heroes here, ought to be marginally competent at their jobs. This is an attempt to make it so that a level 20 paladin doesn't have a perception score of +2 or a knowledge religion of +0, all because he only had 2 skills per level and someone had to be competent in diplomacy and sense motive.
A couple thoughts:
1. If they have a decent ability score modifier, they should be able to win opposed checks against other characters that don't have ranks, unless every NPC is considered trained in the opposing skills.
2. Why would the players be better at Disabling Device or other skills that require training if they have never done it before in their lives, regardless of how high their abstract level is? The same can be said for any skills. If he has never attempted it and hasn't practiced it, he shouldn't gain experience in it.
3. Is the goal to make it so that each party member can do everything by themselves? Creating a balanced party that splits up party roles is a pretty big part of the game. I don't see anything wrong with the group leaving the sweet-talking to the Rogue and calling in the Barbarian when they need some Intimidation. In fact I see it as a pretty integral part of the game.
The conclusion I have come to over many years of playing is that it is ok to spread around skills, and not every one needs to be maxed out. Some skills probably don't need to be advanced past a certain point, as the DCs don't really get past 15-20. I still like to be really, really good at a couple of things, but its ok to be just pretty good at other things. PF has encouraged dipping into more skill by offering the free +3 to class skills.