PDA

View Full Version : Why the condensed skill lists?



druid91
2010-10-16, 10:09 PM
I've seen this in many games, people condensing hide and move silently into stealth, or jump and tumble into acrobatics, or climb and swim into athletics.

So why do you use (or not use) condensed skill lists?

Milskidasith
2010-10-16, 10:10 PM
Because you get hilariously low skill points per level, the skills condensed are either worthless except very rarely, or always used together, and it helps out non magic classes more than magic classes.

SurlySeraph
2010-10-16, 10:12 PM
What Milskidasith said. Also, without condensed skill lists you get silly results, like masters of jumping, tumbling, and climbing who aren't any good at balancing.

Anxe
2010-10-16, 10:13 PM
That'd be because people rarely hide or move silently separately.

Jump is pretty much useless after the player's get fly. Tumble is always useful, but no so much at lower levels when you miss the skill check all the time. This way you get a skill that is useful all the time.

Climb and swim are together because they are so rarely used except in specific situations that might arise once in every campaign.

Coidzor
2010-10-16, 10:13 PM
I know one reason is that people just think some things are so interconnected it's silly to have one without the other.

Another reason is wanting to increase the ability to take more secondary skills.

Lhurgyof
2010-10-16, 10:14 PM
What Milskidasith said. Also, without condensed skill lists you get silly results, like masters of jumping, tumbling, and climbing who aren't any good at balancing.

Synergies.

Dusk Eclipse
2010-10-16, 10:15 PM
Other option that I have considered but haven't implemented (yet) is increasing all classes SP (except full casters) by 50 %. thus fighters get 4 +int and rogues would get 12+int for example.

But I like the idea of condensing the skill list, it just makes sense somehow (a little problematic with some PRG class, but that is easily fixable)

valadil
2010-10-16, 10:19 PM
I like condensed lists. They help ensure that there's a reasonable balance between everyday skills and esoteric ones. 4th ed is pretty good about this. While some skills are definitely more common than others, there isn't a single skill on the list that I've seen any GM neglect entirely. Unlike, say, Forgery in 3.5.

druid91
2010-10-16, 10:21 PM
I like condensed lists. They help ensure that there's a reasonable balance between everyday skills and esoteric ones. 4th ed is pretty good about this. While some skills are definitely more common than others, there isn't a single skill on the list that I've seen any GM neglect entirely. Unlike, say, Forgery in 3.5.

Forgery gets neglected? I love forgery, then again I like ebberon where forgery is extraordinarily useful so...

Coidzor
2010-10-16, 10:34 PM
Forgery is insanely dependent upon DMs, really. And of less than immediately obvious utility unless documentations are a thing.

Serpentine
2010-10-17, 04:11 AM
Well, as long as we're talking about this, I just officially (i.e. I wrote it down) instituted the following houserule: Intimidate and Diplomacy are now Persuasion; Listen and Spot are Perception; Hide and Move Silently are Stealth.
For on-topic reasoning: the first because they seem like different approaches to the same object, and aren't particularly mutually exclusive (i.e. any difference can be roleplayed, with appropriate consequences); the second takes into account such things as taste and smell and are often used together; and the last are almost never used separately.
Off-topic request: is this a good/decent idea?

mangosta71
2010-10-17, 11:38 AM
I tend to prefer condensed skill lists in 3.5. Especially for rogues, as there are so many "archetypal" rogue skills, and even 8+Int per level isn't enough to take all of them.

Chrono22
2010-10-17, 11:40 AM
It simplifies the mechanics, it makes sense, and it helps balance play a bit more. It also allows players to free up skill ranks for secondary skillsets.

ericgrau
2010-10-17, 11:51 AM
I've seen arguments of if I have one without the other, then another skill where people say you can be good at one without necessarily being good at the other. I was listening to a podcast of 4e D&D and one of the PCs was getting athletics and acrobatics mixed up. Then the DM (also a WotC author) said "No, you can only use athletics if you're jumping, climbing or swimming; tumbling or balance is acrobatics." Which wouldn't have been an issue if they just used 3e skills. Really I think it's to make things simpler during character generation, so you're not overwhelmed with options. And because while they don't necessarily get learned together, they tend to be and condensing makes it simpler to pick them. As for not having enough skill points, I've seen DMs simply give the PCs more skill points. So I don't think that's an issue. In my own system I make ranks cost double since there are a little under half as many skills.

Noodles2375
2010-10-17, 11:54 AM
I tend to prefer condensed skill lists in 3.5. Especially for rogues, as there are so many "archetypal" rogue skills, and even 8+Int per level isn't enough to take all of them.

This is SOOOOOO true.

Rogue's should have a liberal arts education in larceny. They need to be good at all of the archetypal stuff!

Starbuck_II
2010-10-17, 11:54 AM
What Milskidasith said. Also, without condensed skill lists you get silly results, like masters of jumping, tumbling, and climbing who aren't any good at balancing.

I don't mind Jump/Tumble as different: they add Synergies.

Why don't Move silent/hide? Might as well combine them if they don't.

Eldan
2010-10-17, 12:00 PM
The only thing I threw out was appraise. I've never seen that one used, and if it was, I'd use knowledge or profession or craft or just intelligence.

TheDarkOne
2010-10-17, 12:19 PM
Personally, I'm not satisfied with a skill system unless there are at least 50 different choices. How am I supposed to make a character without the ability to pick First Aid, Holistic Medicine, Paramedic, Medical Doctor, and pathology as separate skills? And what if I want to be able to read, but not speak or write a certain language? Or can you imagine if Detect Ambush and Detect Concealment were the same skill? It would be absolutely mad.

Cedrass
2010-10-17, 12:21 PM
Personally, I'm not satisfied with a skill system unless there are at least 50 different choices. How am I supposed to make a character without the ability to pick First Aid, Holistic Medicine, Paramedic, Medical Doctor, and pathology as separate skills? And what if I want to be able to read, but not speak or write a certain language? Or can you imagine if Detect Ambush and Detect Concealment were the same skill? It would be absolutely mad.

