| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think that there should be any skill feats, in and of themselves, that are only usable by one class. I like how they represent bailies that any character can do use with the proper training in a skill.
Now, class feats that interact with certain skill feats might be interesting. The only one I can think of right now is the Raging Intimidation feat, that lets Barbarians rage while raging and also gives them Intimidating Glare and Scare to Death automatically when they qualify for them. More feats like that could be interesting.
|
Rogues, at least, have quite a few 'skill-requirement' feats:
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs435rq&page=3?Tarondors-Guide-to-the-Pathfi nder-Second#120
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If they're at the same power level as skill feats there's no reason to gate them w/ a class. Plus they'll likely have broader appeal thematically. So unless there were specific examples to consider, I can't say I'm interested in exploring the route of "like a skill feat, but only for a sliver of PCs".
On the other hand, as the others have mentioned, more class feats tied to skills would be welcome, i.e. Master Monster Hunter. Those have more room to tie into specific class abilities and they get a bigger power budget to do some cool effects.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Archetypes already have some skill feats that are essentially class feats and limited to the archetype, which is close to the idea of a class having skill feats.
I also don’t want skill feats that make sense for anyone to be able to take to be gated behind a class, but skill feats that do make sense for a class could be interesting. Especially for classes like Rogue, Investigator, or Swashbuckler that get lots of bonus skill feats.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
What do other people think ?
I think it'd be a mess to balance.
If you give cool skill feats (so at a high power level compared to most skill feats), you basically force characters of this class to grab them and they become tax feats.If you give average skill feats (same power level than other skill feats) then nearly noone would ever take them as even characters of this class have few incentive in doing so.
I also prefer class feats based on skills.
Archetypes already have some skill feats that are essentially class feats and limited to the archetype, which is close to the idea of a class having skill feats.
There are 2 differences with Archetype-based skill feats:
- They allow you to get out of the archetype earlier. As such, there's a strong incentive in taking them even if they are bad.- You can make them better than other skill feats without making them tax feats. For example, Armor Specialist is way too strong for a skill feat so everyone take it. But it's not much of an issue as it can be considered a benefit of the Archetype.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is only me but do any of you think it would be awesome if there were some class gated skills feats to complement specific class niches.
Personally I think it would be cool if the Wizard got hold of the options of some specific arcane skills feats, the druid nature, the bard occult etc.
What do other people think ?
Given that classes already naturally gravitate towards certain skills and that you can generally only get 3 skills to Legendary (Rogues/Investigators being the exception), getting any one skill to Expert or even Master that is not directly tied to your class identity is already a huge investment.
Therefore, additional gating behind classes isn't really necessary. If someone pays the 'price of admission' in skill increases, they've earned access to those skill feats.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have to agree with Lycar. It's hard for me to imagine a feat that is skill specific but also class specific that feels satisfying.
Maybe if it directly interacted with a class' core mechanic (like a feat that specifically interacts with rage or sneak attack), but I'm not sure that's really a design space skill feats need to fulfill anyways.
One of my least favorite things in PF1 was when they did stuff like this... like a whole line of feats about intimidating people that was slayer only for no real discernible reason.
|
|
What do other people think ?I think it'd be a mess to balance.
If you give cool skill feats (so at a high power level compared to most skill feats), you basically force characters of this class to grab them and they become tax feats.
If you give average skill feats (same power level than other skill feats) then nearly noone would ever take them as even characters of this class have few incentive in doing so.
I also prefer class feats based on skills.Archetypes already have some skill feats that are essentially class feats and limited to the archetype, which is close to the idea of a class having skill feats.There are 2 differences with Archetype-based skill feats:
- They allow you to get out of the archetype earlier. As such, there's a strong incentive in taking them even if they are bad.
- You can make them better than other skill feats without making them tax feats. For example, Armor Specialist is way too strong for a skill feat so everyone take it. But it's not much of an issue as it can be considered a benefit of the Archetype.
