PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Houseruling the skill-list. PEACH.



PetterTomBos
2013-01-08, 06:33 AM
I'm tired of the 3.5 skill-list. I find it hard to use in play, especially when I need to make up on-the-fly DC's . I'm not sure if I want to copy-paste the PF-list either, so I decided to make my own character sheets! :)

Current houserules: no class-skills, the Giants take on diplomacy.

Heres what I'm thinking:

Firstly, a concept of half-skills. A half-skill is a skill so "one trick pony" that it isn't worth the full rank-investment of a regular skill. A half-skill comes at half cost, yet is restricted in some way. Typically, a gem-dealer could have appraise(gems), or a fighter that hates to kick down doors could have disable device(locks). The specifics of what is a "one trick pny" is up to DM and campaign.

Some changed/new skills:

Athletics - Str. Combines Jump, swim and climb. Use this skill to do athletics, like jumping over a gorge, or swing on a chandelier.
Stealth - Dex. Move unseen, against perception. The perceptor gets a bonus to his check, where +0 is full cover, +10 is running between covers with the spotter not having his attention at you, +20 is an unaware guard, watching all around him (not full focus on your spot).
Perception - Wiz. Combines spot and listen.
Knowledge(Structures) -int. Combines arch/engineering and dungeoneering.
Disable Device - dex. Incorporates open lock.
Linguistics - int. Combines deceipher script and forgery.
Profession - wis. Combines with craft. It let's you do what an experienced sailor/farmer/bowmaker/etc. would.

The rest are unchanged.

Table-ifying how I've used "almost relevant"-skills.

Some times a skill doesn't fully fit to what you're using it to. Then you may still try it, with a penalty. The result can be crippled as well, for example only remembering the old customs of the ambassador, instead of the current ones (know(history) vs. know(local)).

{table=head] How close is it? | Modifier.
Just fine. (The examples in the PHB, the first skill I call in an unusual situation. | 0 |
Almost fine. Know(Arcana) instead of spellcraft on an old, mystical spell effect. | -2. |
Related. Athletics to walk a tightrope (fleet of foot) | -5. No reflex save to catch the edge. |
Not right. Diplomacy to avoid people in the city (stealth). | -10. They'll wonder why you didn't meet them. |
Long Shot. Knowledge(History) to remember old stories of rifts, to find out where the rifts most likely are (know(the planes)). | -15 or more. You may find a number of more likely places. |
[/table]

I'll use this table as a tool to keep in mind only, not as a strait-jacket.

I have never used the synergies in 3.5, they've just seemed weird. I'm not going to use them. Instead: theres critical and additional synergy. In critical you roll the highest of the skills, in additional you roll the lowest. (This is what I've been doing at the table for some time).

This leads to fewer skills to put ranks in, should I lower the number of ranks/lvl. as a result? Or do something about the int-bonus to skills? Any ideas?

Please critize heartily :)

Deepbluediver
2013-01-08, 10:35 AM
I agree that some of the skills are drastically more powerful or versatile than the others, but many of the half-skills you listed are ones that get used by everyone and get used quite often.

For example, only the party rogue is probably picking locks, and the party bard is making diplomacy checks. But everyone in the party might need to make multiple jump/climb/swim/balance checks to get through a dungeon, and the whole group gets spot/listen/perception checks every time there's a chance to notice stuff. In other words, you get a lot more chances to make use of the lesser skills.
This doesn't mean that the "half-skills" are a bad idea; it's just something to keep in mind.

IMO, you should NOT reduce the number of ranks players get for skills. Most of the uses of skills are not gamebreaking (barring a diplomancer build that abuses the Core RAW), and giving players more just makes them happy while giving them less makes them struggle.
If anything, I'd put a lower limit on the Intelligence modifer to skills at -0, so that a class could never get fewer skill ranks per level than where listed in the description.

If you don't like eyeballing DCs and making stuff up on the fly, I might take out the "Almost Fine" and "Not Right" levels of modification. When you break things down too minutely that's what leads to DMs needing to make a judgment call about something. Having levels of modification that are more simplified like "Perfect", "Maybe", and "Hardly at All" would be more distinct.


"Wisdom" is spelled with an "S". I keep seeing "wiz." and thinking "wizard".

nonsi
2013-01-08, 11:32 AM
Good call on Profession. Thought about it a while back, but it somehow slipped my mind.

Regarding Linguistics - did just that in my codex (with comprehensive rules).