...Is... That sarcasm?

drakir_nosslin
2010-10-17, 12:28 PM
Personally, I'm not satisfied with a skill system unless there are at least 50 different choices. How am I supposed to make a character without the ability to pick First Aid, Holistic Medicine, Paramedic, Medical Doctor, and pathology as separate skills? And what if I want to be able to read, but not speak or write a certain language? Or can you imagine if Detect Ambush and Detect Concealment were the same skill? It would be absolutely mad.

Try EVE Online, it's like that, only with more skills...

Toptomcat
2010-10-17, 12:37 PM
...Is... That sarcasm?

Some people really do like skill systems like that, hardcore GURPS-heads chief among them. And they can be fun if you're of the right mindset.

HunterOfJello
2010-10-17, 12:45 PM
People created condensed skill lists because they saw this massive list:

* Appraise (Int)
* Autohypnosis (Wis)
* Balance (Dex)
* Bluff (Cha)
* Climb (Str)
* Concentration (Con)
* Control Shape (Wis)
* Craft (Int)
* Decipher Script (Int)
* Diplomacy (Cha)
* Disable Device (Int)
* Disguise (Cha)
* Escape Artist (Dex)
* Forgery (Int)
* Gather Information (Cha)
* Handle Animal (Cha)
* Heal (Wis)
* Hide (Dex)
* Intimidate (Cha)
* Jump (Str)
* Knowledge (arcana) (Int)
* Knowledge (architecture and engineering) (Int)
* Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int)
* Knowledge (geography) (Int)
* Knowledge (history) (Int)
* Knowledge (local) (Int)
* Knowledge (nature) (Int)
* Knowledge (nobility and royalty) (Int)
* Knowledge (psionics)(Int)
* Knowledge (religion) (Int)
* Knowledge (the planes) (Int)
* Listen (Wis)
* Move Silently (Dex)
* Open Lock (Dex)
* Perform (Cha)
* Psicraft (Int)
* Profession (Wis)
* Ride (Dex)
* Search (Int)
* Sense Motive (Wis)
* Sleight of Hand (Dex)
* Speak Language (none)
* Spellcraft (Int)
* Spot (Wis)
* Survival (Wis)
* Swim (Str)
* Tumble (Dex)
* Use Magic Device (Cha)
* Use Psionic Device (Cha)
* Use Rope (Dex)

(Which actually isn't fully complete!) And had to choose between 2 and 8 skill points into the entire list of choices.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-10-17, 12:48 PM
(Which actually isn't fully complete!)

What is there to add besides Iaijutsu Focus, Martial Lore, and Truespeak?

ericgrau
2010-10-17, 12:55 PM
People created condensed skill lists because they saw this massive list:
...
And had to choose between 2 and 8 skill points into the entire list of choices.

Ha you should have seen how huge the 2e nonweapon proficiency list was. Now pick 3. I think that was intentional so that PCs could be heroically good at a few interesting things, to give characters variation, yet without necessarily needing any skills. Not so they could roll DC 30 checks for everything and be borked if they didn't put max ranks in that skill.

Koury
2010-10-17, 12:56 PM
What is there to add besides Iaijutsu Focus, Martial Lore, and Truespeak?

I'm pretty sure the point still stands. :smallwink:

Mordokai
2010-10-17, 12:57 PM
I remember seeing Innuendo in the 3.0 PHB.

Emmerask
2010-10-17, 01:28 PM
I personally like the role master skills there are about 150 or so? if I want to make a specific action I don´t have to substitute what I want to do with something that is somewhat similar but in actuality has nothing to do with it :smallwink:



Though with d&ds 6 skillpoints on avg / level it doesn´t make sense to have that many skills ^^

Toptomcat
2010-10-17, 01:41 PM
What is there to add besides Iaijutsu Focus, Martial Lore, and Truespeak?

Lucid Dreaming, for one thing.

Glimbur
2010-10-17, 01:58 PM
I remember seeing Innuendo in the 3.0 PHB.

I think you and I were seeing the same thing... :smallwink:

Raum
2010-10-17, 02:05 PM
So why do you use condensed skill lists?If the skill is not important to the game, there's no reason to have it on the character sheet. There's no more point to having a "Driving" skill in most fantasy games than a "Brawling" skill in a game of political intrigue.

dspeyer
2010-10-17, 02:06 PM
Has anyone tried making a hierarchical skill system? Where you can put points in perception and be good at spot, listen, smell, etc. but if you only care about listen, you can put the same number of points into just that and be better at it? It always seemed wrong to me that a ranger couldn't just take knowledge(dragons).

ISTR GURPS has something like this, but it turns into an unmanageable mess.

Engine
2010-10-17, 02:07 PM
Like most of previous poster said:

Too much skills, too few skill points. I really hate Move Silently & Hide, never rolled them separately. Same with Spot & Listen. And probably never had a character with Climb & Swim.

HunterOfJello
2010-10-17, 02:31 PM
What is there to add besides Iaijutsu Focus, Martial Lore, and Truespeak?

Okay lets all of the ones I can think of to the list.


Iaijustsu Focus
Martial Lore
Truespeak
Lucid Dreaming
Control Shape

Craft (alchemy)
Craft (armorsmithing)
Craft (boat building)
Craft (body modification)
Craft (bookbinding)
Craft (bowmaking)
Craft (composing)
Craft (playwright)
Craft (poisonmaking)
Craft (tattoo’ing)
Craft (trapmaking)
Craft (weaponsmithing)
Craft (wordsmithing)

Perform (Acting)
Perform (Comedy)
Perform (Dancing)
Perform (Keyboard Instruments)
Perform (Oratory)
Perform (Percussion Instruments)
Perform (Singing)
Perform (String Instruments)
Perform (Weapon Drill)
Perform (Wind Instruments)

Profession (Apothecary)
Profession (Astrologist)
Profession (Barrister)
Profession (Boater)
Profession (Bookkeeper)
Profession (Brewer)
Profession (Cook)
Profession (Driver)
Profession (Executioner)
Profession (Farmer)
Profession (Fisher )
Profession (Guide)
Profession (Herbalist)
Profession (Herdsman)
Profession (Innkeeper)
Profession (Lumberjack)
Profession (Miller)
Profession (Miner)
Profession (Rancher)
Profession (Sailor)
Profession (Scribe)
Profession (Stablehand)
Profession (Siege Engineer)
Profession (Teamster)
Profession (Woodcutter)



~

3.0 also had


Remote View
Stabilize Self
Read Lips
Innuendo
Intuit Direction
Scry

~



Full List of exactly 100 different skills.

