PDA

View Full Version : Would this make Skill Focus a bit better?



Frosty
2009-07-26, 07:44 PM
Right now Skill Focus is mostly crap except for fulfilling requirements and for Truenamers (who are mostly crap anyways). What if taking Skill Focus also made the skill a class skill for you forever? Would that make make it an acceptable feat?

Sinfire Titan
2009-07-26, 07:46 PM
Add in a prereq of 4 ranks in the relevant skill, and yes. Otherwise people would take it to meet requirements earlier than they should be.

AstralFire
2009-07-26, 07:46 PM
I've been spending too much time with Saga. I went "CRAP?! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!" for a second there. :elan:

I think that would do wonderfully. Would also consider making the bonus +4 or +5, maybe.

quick_comment
2009-07-26, 07:47 PM
Maybe give skill mastery with the skill, so you can always take 10.

mistformsquirrl
2009-07-26, 07:48 PM
Personally would love it *solely* on the basis of having access to the skill at full ranks at a 1-1 skill point ratio >.< that would be fantastic.

Having an extra +3 on top of that would be faboo <^_^>

That said, that's from the perspective of a player of characters who usually have 4+Int or less skill points to work with >.>, so take that as you will

*edit*

@Sinfire Titan: How would they meet pre-reqs sooner than they're intended to? The +skill is just a mod, it's not free ranks; while the requirements are actually for ranks.

Unless I'm missing something completely here >.<

AstralFire
2009-07-26, 07:50 PM
Maybe give skill mastery with the skill, so you can always take 10.

I don't think that's that good with most skills, IMO. Who cares about being able to take 10 with a Craft (Sculpture) check you just picked up for RP, but want to be able to keep maxed out without crippling the rest of your skills?

And taking 10 for even stuff like tumble becomes rather... unnecessary at higher levels.


@Sinfire Titan: How would they meet pre-reqs sooner than they're intended to? The +skill is just a mod, it's not free ranks; while the requirements are actually for ranks.

Wizard who needs points in Perform (dance) to take a PrC. Spends a feat on Skill Focus - THEN pours the points on, qualifies for the PrC at level 2 without multiclassing.

Sinfire Titan
2009-07-26, 07:53 PM
@Sinfire Titan: How would they meet pre-reqs sooner than they're intended to? The +skill is just a mod, it's not free ranks; while the requirements are actually for ranks.

Unless I'm missing something completely here >.<

Bad example, but RAW: Wilder trying to get into the Anarchic Initiate. If this version of Skill Focus didn't have the requirement I put up there, they could enter it at 5th instead of 6th (when they would get the feat).

Like I said, bad example. A better one may be PrCs that require Perform ranks but not Bardic Music.

Edit: McNinja'ed.

mistformsquirrl
2009-07-26, 07:54 PM
Eh... that strikes me as kind of weak reason to have that pre-requisite though; as you could do the exact same thing by multiclassing one level. I mean yeah, that weakens your spell progression slightly... but taking Skill Focus reduces your metamagic feat count by one too.

Besides, most caster prestige classes need a specific level of spell castable anyway, right?

tyckspoon
2009-07-26, 07:55 PM
Wizard who needs points in Perform (dance) to take a PrC. Spends a feat on Skill Focus - THEN pours the points on, qualifies for the PrC at level 2 without multiclassing.

If 5 ranks in a skill was the only requirement for the PrC, it was designed for early entry. If it wasn't the only requirement, then there is something else serving as the level-check anyway (BAB, required level of spells, etc) and spending a feat to meet the skill requirement more easily isn't a big deal.

AstralFire
2009-07-26, 07:58 PM
Eh... that strikes me as kind of weak reason to have that pre-requisite though; as you could do the exact same thing by multiclassing one level. I mean yeah, that weakens your spell progression slightly... but taking Skill Focus reduces your metamagic feat count by one too.

Besides, most caster prestige classes need a specific level of spell castable anyway, right?