I think there’s a difference between a feat tax and a feat that is obviously better than other choices. A feat tax is something that you have to take, in order to either function or to access the option that you really want. Combat Expertise from 1E is the classic example of a feat few people wanted to take, but many had to take so that they could eventually take other options. Firearm Ace from the Gunslinger playtest is an example of a feat that was both obviously better than the other choices at the level and necessary for the class to compete with other classes in terms of damage. Battle Medicine is an example of a skill feat that is obviously better than most skill feats, but it is not a feat tax, because it’s not something anyone is required to take for any reason.
The archetype skill feats are, in some ways, sometimes feat taxes, because people take them just to close out the archetype without having to spend a class feat, and not because they actually want the ability that the skill feat grants. But there are also a lot of archetype skill feats that are better than most other skill feats at their level. Treat Condition, for example, is a really good feat. It can be compared to Advanced First Aid, which is 3 levels higher.
Anyway, as I said, I’m not a fan of locking general skill feats that make sense for everyone behind a class. It’s great that anyone can take Battle Medicine. But I also think some of the existing class feats could have been skill feats. I also think there are existing class feats that should have been general feats (or my preference would have been to keep combat feats as a category). Quick Draw and Point Blank Stance come to mind. But they went down the road of locking those behind class feats, so I don’t see it as inconsistent should they create some skill feats that work similarly. And it would help some classes that currently have to choose between taking class feats that keep them relevant in combat or taking interesting out of combat options that only their class can get.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It was more that I thought stuff like raging athlete could be an athletics barbarian skill feat.
Stuff that is about skills but interacts with class features.
Yeah this idea has occurred to me as well. There are actually a lot of rogue, monk, barbarian, and ranger feats which are essentially souped up skill feats but eat into your class feat budget.
It was more that I thought stuff like raging athlete could be an athletics barbarian skill feat.
Conceal Spell too?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Generally I prefer that skills and skill feats be completely separated from class choice. That is one of the best things that came out of PF2 IMHO.
But I can see some class feats that could be marked with the 'Skill' tag and be allowed to be taken with a skill feat slot. Things like Deimatic Display for Druid and such (in addition to the ones mentioned previously). Feats that interact and depend on both skill training and class features - or at least class theme.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I could certainly imagine some druid skill feats based around doing stuff in wild shape... and I'd think it entirely appropriate for the alchemist and/or inventor (possibly gunslinger) to get some skill feats around crafting. Might be a nice way to better distinguish the witch's familiar, too.
At the risk of kicking over the entire stack of feats we already have, I'd have approached feats in an entirely different way.
Class Feats: I'd have made these feats everything that current classes are. To become a Barbarian you just take feats focused around, rage, and toughness. Some of the more powerful feats would either have an attached drawback, like anathema, or inability to use them in armor while others might cost a future feat slot (or slots).
Skill Feats: These are your pure mechanical bonus feats. They'd be bundled in such a way that +1 to attack, +1 to AC, or +1 to a save would either come with a drawback, or compete with feats that offer +3 to one skill, +2 to another, and +1 to two other skills of your choice.
General Feats: A very small pool of feats that are basically just the pool of feats considered strong in PF2 plus one or two more that are around that same level.
Ancestry Feats: I'd cut these beyond 1st level but include a lot of ancestral templates that cost your 1st level ancestry feat and a general feat but make you into one of a few special versions of that ancestry with a slight power boost.
Automatic Feats: These are new feats that are granted when a character reaches specific stat/skill/level-based requirements. So your entire build would likely piot around when and which of these requirements you reach. You could also make some of them related to deeds, like reaching x reputation with a faction or defeating a legendary (read: tougher) version of a specific monster type.
Chuck in my item changes and I think you could make something like a corss between GURPs, PF1, and a gritty low fantasy game.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely want more Skill Feats, and agree with most of upthread that they shouldn't by-and-large be gated behind Class.