* Appraise (Int)
* Autohypnosis (Wis)
* Balance (Dex)
* Bluff (Cha)
* Climb (Str)
* Concentration (Con)
* Control Shape (Wis)
Craft (alchemy)
Craft (armorsmithing)
Craft (boat building)
Craft (body modification)
Craft (bookbinding)
Craft (bowmaking)
Craft (composing)
Craft (playwright)
Craft (poisonmaking)
Craft (tattoo’ing)
Craft (trapmaking)
Craft (weaponsmithing)
Craft (wordsmithing)
* Craft (Int)
* Decipher Script (Int)
* Diplomacy (Cha)
* Disable Device (Int)
* Disguise (Cha)
* Escape Artist (Dex)
* Forgery (Int)
* Gather Information (Cha)
* Handle Animal (Cha)
* Heal (Wis)
* Hide (Dex)
Iaijustsu Focus
* Intimidate (Cha)
* Jump (Str)
* Knowledge (arcana) (Int)
* Knowledge (architecture and engineering) (Int)
* Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int)
* Knowledge (geography) (Int)
* Knowledge (history) (Int)
* Knowledge (local) (Int)
* Knowledge (nature) (Int)
* Knowledge (nobility and royalty) (Int)
* Knowledge (psionics)(Int)
* Knowledge (religion) (Int)
* Knowledge (the planes) (Int)
* Listen (Wis)
Lucid Dreaming
Martial Lore
* Move Silently (Dex)
* Open Lock (Dex)
Perform (Acting)
Perform (Comedy)
Perform (Dancing)
Perform (Keyboard Instruments)
Perform (Oratory)
Perform (Percussion Instruments)
Perform (Singing)
Perform (String Instruments)
Perform (Weapon Drill)
Perform (Wind Instruments)
* Psicraft (Int)
Profession (Apothecary)
Profession (Astrologist)
Profession (Barrister)
Profession (Boater)
Profession (Bookkeeper)
Profession (Brewer)
Profession (Cook)
Profession (Driver)
Profession (Executioner)
Profession (Farmer)
Profession (Fisher )
Profession (Guide)
Profession (Herbalist)
Profession (Herdsman)
Profession (Innkeeper)
Profession (Lumberjack)
Profession (Miller)
Profession (Miner)
Profession (Rancher)
Profession (Sailor)
Profession (Scribe)
Profession (Stablehand)
Profession (Siege Engineer)
Profession (Teamster)
Profession (Woodcutter)
* Ride (Dex)
* Search (Int)
* Sense Motive (Wis)
* Sleight of Hand (Dex)
* Speak Language (none)
* Spellcraft (Int)
* Spot (Wis)
* Survival (Wis)
* Swim (Str)
Truespeak
* Tumble (Dex)
* Use Magic Device (Cha)
* Use Psionic Device (Cha)
* Use Rope (Dex)


Should I try to dig up some more?

Urpriest
2010-10-17, 02:51 PM
If you're going to include 3.0, PF has Fly.

dspeyer
2010-10-17, 02:51 PM
I've seen Alchemy and Pick Pocket in what were supposed to be 3.5 aggregations, though I suspect they're older skills that someone forgot to update.

The crafts and professions can go on forever, of course. My favorite weird crafts in published sources are Dreamweaving, Flower Arranging and Origami.

VirOath
2010-10-17, 03:32 PM
...Is... That sarcasm?

Yes, it is. He was making a joke at Rift's expense, which has all of the above listed skills as part of the Palladium system. Even Literacy was a separate skill from Speak as i the first book, characters from the Collation States can't read, as books and advanced learning are outlawed to the masses.

Psyren
2010-10-17, 05:42 PM
Synergies.

You do realize that having 10 ranks in Tumble gives you the exact same synergy bonus as having 100, right?

Marillion
2010-10-17, 05:48 PM
Has anyone tried making a hierarchical skill system? Where you can put points in perception and be good at spot, listen, smell, etc. but if you only care about listen, you can put the same number of points into just that and be better at it? It always seemed wrong to me that a ranger couldn't just take knowledge(dragons).

ISTR GURPS has something like this, but it turns into an unmanageable mess.

7th Sea has something like that. A skill gives you access to a subset of "knacks", representing portions of what that skill consists of, and you buy each knack individually. The doctor skill, for example, gives you access to Diagnosis, First Aid, Surgery, Veterinarian, and (my personal favorite:smallbiggrin:) Quack. Likewise, melee weapon skills have Attack and Parry as separate knacks. Athlete is subdivided into Climbing, Footwork, Sprinting, Throwing, Break fall, Leaping, Rolling, and so on. Wrestling has Grapple, Bear Hug, Break, Escape, and Head Butt. Courtier comes with Dancing, Etiquette, Fashion, Oratory, Diplomacy, Cold Read, Sincerity, Mooch, etc. I find it quite entertaining and manageable.

137beth
2010-10-17, 05:50 PM
Forgery is insanely dependent upon DMs, really. And of less than immediately obvious utility unless documentations are a thing.
Most skills are dependent upon the DM, the campaign, or both.


You do realize that having 10 ranks in Tumble gives you the exact same synergy bonus as having 100, right?
You do realize that each additional 20 skill ranks gives another +2, right?

Still, skill rank 85 giving a +10 synergy bonus isn't all that great.

Anyways, I don't like reducing the skill list because I think it limits versatility. However, I am not against giving more skill points, which solves the problem of not having enough SP, but doesn't limit customization as much.

SurlySeraph
2010-10-17, 05:52 PM
Plus, ya know, you can't get above 23 skill ranks normally. So in a game that doesn't involve epic, which most don't, you're going to stay with the +2 Synergy bonus for the entire game.

