|
6 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2007 - 6:07AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 30, 2006
|
Skills have been discussed at length at the 4e rules thread but I thought they should have their own thread.
My two cents:
1.Don't tie skills to just one ability score.
[INDENT][/INDENT]I always found it weird that i.e. jump and climb are str based only. Maybe str+dex/2, or simply str+dex modifiers could be introduced.
2.Find uses for skills beyond a certain threshold.
[INDENT][/INDENT]A +14 on tumble will be sufficient 90% of the time, as will +14 on heal (if you invest into heal at all)
So what do you think is wrong with skill rules now, and what do you think would be a good improvement?
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2007 - 11:43AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Aug 20, 2007
|
I like the streamlined skill system in Star Wars Saga. In a nutshell:
1) Skills are Untrained, Trained, or Expert (IIRC).
2) Fewer, broader skills. Stealth included move silently, and hide, Athletics includes Jump and Climb, etc.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2007 - 11:46AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Mar 19, 2001
|
I like the streamlined skill system in Star Wars Saga. Athletics includes Jump and Climb
No, it doesn't. At least not in Star Wars Saga.
But it should... 
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2007 - 7:34PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2009
|
I like the streamlined skill system in Star Wars Saga. In a nutshell:
1) Skills are Untrained, Trained, or Expert (IIRC).
Mostly right. Skills are either untrained or trained, but there is a Skill Focus feat that adds an additional +5 to the modifier for one trained skill.
I suppose it wouldn't be too hard to make a slightly finer-grained system by letting a character take a +2 bonus for each of two "familiar" skills rather than a +5 bonus for one trained skill. No Skill Focus for a "familiar" skill, of course. I have no idea whether the powers that be have considered that option.
2) Fewer, broader skills. Stealth included move silently, and hide, Athletics includes Jump and Climb, etc.
Also mostly right. Jump, Climb, and Swim are all individual skills in Saga Edition, but I know there are plenty of fans of a combined Athletics skill.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2007 - 7:42PM
#5
|
|
|
Skills are a very important thing to 90% of the characters I play, and I'm a very skills focused character creator, so the rules had better be good or I will be very disappointed.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2007 - 9:22PM
#6
|
|
|
Skills have been discussed at length at the 4e rules thread but I thought they should have their own thread.
My two cents:
1.Don't tie skills to just one ability score.
[INDENT][/INDENT]I always found it weird that i.e. jump and climb are str based only. Maybe str+dex/2, or simply str+dex modifiers could be introduced.
Meh. The str+dex would be fine I suppose as long as it was balanced. As for the average-two-attributes idea, the extra math (as little as it would be) wouldn't really add anything to the game for me. It would be easy enough to housrule either way I suppose.
2.Find uses for skills beyond a certain threshold.
[INDENT][/INDENT]A +14 on tumble will be sufficient 90% of the time, as will +14 on heal (if you invest into heal at all)
So what do you think is wrong with skill rules now, and what do you think would be a good improvement?
I'm with ya on this one. More opposed rolls are good for one thing. Other ways to scale the DC *looking at you tumble* would be to base the DC's vs opponents attack roll. I'm hoping Mearls comes through on this one. (as he did in Iron Heroes). Heck there is some good support for skills in Iron Heroes in general. EDIT: It even has a little bit on heal (healing reserve points = your heal ranks. Could be better but it's going in the right direction).
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 10, 2007 - 11:01AM
#7
|
|
|
The one thing in 3.x that I never liked about skills, and changed in all my games were how cross-class skills are handled. Specifically, saying that two skill points buys one rank and that you can have no more than half the number of ranks in a cross-class skill as you can have in a class skill is double-penalizing character customization. I personally think you should do one or the other. Since max cross-class ranks being half max class ranks is a bit simpler than a single skill point buys you half a cross-class rank (which the half-point is ignored during the game anyway), all of my games ignore the two points per rank rule.
This way, putting points in skills that aren't class, but are important anyway (like listen, search, and spot) is a viable choice and will not eat up a ton of skill points for a relatively small number of ranks.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 10, 2007 - 9:22PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2006
|
My contribution would be two divisions of skills. Basic Skills would include Athletics and Perception. Basically, they are skills that all character possess by default at 1/2 Character Level + Ability Modifier. Advanced Skills are those skills that can only be used if you are Trained in it such as Knowledge (*), Spellcraft, or Survival. Obviously trained skills would be 1/2 Character Level + 5 (Trained) + Ability Modifier.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 10, 2007 - 9:32PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
|
In general I liked most of what they did in sage but the way they handled skills was not one of them. The current skill system lets you express all kinds of roleplaying history and character quirks sooo much better than Saga. If I want him to begin his life as one thing but later forsake that life in favor of an other 3.5's system allows that. Saga's system not only forces you to keep those skills "maxed" but makes it more difficult to become trained in others. The Saga system also makes it very hard to play the jack of all trades master of none character. I currently have a factotum who is 10 level but with only a couple skills max and dozens with 1-5 ranks in them, Saga's skill system wouldn't allow such a character.
Spreading skill points around when you level may not mean much to a cleric or fighter but to a rogue that what its all about. If they go with the Saga skill system in 4th, they better give skill based characters some pretty solid stuff to make up for it.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Sep 11, 2007 - 1:50AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2004
|
I currently have a factotum who is 10 level but with only a couple skills max and dozens with 1-5 ranks in them, Saga's skill system wouldn't allow such a character.
Uhmm... Yes it does. At level 10 you have 5+5+ability mod in your trained skills essentially 10ranks and you have 5+ability in all untrained for 5 ranks. Not too different then having 13 ranks in a trained skills and some in dozens of skills.
Top it off, you can be a skill specialist by obtaining more skills by using feats to obtain them. It makes sense that some one who wants to focus on skills over combat can do this, which you couldn't in 3.x.
In addition if you want to focus on select skills, you can by taking focus granting a +5 to the skills (much more desirable to take than in 3.x). If you want a skill monkey you can use feats to gain more trained skills or focus in a select few. None of which was possible in 3.x.
Then look at the utility of the new skill format, you have skill options that only trained practitioners of the skill could use. Also most skills are composed of many skills like persuasion have eaten up diplomacy, intimidation, gather info, etc. so that when you get trained in it it's like being trained in 4 skills in 3.x.
As if that's not enough reason to make the switch, it's a better format for creating high level characters (a huge boon to the DM). You no longer have issues occuring over Int increases, synergies, and other miscellaneous stuff that bogged down character creation. This speeds up play or allows more time for the creative thought process as you don't have to think about how many points go into which skill, what skill gives synergy to this or that, etc. etc. This is ever important in high level play where there are so many options already to consider.
And for my final reason for why such a switch is good, is that in the end, most people max out certain skills, with the rest having much fewer ranks invested. How is that really fundamentally different than the Saga system? Not really mechanic-wise, just fluff wise, so what's stopping you from listing certain background or hobby interest? Unless you are really Trained in said skill, then you are technically untrained. Also, it's like comparing skills to other level based changes, why shouldn't your abilities improve across the board when you level up? You standard BAB and Saves do, regardless if you gained Xp by using skills or the sword, why should skills be any different.
Regards, Netherek.
|
|
|