That said, if we take a look at the Inventor, you'll notice that built right into their Chassis is the automatic Skill Increase for the Crafting skill. This is unique among the Classes, to "bake in" this Upkeeping Proficiency in an essential skill.
I wish more Classes had taken this route. That way, any Class that has Upkeeping Proficiency in a Skill could almost consider any upper-proficiency Skill Feats (That require Expert, Master, Legendary, etc) as essentially "Class Skill Feats" without the necessity for gating.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At the risk of kicking over the entire stack of feats we already have, I'd have approached feats in an entirely different way.
Class Feats: I'd have made these feats everything that current classes are. To become a Barbarian you just take feats focused around, rage, and toughness. Some of the more powerful feats would either have an attached drawback, like anathema, or inability to use them in armor while others might cost a future feat slot (or slots).
Skill Feats: These are your pure mechanical bonus feats. They'd be bundled in such a way that +1 to attack, +1 to AC, or +1 to a save would either come with a drawback, or compete with feats that offer +3 to one skill, +2 to another, and +1 to two other skills of your choice.
General Feats: A very small pool of feats that are basically just the pool of feats considered strong in PF2 plus one or two more that are around that same level.
Ancestry Feats: I'd cut these beyond 1st level but include a lot of ancestral templates that cost your 1st level ancestry feat and a general feat but make you into one of a few special versions of that ancestry with a slight power boost.
Automatic Feats: These are new feats that are granted when a character reaches specific stat/skill/level-based requirements. So your entire build would likely piot around when and which of these requirements you reach. You could also make some of them related to deeds, like reaching x reputation with a faction or defeating a legendary (read: tougher) version of a specific monster type.
Chuck in my item changes and I think you could make something like a corss between GURPs, PF1, and a gritty low fantasy game.
That sounds... like an entirely different game. It doesn't sound like it would be a bad game, necessarily. It could be done well. and I could see it being pretty cool. I can understand why Paizo didn't go that route, though.
You could even go one further. There are glog hacks out there where character progression is handled entirely via delta templates. It's interesting, and could be cool... but it's not the same game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At the risk of kicking over the entire stack of feats we already have, I'd have approached feats in an entirely different way.
Class Feats: I'd have made these feats everything that current classes are. To become a Barbarian you just take feats focused around, rage, and toughness. Some of the more powerful feats would either have an attached drawback, like anathema, or inability to use them in armor while others might cost a future feat slot (or slots).
Skill Feats: These are your pure mechanical bonus feats. They'd be bundled in such a way that +1 to attack, +1 to AC, or +1 to a save would either come with a drawback, or compete with feats that offer +3 to one skill, +2 to another, and +1 to two other skills of your choice.
General Feats: A very small pool of feats that are basically just the pool of feats considered strong in PF2 plus one or two more that are around that same level.
Ancestry Feats: I'd cut these beyond 1st level but include a lot of ancestral templates that cost your 1st level ancestry feat and a general feat but make you into one of a few special versions of that ancestry with a slight power boost.
Automatic Feats: These are new feats that are granted when a character reaches specific stat/skill/level-based requirements. So your entire build would likely piot around when and which of these requirements you reach. You could also make some of them related to deeds, like reaching x reputation with a faction or defeating a legendary (read: tougher) version of a specific monster type.
Chuck in my item changes and I think you could make something like a corss between GURPs, PF1, and a gritty low fantasy game.
That sounds... like an entirely different game. It doesn't sound like it would be a bad game, necessarily. It could be done well. and I could see it being pretty cool. I can understand why Paizo didn't go that route, though.
You could even go one further. There are glog hacks out there where character progression is handled entirely...
I think a lot of making a game feel like it belongs to franchise x or y can be done with art style, flavor, and familiar names. If I did this system I'd keep the stats and saves as they are (normally cows I'd gladly slaughter), Vancian casting, and hit points (though probably with optional rules for location damage/targeting), and there would be a section detailing how to make the iconic classes for those who want an easier game. I think if done very carefully you could keep it Pathfinder even with my changes.