Knaight
2010-10-17, 06:07 PM
Asking about condensed skill lists assumes a standard, however, as seen, there are a great many standards. As stated beforehand, what needs a skill varies from game to game. Thus, having a skill list tweaked to the game makes perfect sense, particularly in regards to depth. In a political intrigue game, brawling might be a skill, and you might have etiquette, innuendo, phrasing, etc. might all be separate skills. In a game about martial artists, you might have Rapport, or Diplomacy, or even Statecraft, but there will be no "Brawling". That said, you might have several styles of Kung-fu with each having a skill, along with Caipoera, Aikido, etc. Or take a wilderness exploration themed game, Swim and Climb aren't going to be merged into Athletics, Climb might even split into Tree Climbing, Rock Climbing, and Ice Climbing*. A dungeoncrawl is fine with Athletics.

*In the case of something like Cortex, split is a very accurate term. Skills get less broad as you get better at them. You might have guns 4, but you will have pistol 7 (guns 4), though Cortex uses dice and not numbers as skill ranks.

Toptomcat
2010-10-17, 06:17 PM
Has anyone tried making a hierarchical skill system? Where you can put points in perception and be good at spot, listen, smell, etc. but if you only care about listen, you can put the same number of points into just that and be better at it? It always seemed wrong to me that a ranger couldn't just take knowledge(dragons).

ISTR GURPS has something like this, but it turns into an unmanageable mess.

Shadowrun in at least its third and fourth incarnations does something very similar.

And GURPS is not terribly unmanageable, particularly if you're given to using wildcard skills.

Zherog
2010-10-17, 06:28 PM
I've seen Alchemy and Pick Pocket in what were supposed to be 3.5 aggregations, though I suspect they're older skills that someone forgot to update.

Yep, these are both 3.0 skills. Alchemy became Craft (alchemy) and Pick Pocket became Sleight of Hand.

Lhurgyof
2010-10-17, 07:18 PM
This is SOOOOOO true.

Rogue's should have a liberal arts education in larceny. They need to be good at all of the archetypal stuff!

You don't have to max out every skill, though. Spread your points all around. 8+int x 4 doesn't mean "Let me choose 8+int skills and stick with them" (which is what I've seen a lot of people do)


Plus, ya know, you can't get above 23 skill ranks normally. So in a game that doesn't involve epic, which most don't, you're going to stay with the +2 Synergy bonus for the entire game.

IIRC, the epic level handbook says you get another +2 for each 10 it is over 5, so you'd get another synergy at 15.


Okay lets all of the ones I can think of to the list.


Iaijustsu Focus
Martial Lore
Truespeak
Lucid Dreaming
Control Shape

Should I try to dig up some more?

Where's Lucid Dreaming/Martial lore, and what do they do?

Koury
2010-10-17, 07:34 PM
You don't have to max out every skill, though. Spread your points all around. 8+int x 4 doesn't mean "Let me choose 8+int skills and stick with them" (which is what I've seen a lot of people do) Well, you do if you want to be good at them, most of the time. There are exceptions (5 ranks of Balance, able to hit DC 15 or 25 Tumble checks), but they're just that, exceptions.


Where's Lucid Dreaming/Martial lore, and what do they do?

Don't know about Lucid Dreaming, but Martial Lore is Spellcraft for maneuvers, basically.

Zeofar
2010-10-17, 07:34 PM
Certain skills should be combined, like Move Silently and Hide. While I don't agree that Listen and Spot should be combined, that gets troublesome if you have something like Stealth, because it becomes difficult to say when each skill triggers, and puts the stealth guy at a disadvantage if both do. Most skills, though, should be separate. Having Jump, Climb, and Swim as the same skill is absolutely laughable and really challenges the verisimilitude of the game in some ways. Arguably, Intimidate and Diplomacy could be made the same skill, but it depends on the viewpoint of the DM and the players.

I like condensed skills because sometimes it makes sense. I dislike them because they often go too far. When I'm thinking up a character, I don't necessarily want them to be good at everything just because they're good at one thing. What if I wanted a Rogue who was an expert pocket-picker, but couldn't open a lock if he dared try? Sure, you could say, "Never try," but if he did, he would be good at it under 4e rules. Applying a self-inflicted penalty seems dumb, especially considering I don't get any benefit from it, but payed as much for it as the next guy.

I really like the suggestion of Hierarchal skills in here... I'm going to look into that.

HunterOfJello
2010-10-17, 07:35 PM
Where's Lucid Dreaming/Martial lore, and what do they do?

Martial Lore is featured in Tome of Battle. It's used to identify the maneuvers that another character has used. If you succeed at a very high DC, then you can determine ALL of the maneuvers that the character knows.

Lucid Dreaming is from Manual of the Planes and allows you to do stuff while asleep. You use the skill to come to the realization that you're dreaming, consciously control dream elements around yourself or move around to other dreamscapes. You can also do some things to manipulate others in the dreamscape. (It all has to do with entering a plane of dreams while you're alseep or something.)

~

The only other time anyone would really use Martial Lore is to create a new maneuver or to use a Martial Script. Both cases are very rare and I'd be surprised if 1 in 1000 groups ever made use of the skill.

Psyren
2010-10-17, 07:39 PM
You do realize that each additional 20 skill ranks gives another +2, right?

Oh joy, that certainly makes sense. So if I have 24 ranks in tumble and no ranks in Jump, I jump exactly as well as someone with 5 ranks in tumble and no ranks in Jump. The system works! :smallsigh:

Duke of URL
2010-10-17, 07:41 PM
I like the richness of the skill system. The problem isn't the number of skills, it's how skills are acquired. And simply adding skill points doesn't fix the problem.

4e and Pathfinder are on the right track in this regard, but they're a bit too simplistic (plus, both condense skill lists despite this). That's why I came up with my focused/familiar/foreign system (I'd add a link to the homebrew forum, but I'm doing this from my phone - it's also included in Boundless Horizons, see signature links) - it provides a class-based mechanism for maintaining specialization without the problems of the 3.x skill system.

Edit: here's the homebrew link (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81778) I mentioned. Use the "variant" method listed, as that wound up being much more workable.