It wouldn't be broken in the great majority of cases to not have a prerequisite; but I guarantee you that somewhere, somehow, there is an amazing power boost available to some sort of caster if there is no such prerequisite.

Rule Thirty-Futhark: It OPs a caster somehow. No exceptions.

mistformsquirrl
2009-07-26, 08:00 PM
Hah, well that's true <,<

Thankfully there's a handy thing called "The DM" <^_^> also known as "RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAY (or I'll bash your skull with the DMG, you dirty wizard)" >.>

<.< Or maybe that's just me.

Frosty
2009-07-26, 08:07 PM
Wizard who needs points in Perform (dance) to take a PrC. Spends a feat on Skill Focus - THEN pours the points on, qualifies for the PrC at level 2 without multiclassing.

Still not seeing it. Except for Master Specialist, eveyr single PC PrC I've seen requires level 6 for entry due to skill requirements (8 ranks in X) or spellcasting requirements (Able to cast 3rd level arcane/divine spells). Taking this feat would allow for earlier entries yes, but not earlier than the earliest that it was designed for. For example, Sorcerers who take this can now enter Initiates of the 7 Veils and Archmage at the levels that Wizards can enter. You can now enter Ur-Priest without making a nonsensical dip just to get Bluff, but you still need to be level 6.

AstralFire
2009-07-26, 08:10 PM
I'm inclined to agree with you/mist/tyck. I was just explaining Sin's PoV.

Oslecamo
2009-07-26, 08:42 PM
Right now Skill Focus is mostly crap except for fulfilling requirements and for Truenamers (who are mostly crap anyways).

Artificers who don't get to start at high levels will almost always pick up skill focus UMD.

Are you saying that artificers are crap?

Sinfire Titan
2009-07-26, 08:56 PM
Artificers who don't get to start at high levels will almost always pick up skill focus UMD.

Are you saying that artificers are crap?

May I point out the fallacy in this statement?

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-07-26, 09:03 PM
Artificers who don't get to start at high levels will almost always pick up skill focus UMD.

Are you saying that artificers are crap?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v422/toddsun/Pwnage%20pics/myheadisalem128562305945288665.jpg
lololololol!

FMArthur
2009-07-26, 09:15 PM
Back when my whole group was still learning how to play D&D, we made the mistake of thinking Skill Focus gave you additional ranks. We were smart enough to abuse this for early PrC qualification but dumb enough to miss the specific wording. In any case, it wasn't a total disaster because the BAB and casting requirements of fighter-types' and caster-types' prestige classes limited them, while wusses like swashbucklers and ninjas and scouts found their ways into PrCs early to make up for their shortcomings. :smallsmile:

It would be certainly, 100% unbalanced for a group that knows about a lot of PrCs.

valadil
2009-07-26, 09:30 PM
I like that change. I'm sure there are a few PrCs that could qualify a little too early with it though. They might need other changes thrown in to make up for it.

Sinfire Titan
2009-07-26, 09:53 PM
I like that change. I'm sure there are a few PrCs that could qualify a little too early with it though. They might need other changes thrown in to make up for it.

Well, changing Skill Focus so that it is actually 3 additional ranks in a skill would only require putting a level requirement on PrCs that have a Rank requirement.

There's a precedent set for this in Weapons of Legacy. The Legacy Champion requires you to be 10th level to enter it. For the other PrCs, have the entry requirement be set by the skill ranks required -3 (so 8 Ranks becomes Character Level 5th, 8 ranks in * skill).

DragoonWraith
2009-07-26, 09:58 PM
Personally, I've always considered it kind of silly that they have all these requirements that essentially say that you need a certain number of levels, without just saying it. I get why (backwards-compatibility, mostly, so new classes with similar features can get into old PrCs), but sometimes I feel like they need to just come and say "you need to be level 8 to enter" or "you need three levels of some arcane spellcasting class" - the latter would do wonders to help out Sorcerers, for one.