Disable Device encompassing Open Locks is quite intuitive and a lot of DMs make that rule (myself - I view locks as intricate devices, so it's ok to up the DCs by 5 - burglars optimize, so shouldn't be a problem).

As for the rest - I vote against.

PetterTomBos
2013-01-08, 03:00 PM
I agree that some of the skills are drastically more powerful or versatile than the others, but many of the half-skills you listed are ones that get used by everyone and get used quite often.

If you don't like eyeballing DCs and making stuff up on the fly, I might take out the "Almost Fine" and "Not Right" levels of modification. When you break things down too minutely that's what leads to DMs needing to make a judgment call about something. Having levels of modification that are more simplified like "Perfect", "Maybe", and "Hardly at All" would be more distinct.

"Wisdom" is spelled with an "S". I keep seeing "wiz." and thinking "wizard".

Some formatting issues there, they were not ment to be half-skills. Fix'd.

I like eyeballing stuff, that's why I want to change the physical skills, as setting a DC on swinging from a chandelier or directing a fall can be really hard.

Thankies, typo fixed.



Regarding Linguistics - did just that in my codex (with comprehensive rules).

Disable Device encompassing Open Locks is quite intuitive and a lot of DMs make that rule (myself - I view locks as intricate devices, so it's ok to up the DCs by 5 - burglars optimize, so shouldn't be a problem).

As for the rest - I vote against.

My apologies if I should have seen the codex, could I see those rules ? :)

About opening locks: I viewed some elementary lockpicking vids at youtube once, and started fiddling with the idea of making "extra lock securities" based on the different problems that could arise. Perhaps I'll look into it when I'm done with this.

Hmm, could you elaborate on the vote against? Heres my reasoning:

Know(Structures) - I have a hard time urging my PC's to chosse know(arch or dungeoneering). They seem sort of situational, and where one is useful the other isnt.

Atheltics/fleet of foot. Not completely satisfied with this. I really, really want to make a new "general physical athletics" - skill. That's a main part of why I'm doing this, as theres quite a few scenarios where I'd ike to eyeball a DC, but can't find the skill. I don't like the divide, yet feel like athletics should be str, and that the most dexy parts of balance/tumble should be kept dex. Perhaps keep expand balance a litte, and remake tumble as some sort of "The dance of battle"-skill?

Perception and Stealth. I don't like the entire "roll for move silently"-regime today. Roll move silently as long as you're not in cover, then switch to hide? It feels weird to have this chasm in skill-uses depending upon the height of the wall to hide behind. Still, It'd be nice to keep sneakiness as two skills.

I get that skills arent overpowered, and having more is not a bad thing. Still feels weird if/when everyone has a lot of everything (everyone in the party has the sight of an eagle?). Agree on the max -0-thing. One thing that I've been toying with is to let int give you some skills where you get a fixed bonus, instead of skillpoints, or something. It feels weird when we're all whimsy masterminds because of the skillpoints.

nonsi
2013-01-08, 03:25 PM
My apologies if I should have seen the codex, could I see those rules ? :)


Click "3.N – Codex Gigas" in my sig.

As for the rest... maybe tomorrow.
Too tired right now.

Pegtor
2013-01-08, 06:00 PM
I'm tired of the 3.5 skill-list. I find it hard to use in play, especially when I need to make up on-the-fly DC's . I'm not sure if I want to copy-paste the PF-list either, so I decided to make my own character sheets! :)

Current houserules: no class-skills, the Giants take on diplomacy.

Heres what I'm thinking:

Firstly, a concept of half-skills. A half-skill is a skill so "one trick pony" that it isn't worth the full rank-investment of a regular skill. A half-skill comes at half cost. Svim/Climb is half-skills by default, other skills may be restricted (Appraise only on gems for example. Most profession-skills would be half-skills.), the details on restrictions depends on the campaign.

Some changed/new skills:

Athletics - Str. Combines Jump, and some places where I'd put the check on tumble/balance before. Use this skill to do athletics, like jumping over a gorge, or swing on a chandelier.
Fleet of foot - Dex. The rest of balance and tumble, contains all the AOO-parts of tumble. Use this skill to navigate combat unhindered, or keep on your feet in a greased area.
Stealth - Dex. Move unseen, against perception. The perceptor gets a bonus to his check, where +0 is full cover, +10 is running between covers with the spotter not having his attention at you, +20 is an unaware guard, watching all around him (not full focus on your spot).
Perception - Wiz. Combines spot and listen.
Knowledge(Structures) -int. Combines arch/engineering and dungeoneering.
Disable Device - dex. Incorporates open lock.
Linguistics - int. Combines deceipher script and forgery.
Profession - wis. Combines with craft. It let's you do what an experienced sailor/farmer/bowmaker/etc. would.