137beth
2010-10-17, 08:30 PM
Plus, ya know, you can't get above 23 skill ranks normally. So in a game that doesn't involve epic, which most don't, you're going to stay with the +2 Synergy bonus for the entire game.

Yea, the post I quoted mentioned skill rank 100, hence I assumed a (very high) epic campaign. I don't think I've ever met anyone who's played to level 97, but apparently that is a consideration if someone is talking about 100 skill ranks in a skill.

{Scrubbed}

Psyren
2010-10-17, 09:52 PM
{Scrub the original, scrub the quote}

You admit the system is flawed, yet you are pointlessly defending it. Followed by a snappy retort about my reading comprehension. And all due to a reply that wasn't even directed at you.

Yeah, I think I'll go ahead and ignore you now.

Aran Banks
2010-10-17, 09:59 PM
well, the list IS missing all the different types of craft and perform.

That'd add 35-45% more to the list.

nevermind. I don't know how to read multi-page threads, obviously :P

Aotrs Commander
2010-10-18, 08:23 AM
Personally, I'm not satisfied with a skill system unless there are at least 50 different choices. How am I supposed to make a character without the ability to pick First Aid, Holistic Medicine, Paramedic, Medical Doctor, and pathology as separate skills? And what if I want to be able to read, but not speak or write a certain language? Or can you imagine if Detect Ambush and Detect Concealment were the same skill? It would be absolutely mad.

Rolemaster actually has far more skills than that (at least 2nd edition did), which include basically everything, including such Tax Evasion and Midwifery.

No, I'm actually dead serious. Tax Evasion. As a skill. Space Master Companion 1.

And yet, even they only have Perception and Stalk/Hide as one skill each.



I use a few on the condensed skills nowadays (mostly Spot/Listen and Move Silently/Hide as Perception and Stealth) because I found you nearly always used those skills by pairs anyway. Making it one roll does at least mean the PCs only get one chance to frag it up, and I only get one chance to crit. (Or vise-versa). It removes another set of unecessary dice rolls. When I do this, I just call for spot Perception or listen Perception as required (or perhaps smell or touch Prcepion if needed) or if there's circumstantial bonuses (e.g. racial bonuses).

Quietus
2010-10-18, 09:52 AM
I use a few on the condensed skills nowadays (mostly Spot/Listen and Move Silently/Hide as Perception and Stealth) because I found you nearly always used those skills by pairs anyway. Making it one roll does at least mean the PCs only get one chance to frag it up, and I only get one chance to crit. (Or vise-versa). It removes another set of unecessary dice rolls. When I do this, I just call for spot Perception or listen Perception as required (or perhaps smell or touch Prcepion if needed) or if there's circumstantial bonuses (e.g. racial bonuses).


This is the biggest one, in my opinion - folding skills together where several get used at the same time speeds up play, by reducing the number of dice rolled and numbers compared. It's also handy to fold rarely used skills together - If two skills are similar, or at least related, but are almost never used, putting them into one skill can make them more attractive. This happened with quite a few skills in 3.0->3.5, and often to the improvement of the system.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-10-18, 10:02 AM
There's no such thing as a "condensed" skill list; there are only longer and shorter ones.

Remember that "skills" in any game are arbitrary categories to represent certain bundles of actions that - IRL - may not be related. For example, the act of persuading someone can be done through a variety of activities: intimidation, reasoning, charming, lying, and bribery to name a few. At best you could say these activities are generally related, but even then it is easy to make arguments for any subset of the group to be bundled in a particular fashion.

In terms of efficient game design, you should only introduce new categories of skills when there is an important in-game reason to do so. For example, if your game focuses heavily on social interaction you will want to have a wide variety of social skills to provide greater granularity to the conflict which is going to take up most of your game. On the other hand, if your game is principally about physical combat you probably don't need to have many skill categories (if any) in regards to the less relevant sphere of social conflict.

Duke of URL
2010-10-18, 10:09 AM
There's no such thing as a "condensed" skill list; there are only longer and shorter ones.

I believe the description is used relative to the default 3.5 skill system. If you were starting from scratch, your point is 100% correct, but using 3.5 as a reference standard, consolidating or condensing skills is an accurate way of describing rule variants.

ShaggyMarco
2010-10-18, 10:16 AM
I really liked the way Iron Heroes did this: They put 3-5 skills into groups, and each class had certain "class skill groups." When you put 1 point into the "Athletic Skill Group" you got a skill point in climb, swim, and endurance (maybe?). All other skills could be bought 1 point=1 rank individually.

So I COULD have a character who is good at spotting stuff, but not so good at listening, but I could also have a character who focuses on being perceptive pretty easily, making my skill points go farther, and giving you a pretty simple way to know that most (if not all) of your skills in a group would be coming at about the same bonus.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-10-18, 10:47 AM
I believe the description is used relative to the default 3.5 skill system. If you were starting from scratch, your point is 100% correct, but using 3.5 as a reference standard, consolidating or condensing skills is an accurate way of describing rule variants.
Well, that is where the OP could be coming from (he could be using AD&D, though :smallwink:) but my post was made to highlight a fallacy with that thought - the idea of a "default" skill list.

The actual 3.X skill list is - as anyone can see - about as arbitrary as they come. There is no more reason to separate "spot" and "listen" than there is to condense charm and rhetoric into "diplomacy." While it is true that - say, 4E - has a shorter skill list, referring to it as "condensed" is a much a misnomer as saying that the 3.X skill list is a condensed version of the AD&D NWP / Thieves' Skill list.

To deal with the concept of "Skill Lists" in general, and the appropriate breadth or depth of one specifically, you need to first accept that there is no "default" skill list that provides guidance; then you can consider methodologies for constructing one, including which "skills" to combine and which to separate.

EDIT: To respond to the OP's question more specifically - I "condense" the skill system to provide clarity to my Players (e.g. "I'm looking for something so I'll roll Perception" instead of "I'm looking for something - is that Spot or Search?") and to speed up gameplay and leveling. As far as Heroic Fantasy goes, I'd say the 4E Skill List does about as good a job as I've seen are providing a list of skills appropriate for that genre.

lsfreak
2010-10-18, 11:13 AM
Because you get ridiculously low skill points per level, and there's a high amount of skills. Both need addressing.