Sinfire Titan
2009-07-26, 10:03 PM
Personally, I've always considered it kind of silly that they have all these requirements that essentially say that you need a certain number of levels, without just saying it. I get why (backwards-compatibility, mostly, so new classes with similar features can get into old PrCs), but sometimes I feel like they need to just come and say "you need to be level 8 to enter" or "you need three levels of some arcane spellcasting class" - the latter would do wonders to help out Sorcerers, for one.

Like the signs at a roller coaster. The sign says you need to be 60 Inches tall to ride, but anyone who knows the Imperial system can tell you they mean 5' (almost 2 meters, for you Metric buffs). So rather than say 60 inches, they put the sign up stat has a measuring stick and an arrow pointing to it.

The Rose Dragon
2009-07-26, 10:08 PM
Like the signs at a roller coaster. The sign says you need to be 60 Inches tall to ride, but anyone who knows the Imperial system can tell you they mean 5' (almost 2 meters, for you Metric buffs). So rather than say 60 inches, they put the sign up stat has a measuring stick and an arrow pointing to it.

1.52.

2 meters is about 79 inches.

Sinfire Titan
2009-07-26, 10:09 PM
1.52.

2 meters is about 79 inches.

Ok, thanks for the math.

FMArthur
2009-07-26, 11:24 PM
Please don't use that system. It doesn't work; BAB requirements continue to screw fighter-types but what we missed early on was that there are a lot of PrCs that casters can take early with extra ranks. You'd be better off waiving certain requirements, using a lot of specific rules, etc.

But... it might be fun to play a game where you can just ignore entry requirements altogether and start off in prestige classes if you want. Banning stupidly powerful classes (like even normal campaigns should do), I think it would be a lot of fun. There are so many more prestige classes than base classes, and you'd meet any specific character concept (that you'd normally be waiting until level 6 or higher for) you had in mind much earlier.

Frosty
2009-07-26, 11:26 PM
I think my proposed houserule would benefit more than anything Fighter types with their ridiculously low skill points and skill selection.

ericgrau
2009-07-27, 12:48 AM
(@ first post): Nope, and no matter how much you help the skill it won't be worth much when skills aren't really used at all. But if you use skills more, then the feat (I mean the original version of it) is worth taking. I've heard of a gaming group where the DM liked to include lots of water hazards that players often fell into, ocean voyages, etc. All his players took skill focus (swim).

The common alternative I've seen used is to separate things like skills from things that do get used a lot. So players might get a free feat every X levels but they can only use it on skill feats or maybe something else "minor" too. It doesn't cut into their other feats and they can't use it for other things, so they gotta use it on the "flavor" abilities that only occassionally come up during games. Be sure to disallow using the "flavor" feats as prestige class entry requirements. That may be the best option in your case if you don't want to emphasize skill-based encounters more.

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-07-27, 08:16 AM
One houserule a friend of mine used was having it automatically max ranks in a skill without spending any skill points. He put some restrictions on it like requires X ranks already, can't be used on certain skills, and such (don't remember the exact prereqs, it's been a while). I was a rogue in that game, and he basically said "Don't use it on your primary skills like Hide and UMD," so I picked it up for Survival and a few Craft skills and had a blast.

So, given the above, you could have SF grant free skill points to only be used on the specified skill. If it's a less-important skill, it grants 1 point at the class rate; more important skills might grant 1 point at the cross-class rate, or 2 points every 3 levels, or whatever, and require you to make up the difference.

Frosty
2009-07-27, 11:02 AM
In a no magic game, Skill Focus would probably become a lot more important, but alas... :smalltongue:

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-07-27, 11:13 AM
In a no magic game, Skill Focus would probably become a lot more important, but alas... :smalltongue:

Not necessarily. How often do your players rush out and grab items of +10 to skill X as soon as possible? In fact, with no magic items, I'd say SF would actually become less important, because feats that are currently all but a waste of paper would become highly desirable, like the Weapon Focus line (due to a lack of magic weapons) or the three save feats (due to a lack of save-boosters).