The rest are unchanged.

Table-ifying how I've used "almost relevant"-skills.

Some times a skill doesn't fully fit to what you're using it to. Then you may still try it, with a penalty. The result can be crippled as well, for example only remembering the old customs of the ambassador, instead of the current ones (know(history) vs. know(local)).

{table=head] How close is it? | Modifier.
Just fine. (The examples in the PHB, the first skill I call in an unusual situation. | 0 |
Almost fine. Know(Arcana) instead of spellcraft on an old, mystical spell effect. | -2. |
Related. Athletics to walk a tightrope (fleet of foot) | -5. No reflex save to catch the edge. |
Not right. Diplomacy to avoid people in the city (stealth). | -10. They'll wonder why you didn't meet them. |
Long Shot. Knowledge(History) to remember old stories of rifts, to find out where the rifts most likely are (know(the planes)). | -15 or more. You may find a number of more likely places. |
[/table]

I have never used the synergies in 3.5, they've just seemed weird. I'm not going to use them. Instead: theres critical and additional synergy. In critical you roll the highest of the skills, in additional you roll the lowest. (This is what I've been doing at the table for some time).

This leads to fewer skills to put ranks in, should I lower the number of ranks/lvl. as a result? Or do something about the int-bonus to skills? Any ideas?

Please critize heartily :)

While I try to homebrew as little a possible (I'm trying to break a bad MEGA homebrewing habit...don't ask it involves a squid PC) I agree with most/all of these :smallamused: , and recommend the following two things:
1: the profession skill, make it just the one skill. As in pretty much the players are rolling to see if they learn the ropes/pick it up because no sane GM is going to let his players go in-game job hunting so much that this would be a problem (i.e. oh I think I'll try farming, then accounting then cooking then...etc.), and it saves space and time

2: when multiclassing once players pick up a class with a curtain class skill it becomes a class skill for them always (believe me this saves a lot of stupid and there's not much in the way of drawback
:smallwink:

PetterTomBos
2013-01-10, 08:57 AM
Figured I'd drop making a fleet of foot-skill, as the original tumble/balance would work just as well. Thinking about making balance a half-skill.

Hmm, I'm not satisfied with sneak, but I like it better than the original "roll move silently against listen"-thing. Having separate rolls for listening and spotting feels weird at the table. Still, having only one skill in sneaking seems sort of cheap.

Jane_Smith
2013-01-10, 10:01 AM
Ive done the following with skills in my games;

Climb, Swim, and Jump = Acrobatics (Str)

Spot, Listen, Search, Scent, Touch, etc = Perception (Wis)

Open Device, Disable Device = Disable Device (Int)

Diplomacy, Intimidate, Bluff, seduce/haggling/rally/suggestion/etc = Influence (Cha)

Appraise, Profession = Knowledge (Trade)

Martial Lore and Perform (Weapon Display) from 3.0/Sword and Fist and Tome of Battle respectively = Knowledge (War), ontop of any knowledge related to tactics, identifying maneuvers, legendary weapons, the working/usage of siege weapons, and a bit of synergy with history for historic wars/etc.

Hide, Move Silently = Stealth (Dex). Being sneaky is being sneaky. Even if the enemy is blind, people tend to still try to hide behind objects while keeping there footsteps silent, both skillsets are instinctively tied to "Not get caught" thoughts and actions of the user, and always go hand in hand together 9 times out of 10.

Concentration = like pathfinder, remove as a skill and make a caster level + con check, thus removing skill focus (concentration)/etc shenanigans and automatic successes late game.


Some other class love; changed the minimum skill points/level to 4+ for all classes such as fighter, paladin, sorcerer, wizard, so there is a low, moderate, and fast progression (4/6/8), and added class skills like acrobatics and influence to fighter, athletics/acrobatics/perception to sorcerers to fit there "more athletic then wizards" role, use magic device and disable device to wizards to fit more crafting/inventor/scientist stereotypes. I mean, after all, 70% of magic items are made by wizards moreso then any other class due to the bonus item creation feats, yet they have no skill that understands the use of most of them if they are made by a druid or cleric or vice versa, but a rogue who is just a guttersnipe, thug, charlatan, burgler, assassin, etc does? i know rogues are street smart, but wizards are suppose to be, you know, smart about just about everything, especially about the things they can craft the easiet.