If you're going to have the rather high number of skills in 3.5e, skills/level needs raised across the board. There's also a lot of arbitrary muddling together of skills in 3.5, like putting feinting in combat and lying about your status as a noble under the same skill, while separating out breaking a lock from breaking a wagon wheel. This naturally leads to people condensing the given skill list down further to more abstracted ideas.

Personally, I prefer a rather long skill list, with a high number of skills per level and one of several methods of increasing synergies.

Coidzor
2010-10-18, 02:49 PM
Most skills are dependent upon the DM, the campaign, or both.

Hence why I added the qualifier, "insanely." :smallwink:


While it is true that - say, 4E - has a shorter skill list, referring to it as "condensed" is a much a misnomer as saying that the 3.X skill list is a condensed version of the AD&D NWP / Thieves' Skill list.


I dunno, it certainly could be said that it seems like they took the older list and started trimming things off of it to suit their purposes.

TaliaJacta
2010-10-18, 03:08 PM
I don't really have anything to add to the argument, but I would like to chime in that I have used Move Silently without using Hide, in order to move across the campsite without waking up the other PCs. I have also used Hide without Move Silently, when trying to make my way down a busy street without being noticed by the city guards.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-10-18, 03:22 PM
I dunno, it certainly could be said that it seems like they took the older list and started trimming things off of it to suit their purposes.
And I could say the same thing in regard to the 2E to 3E transition :smallwink:

The point here is that "condensing" lists is functionally indistinguishable from writing a new one - you're grouping together various activities considered "important" for a game system. It should be unsurprising to find similarities in the skill lists of games set in the same genre.

However, the implication that there is a "default" skill list and that others are "modifications" of it can result in unwarranted deference being given to whatever is labeled as the "default" skill list. We should not be asking "why did they combine Move Silently and Hide" but rather "what sort of distinct stealth-related skills are appropriate for a Heroic Fantasy game?"

Starbuck_II
2010-10-18, 03:24 PM
I don't really have anything to add to the argument, but I would like to chime in that I have used Move Silently without using Hide, in order to move across the campsite without waking up the other PCs. I have also used Hide without Move Silently, when trying to make my way down a busy street without being noticed by the city guards.

In the first situation, you were safe since they were asleep (big penalties).

Second situation, Guards should have been able to hear you if you didn't roll.

TaliaJacta
2010-10-18, 05:15 PM
In the first situation, you were safe since they were asleep (big penalties).

Second situation, Guards should have been able to hear you if you didn't roll.

1. Big penalties, but not so high as to make it impossible. (As evidenced by the fact that I failed that Move Silently check.)

2. The objective wasn't to keep the guards from hearing us. It was a busy street; none of the sounds we were making were very unusual. The objective was to stop them from seeing us: a Hide check.

Susano-wo
2010-10-18, 06:19 PM
1. Big penalties, but not so high as to make it impossible. (As evidenced by the fact that I failed that Move Silently check.)

2. The objective wasn't to keep the guards from hearing us. It was a busy street; none of the sounds we were making were very unusual. The objective was to stop them from seeing us: a Hide check.

Personally, I love condensed skills mostly because it breaks my brain to have to buy some skills seperately. I can see the difference in spot/listen, though I'd rather not worry about it, and use flaws or traits to create someone who specialized in one or the other.

But Hide and Move Silently? Yes, its possible to use one and not the other. It is also *possible* that one could be good at one but not the other. BUt realisitically, conceptiually, its such a corner case, that it should be the exception. IN 3.5 its almost the rule.

Also silly: open lock/disable device. You know its silly when, by the time of the Rules Compendium, they are suggesting that you might want to not use open lock. >.> (And yes, you can be the greatest lockpick in all of Cairo, but not know how to disarm a trap, but that can much more smoothly be handled via traits and flaws.)

137beth
2010-10-18, 06:28 PM
You admit the system is flawed, yet you are pointlessly defending it. Followed by a snappy retort about my reading comprehension. And all due to a reply that wasn't even directed at you.

Yeah, I think I'll go ahead and ignore you now.

I'm confused, it wasn't directed at me but you quoted me on it? In general, if someone quotes my post and then writes a responds immediately under the quote, I assume they are responding to the quote, especially if it is on the same topic. The "snappy remark about your reading comprehension" is simply stating that you took my quote OUT OF CONTEXT, which changes the meaning. You quoted just the part in which I made a small correction that wasn't even directed at you and sarcastically said that the system worked. Also, I'd like it if you could point out where I "pointlessly defend" the system. I looked back through the thread and I couldn't find it. Everything I wrote in this thread involved saying that the core skill system doesn't work. Now, it could just be that I am missing something, so please, if I am, tell me:smallwink:


Hence why I added the qualifier, "insanely." :smallwink:



:smallsmile: True! Definitely more insanely dependent on DM than, say, swim.

ranagrande
2010-10-18, 11:23 PM
I have recently devised my own method for awarding skill points, and I'd like to see what people think of it.

At each level, characters receive normal skill points as determined by their class. There are no penalties or bonuses to this number from a character's Intelligence score.

However, they then also receive specialized skill points equal to every positive ability score modifier they possess (based on unmodified ability scores, so natural + inherent only).

A character receives points equal to his strength modifier (if positive) to spend on strength-based skills like climb, jump, swim, etc.

A character receives points equal to his dexterity modifier (if positive) to spend on dexterity-based skills like hide, tumble, sleight of hand, etc.

A character receives points equal to his constitution modifier (if positive) to spend on constitution-based skills like concentration. I think that's actually the only con-based skill. Any unused skill points would be lost.

A character receives points equal to his intelligence modifier (if positive) to spend on intelligence-based skills like craft, knowledge, search, etc.

A character receives points equal to his wisdom modifier (if positive) to spend on wisdom-based skills like heal, listen, profession, etc.

A character receives points equal to his charisma modifier (if positive) to spend on charisma-based skills like diplomacy, perform, use magic device, etc.

The current class's skill list would still be used for determining class and cross-class skills for all of these extra points.

herrhauptmann
2010-10-19, 12:16 AM
You do realize that each additional 20 skill ranks gives another +2, right?


Didn't know that, is it in the epic handbook somewhere?

If I'm running a game where I know the players are going to spread their skills out, I'll add a houserule that 10 ranks gives a +4 synergy skills, and 15 gives a +6. It's intended as a carrot for the players to really specialize.
If the game is with a lot of inexperienced players, ones who spread their skills all over the place, I'll add additional synergies, but keep them at a +2 bonus, and probably consolidate a few skills. This way, the dwarf fighter with max ranks in bluff doesn't feel like he wasted all those points.

Serpentine
2010-10-19, 12:56 AM
Yeah, I'm seriously considering installing that houserule, too. And I'm also considering some shifting of points around to still leave room for the more specific skill arrangements, possibly just in the form of traits (e.g. gaining a penalty to vision-based perception checks in exchange for a bonus to one or more other sense-based perception checks).

Coidzor
2010-10-19, 01:12 AM
I have recently devised my own method for awarding skill points, and I'd like to see what people think of it.

At each level, characters receive normal skill points as determined by their class. There are no penalties or bonuses to this number from a character's Intelligence score.

However, they then also receive specialized skill points equal to every positive ability score modifier they possess (based on unmodified ability scores, so natural + inherent only).

A character receives points equal to his strength modifier (if positive) to spend on strength-based skills like climb, jump, swim, etc.

A character receives points equal to his dexterity modifier (if positive) to spend on dexterity-based skills like hide, tumble, sleight of hand, etc.

A character receives points equal to his constitution modifier (if positive) to spend on constitution-based skills like concentration. I think that's actually the only con-based skill. Any unused skill points would be lost.

A character receives points equal to his intelligence modifier (if positive) to spend on intelligence-based skills like craft, knowledge, search, etc.

A character receives points equal to his wisdom modifier (if positive) to spend on wisdom-based skills like heal, listen, profession, etc.

A character receives points equal to his charisma modifier (if positive) to spend on charisma-based skills like diplomacy, perform, use magic device, etc.

The current class's skill list would still be used for determining class and cross-class skills for all of these extra points.

Interesting. I think I'll try this out sometime.

Caphi
2010-10-19, 01:56 AM
I have recently devised my own method for awarding skill points, and I'd like to see what people think of it.

...

The current class's skill list would still be used for determining class and cross-class skills for all of these extra points.

Why? Strength already contributes to strength-based skills, it's right there in the modifier. This just penalizes physical classes (all those heavy fighters and paladins with huge armor penalties to Athletics skills?), makes wizards by an even wider margin the best class in the game by letting them cap INT knowledge skills for free, adds irrelevant extra work to a levelling system already considered by some needlessly complex, and is redundant against the existing d20+ability+ranks framework.

Toptomcat
2010-10-19, 02:18 AM
Didn't know that, is it in the epic handbook somewhere?

If I'm running a game where I know the players are going to spread their skills out, I'll add a houserule that 10 ranks gives a +4 synergy skills, and 15 gives a +6. It's intended as a carrot for the players to really specialize.
If the game is with a lot of inexperienced players, ones who spread their skills all over the place, I'll add additional synergies, but keep them at a +2 bonus, and probably consolidate a few skills. This way, the dwarf fighter with max ranks in bluff doesn't feel like he wasted all those points.

Oh, the diplomonsters that would result from this houserule. You can already get a +6 synergy bonus to Diplomacy...expanding that to +12 or +18 would be O_o.
Good general idea, though.

ranagrande
2010-10-19, 02:21 AM
Why? Strength already contributes to strength-based skills, it's right there in the modifier. This just penalizes physical classes (all those heavy fighters and paladins with huge armor penalties to Athletics skills?), makes wizards by an even wider margin the best class in the game by letting them cap INT knowledge skills for free, adds irrelevant extra work to a levelling system already considered by some needlessly complex, and is redundant against the existing d20+ability+ranks framework.

I don't see where any of your objections come from. This is a boost to physical classes, as now they'll have free ranks in those skills in addition to the modifier to help counteract those armor check penalties.

Wizards benefit the least from this change, since their key ability score was already added into skill ranks anyway. This helps to equalize the playing field, at least for skills.

Like most house rules, this certainly isn't for everyone. However, one of the concerns that has been mentioned repeatedly in this thread is the low number of skill points characters get at each level. This helps alleviate that.

Besides, I never really liked the default class number + int mod skill points. Perhaps the stereotypical big dumb fighter puts his one skill point at each level into Intimidate. If only he were a little smarter, he might get better at jumping too! Yeah, it doesn't make sense. Many things in the system don't, but this is one that I decided to change.

Serpentine
2010-10-19, 02:52 AM
It's an interesting sensation, feeling oneself becoming convinced...

Could you give us a numerical comparison between the two systems?

ranagrande
2010-10-19, 04:43 AM
It's an interesting sensation, feeling oneself becoming convinced...

Could you give us a numerical comparison between the two systems?

I'd be happy to.

For demonstration purposes, I will use 28-point buy humans.

For a Fighter, I would probably go with 16 str, 14 dex, 14 con, 14 int, 8 wis, 8 cha.

Under the normal rules, that character would get 5 skill points at each level: 2 for being a fighter, 1 for being human, and 2 from the intelligence bonus.

Using my system, that same character would get 12 skills points at level: 2 for being a fighter and 1 for being human that can used for anything, 3 that can be used for any str-based skills, 2 that can be used for any dex-based skills, 2 that can be used for any con-based skills (although Concentration is the only one I know of, so skill points are likely to be wasted here), and 2 that can be used for any int-based skills.

On the other hand, for a human Wizard, I would go with something like 8 str, 10 dex, 16 con, 18 int, 8 wis, 8 cha.

Under the normal rules, that character would get 7 skill points at each level: 2 for being a wizard, 1 for being human, and 4 from the intelligence bonus.