Oh, and - I usually let my players pick any one of the following; perform, knowledge (trade), survival, or craft, that they have at least 1 rank in at character creation. Only one. They may then take the total rank/ability/feat/etc bonus (not including items/spell buffs), x10 that, and gain as bonus starting wealth gold. So a level 1 bard with +8 perform would get +80 gold from the time singing beforehand and gaining tips or funds from patrons or the like. And if they have a overall bonus high enough that rolling 10 on the craft check would let them make something at first level, such as a longsword, etc, they can act as if they made the item at character creation for 1/3th the market value. Like they spent the time/resources to make it before the game starts. It has greatly encouraged crafters in my little gamer circle and many have begun to put ranks in craft as I came up with new feats and uses for it, such as non-magical upgrades like serration and 1/6th the time to craft, etc to make it more viable and useful for tinkerer-support characters. But these are more of homebrew options and not really that great for a set of base rules/etc.

PetterTomBos
2013-01-10, 03:22 PM
Ive done the following with skills in my games;

Climb, Swim, and Jump = Acrobatics (Str)

Spot, Listen, Search, Scent, Touch, etc = Perception (Wis)

Open Device, Disable Device = Disable Device (Int)

Diplomacy, Intimidate, Bluff, seduce/haggling/rally/suggestion/etc = Influence (Cha)

Appraise, Profession = Knowledge (Trade)

Martial Lore and Perform (Weapon Display) from 3.0/Sword and Fist and Tome of Battle respectively = Knowledge (War), ontop of any knowledge related to tactics, identifying maneuvers, legendary weapons, the working/usage of siege weapons, and a bit of synergy with history for historic wars/etc.

Hide, Move Silently = Stealth (Dex). Being sneaky is being sneaky. Even if the enemy is blind, people tend to still try to hide behind objects while keeping there footsteps silent, both skillsets are instinctively tied to "Not get caught" thoughts and actions of the user, and always go hand in hand together 9 times out of 10.

Concentration = like pathfinder, remove as a skill and make a caster level + con check, thus removing skill focus (concentration)/etc shenanigans and automatic successes late game.


Commenting differences in order:

I kept climb/jump, because I like how they are skills that aid a new way of travel. Yet when I think about it, I can't really defend it, except for the early lvl.s, they arent't that useful anyways. Out they go! (The only thing is that the barbarians now get more skills than usual. Meh, good on them!).

I like to keep search as a separate skill. It is sort of situational, yet my adventures usually have a big enough dungeoncrawl element to them, that it is used oftenly enough. I like to think of perception as your passive windows to the world, whereas search let you think "hmm, that table-leg may be hollow...".

I like the skill-name influence. May steal it. I like bluff, it is used quite often, and works like a "tool" in social encounters (you can bluff all you'd like, but roleplay it with me!). The thing I'm unsure about here, is intimidate. How do I make intimidate unique, compared to the giant's persuasion? This needs work! Still, I'd like to keep the skill, if nothing else for RPG-reasons. What about letting it use strength instead of cha, for a start?

I like to keep the different professions allready (Using profession(sailor) for a sailing check, etc.). Using profession(trade) to appraise, on the other hand. A lot more fluffy, and it could proove useful. Perhaps allow a profession(stuff) check to appraise stuff?

Stealth completely agreed upon. (I guess my feelings of "this feels weird" comes from prolonged exposure to 3.5).

I like to keep concentration. Both for keeping the game as close to the original as possible, but I also quite like the skill. The scaling with damage could easily turn the checks up to the 30-50-range.

Thanks for the feedback!

Another tiny houserule: in the table of skill DC's I omit one word. Where it says "nearly impossible" for DC40, I take out the "nearly". I'd argue that the example itself is humanly impossible (but still fair game for a high lvl. player, the rabid animal-hunter in madagascar 3 probably pulled some 45+ survival checks ;) )

In the same vein, I find the epic skill uses to be very not-satisfying. I mean, a wizard gets epic spells, and they think that swimming up a stream is impressive. These things make me want to write up more, stronger, skill tricks. But meh, let's just eyeball DC's :)

Deepbluediver
2013-01-10, 03:54 PM
Personally, I don't really like the existing craft/profession system; I made post a little while back detailing some ideas for changes, but it never sparked a lot of interest.

If you really want to keep the profession checks in place as a skill check (though honestly, why do the PC's need them?) then I might suggest making the Profession check have a variable ability modifier.
Yes, this is unusual, but frankly the term "Profession" covers a wider range of actual "skills" than nearly anything else. Here is a sample list of what I think various professions might correspond well with.