Using my system, that same character would get 10 skill points at each level: 2 for being a wizard and 1 for being human that can be used for anything, 3 that can be used for any con-based skills (although Concentration is the only one I know of, so skill points are likely to be wasted here), and 4 that can be used for any int-based skills.

One possible criticism that I do see is that it could take away some of the power of skill-based classes like bards and rogues, but I don't really see that being much of an issue. The real advantage for those classes are their skill lists, so they'll still be getting many more options at full value where others have mainly cross-class skills. Besides, they'll still be ahead, but it will be by more like 18-12 than 10-4.

Godless_Paladin
2010-10-19, 04:47 AM
I've seen this in many games, people condensing hide and move silently into stealth, or jump and tumble into acrobatics, or climb and swim into athletics.

So why do you use (or not use) condensed skill lists?

Condensed skill lists is a good way to expand the conceptual versatility of character building, and help players to add flavorful touches to their characters other than "Ok, I'm a cleric with 2 skill points, I have Spellcraft and Concentration." It also helps to balance out the skills that simply aren't worth as much as others.

That said, I'm not really satisfied with the way Pathfinder went about it.

Aotrs Commander
2010-10-19, 08:10 AM
Didn't know that, is it in the epic handbook somewhere?

If I'm running a game where I know the players are going to spread their skills out, I'll add a houserule that 10 ranks gives a +4 synergy skills, and 15 gives a +6. It's intended as a carrot for the players to really specialize.
If the game is with a lot of inexperienced players, ones who spread their skills all over the place, I'll add additional synergies, but keep them at a +2 bonus, and probably consolidate a few skills. This way, the dwarf fighter with max ranks in bluff doesn't feel like he wasted all those points.

The Rules Compendium already has Expert Assistance, which means if you have five or more ranks in a skills, the bonus you add is not +2 but instead 1+check result/10. (We had one party where everyone took 5 ranks of survival for just this purpose. With the six of us, we could actually break about 50 on the Survival check, if got a bit above average rolls (at about level 9-10 or so). And, for once, the adventure actually called for it. We made the DM cry one time when we were in a frozen region and needed survival checks to not suffer from the cold. So, we shrugged and just built an ice-mansion.


That said, I'm not really satisfied with the way Pathfinder went about it.

Yeah, I'm not conviced by some of those either. Spot+Listen => Perception, I can understand - maaaybe even search ('cos really, when Rolemaster has less skills than you on that score...) Concentration into, spellcraft was it? Less so.

Godless_Paladin
2010-10-19, 09:14 AM
Yeah, I'm not conviced by some of those either. Spot+Listen => Perception, I can understand - maaaybe even search ('cos really, when Rolemaster has less skills than you on that score...) Concentration into, spellcraft was it? Less so.

Of course, as you probably already know, Commander, I have my own revised skill system that I've been using for quite some time.


I have recently devised my own method for awarding skill points, and I'd like to see what people think of it.

At each level, characters receive normal skill points as determined by their class. There are no penalties or bonuses to this number from a character's Intelligence score.

However, they then also receive specialized skill points equal to every positive ability score modifier they possess (based on unmodified ability scores, so natural + inherent only).

A character receives points equal to his strength modifier (if positive) to spend on strength-based skills like climb, jump, swim, etc.

A character receives points equal to his dexterity modifier (if positive) to spend on dexterity-based skills like hide, tumble, sleight of hand, etc.

A character receives points equal to his constitution modifier (if positive) to spend on constitution-based skills like concentration. I think that's actually the only con-based skill. Any unused skill points would be lost.

A character receives points equal to his intelligence modifier (if positive) to spend on intelligence-based skills like craft, knowledge, search, etc.

A character receives points equal to his wisdom modifier (if positive) to spend on wisdom-based skills like heal, listen, profession, etc.

A character receives points equal to his charisma modifier (if positive) to spend on charisma-based skills like diplomacy, perform, use magic device, etc.

The current class's skill list would still be used for determining class and cross-class skills for all of these extra points.

That's a different take, I suppose. However, if Intelligence no longer gives out skill points in the general sense, how do you avoid it falling into the same dump as Charisma?


Why? Strength already contributes to strength-based skills, it's right there in the modifier. This just penalizes physical classes (all those heavy fighters and paladins with huge armor penalties to Athletics skills?), makes wizards by an even wider margin the best class in the game by letting them cap INT knowledge skills for free, adds irrelevant extra work to a levelling system already considered by some needlessly complex, and is redundant against the existing d20+ability+ranks framework.

No. A more accurate description of what happens would be that this system boosts people who are NOT int-based, increases skill specialization by attribute, makes character abilities telegraph more, rewards MAD players (that is to say, if you spent your 32 points to get 14s in everything, you have more skill points than people who got an 18 somewhere, so basically melee clerics are happy), and has a conspicuous blind spot regarding ability score penalties. It also raises some questions about cross class skills.

The wizard is gaining little from this as far as "capping knowledge skills for free." Note the way Int has had its skill-contributing abilities nerfed.

lsfreak
2010-10-19, 09:22 AM
That's an interesting take. However, if Intelligence no longer gives out skill points in the general sense, how do you avoid it falling into the same dump as Charisma?

I doubt it would change that much. Many melee still want 13+Int thanks to needing Combat Expertise for one thing or another, Int-based casters still want it, and skillmonkies generally have a lot of Int-based skills that they'd benefit from having a high Int. The people who are going to dump it are the people who already would have dumped it (non-tripper melee, Cha-casters), the really MAD classes (paladin, monk), and possibly divine casters.

137beth
2010-10-20, 07:03 AM
Didn't know that, is it in the epic handbook somewhere?

If I'm running a game where I know the players are going to spread their skills out, I'll add a houserule that 10 ranks gives a +4 synergy skills, and 15 gives a +6. It's intended as a carrot for the players to really specialize.
If the game is with a lot of inexperienced players, ones who spread their skills all over the place, I'll add additional synergies, but keep them at a +2 bonus, and probably consolidate a few skills. This way, the dwarf fighter with max ranks in bluff doesn't feel like he wasted all those points.

Yes, its in the epic handbook. Unfortunately a +2 bonus for 20 ranks isn't big enough.