{table=head]Profession|Ability|Labor|Wage
Farmer|
CON|untrained|Copper
Miner|
STR|untrained|Copper
Tailor|
DEX|trained|Silver
Carpenter|
STR|trained|Silver
Scribe|
INT|trained|Silver
Dancer|
CHA|trained|Silver
King's steward|
INT|management|Silver
Jeweler|
DEX|highly-trained|Gold
Ship's Captain|
WIS|management|Gold[/table]

PetterTomBos
2013-01-11, 04:31 PM
Hmm, I think I use profession differently, ignoring the "make a living aspect". For instance, one of my players had profession(sailor) once, where handling a ship is a profession(sailor) check. Similarily, a "how to get from here to there on sea" would be a profession(sailor) check. It is basically a "bag of stuff" that the sailor would/should know. Similarily you could have profession(bowmaker) that let you price bows (even magical ones) after using them, make them and even haggle when you buy them :)

In my campaigns I have houseruled that the pure +1 etc. bonus is a mundane "this is reallly well made thing" instead of magic (it still interferes with magical abilities in different ways, making additional bonuses cost as in the DMG. I'm looking at making the crafting of such items a profession(bowmaker), etc. check. At what lvl.s should the players at the least have a +n-item?

Deepbluediver
2013-01-11, 04:43 PM
Hmm, I think I use profession differently, ignoring the "make a living aspect". For instance, one of my players had profession(sailor) once, where handling a ship is a profession(sailor) check. Similarily, a "how to get from here to there on sea" would be a profession(sailor) check. It is basically a "bag of stuff" that the sailor would/should know. Similarily you could have profession(bowmaker) that let you price bows (even magical ones) after using them, make them and even haggle when you buy them :)

A skill can have more than one function, I agree, but that doesn't really address my main concern that a librarian, a rancher, and chef all end up making their profession checks based off the same ability.

Also, are you saying that an experienced archer wouldn't know a good bow from a bad one unless he has taken ranks in a certain skill? Maybe their should be some sort of bonus based on weapon proficiency and BAB. Just an idea.


In my campaigns I have houseruled that the pure +1 etc. bonus is a mundane "this is reallly well made thing" instead of magic (it still interferes with magical abilities in different ways, making additional bonuses cost as in the DMG. I'm looking at making the crafting of such items a profession(bowmaker), etc. check. At what lvl.s should the players at the least have a +n-item?

That depends largely on what level of power the campaign (and the entire world, really) is running at. Personally, if you start off with 0 (zero) bonus at 1st level, I think that an additional +1 at every 3-4 levels or so (3rd/4th, 6th/8th, 9th/12th, etc) is reasonable. However, I also like to start games at 2nd/3rd level for a variety of reasons, so the players don't need to wait to long before they start getting much nicer stuff.

PetterTomBos
2013-01-12, 11:54 AM
A skill can have more than one function, I agree, but that doesn't really address my main concern that a librarian, a rancher, and chef all end up making their profession checks based off the same ability.

Also, are you saying that an experienced archer wouldn't know a good bow from a bad one unless he has taken ranks in a certain skill? Maybe their should be some sort of bonus based on weapon proficiency and BAB. Just an idea.

That depends largely on what level of power the campaign (and the entire world, really) is running at. Personally, if you start off with 0 (zero) bonus at 1st level, I think that an additional +1 at every 3-4 levels or so (3rd/4th, 6th/8th, 9th/12th, etc) is reasonable. However, I also like to start games at 2nd/3rd level for a variety of reasons, so the players don't need to wait to long before they start getting much nicer stuff.

It is a bit weird, I agree. Still, I am not sure if the added realism by explicitly stating each one of them would be worth that much. I'd rather let the changing of ability be something done at the same time as the choosing of the specific profession.

Of course a good bowman would be able to see whether a bow was any good or not! (Perhaps by firing some arrows, "feeling" a little on what he rolled, and so on). What he couldnt do is determine it's exact properties (it's +2 or +3 or somewhere around that. Neither would he know exactly what it's worth at the closet city (It'd be worth something, I sure know that!). A professional could. (Or an appraiser).

Mhm, I agree. I ran the numbers on it, suggesting that the fighting man would use half his wealth on weaponry, they agreed as well.

I'm making char sheets with this now, but first I'll make one last change and take climb/swim into athletics. They aren't that useful above lvl. 5 anyhow.