PDA

View Full Version : is this balanced?



Wraithy
2007-07-15, 10:25 AM
quick question. in complete adventurer there is a feat which gives you 5 skill points, however would this be balanced if it was reversed?
on one side, there is the possibility of suddenly super-powered skill monkeys.
on the other side I will let you decide

Human Paragon 3
2007-07-15, 10:29 AM
quick question. in complete adventurer there is a feat which gives you 5 skill points, however would this be balanced if it was reversed?
on one side, there is the possibility of suddenly super-powered skill monkeys.
on the other side I will let you decide

Reversed how? A flaw that takes away 5 skill points?

I don't think it creates super-powered skill monkeys. It only provides one more total point of bonus vs. the +2 to 2 skills feats, and unlike those feats you can't use it to increase your bonus beyond your maximum ranks.

CasESenSITItiVE
2007-07-15, 10:35 AM
i think it would have to be restricted to certain feats, ones that would make sense to "learn", such as proficiencies or crafting. things like skill focuses or metamagic feats wouldn't make sense

brian c
2007-07-15, 11:05 AM
Reversed how? A flaw that takes away 5 skill points?

I don't think it creates super-powered skill monkeys. It only provides one more total point of bonus vs. the +2 to 2 skills feats, and unlike those feats you can't use it to increase your bonus beyond your maximum ranks.

I think what he means is that a character could spend 5 skill points to get a feat.

Yes, that could be very overpowered. If you regulate it to say, only once every 3 levels, then it's a little better. Still, the drawback is that Bards and especially Rogues could have boatloads of feats. If you use the Feat Rogue variant (Unearthed Arcana, Fighter bonus feats instead of Sneak Attack) then... wow. Ridiculous feat-age.

bugsysservant
2007-07-15, 11:27 AM
I'd call it balanced, but allow it only at first level. Makes rogues, and bards a bit better, but not overwhelmingly so. Also gives incentive (albeit small) for smart fighters who want a quick edge.

MeklorIlavator
2007-07-15, 11:30 AM
Make it a cross-class skill for every class but the fighter. Then it's ten points per feat, and they can only get a maximum of 4 feats at level 20 if they sink a large pat of their skills into it.

Quietus
2007-07-15, 11:33 AM
Being that flaws are supposed to be more painful than feats, I'd make it something akin to :

Slow Learner [flaw]
You gain one less skill point per level. This flaw can reduce you to zero skill points per level, but not below that.

OR

Slow Learner [flaw]
You begin play with 8 less skill points than usual. This flaw can only be taken if you gain 8 or more skill points with your first level.

Stephen_E
2007-07-16, 09:20 AM
Assuming you're talking about spending 5 skill points to gain a feat,
Yes, if you could buy any feat it would be broken.

If you restricted it to "appropriate feats for skill points it would be fine.
For example -
Any one can buy skill focus feats.
Fighters can buy physical feats i.e. Endurance, and Fighter feats, with Fighter feats costing 4 skill points (I might apply this discount to any class that has a feat that is on a class list of "bonus feats").
Arcane casters can buy caster feats and feats from there bonus list.
Rogues get any general feats that aren't Fighter or Wizard bonus feats.
Bard as Rogue but add any music feats.
Clerics get Item Creation and Turning feats, but don't let any extra "turnings" brought this way be used on Divine Metamagic (don't let them buy Divine Metamagic no matter how much they whine).
Paladins as Fighters + Turning feats.
Rangers as Fighters + any wilderness/animal type feats.

Stress that all feat buys require DM ok, i.e. they're a privlege, not a right.
I'd defintely increase Fighter skill points to 4 for this.

Stephen

hewhosaysfish
2007-07-16, 09:36 AM
Consider a human Fighter 5 (Int 10) and a human Ranger 5 (Int 10):

Fighter has:
3 bonus feats
medium/heavy armour/shield proficiency
an expected 6 hit points more
24 skill points

Ranger has:
class features
a better class skill selection
56 skill points

If the ranger spends 32 points on 8 feats, he can get Improved Toughness (+1 hp per level), medium armour proficiency, heavy armour proficecy, shield proficency and match the fighters 3 bonus feats plus one more.
And have 24 skill points left.

Now the fighter has:
1 hp more

While the ranger has:
class features
a better class skill selection
a bonus feat (if you want to be really mean, take Toughness)

EDIT Before anyone says it, I know the fighter is the weakest class and say "X>fighter" does not mean that X is broken. My point is that... well... the fighter is the weakest class and this takes away the only thing he had going for him (i.e. maximum featage).

jamroar
2007-07-16, 09:45 AM
quick question. in complete adventurer there is a feat which gives you 5 skill points, however would this be balanced if it was reversed?
on one side, there is the possibility of suddenly super-powered skill monkeys.
on the other side I will let you decide

What, buy any feat for 5 skill points? Yes, grossly overpowered.

Person_Man
2007-07-16, 10:04 AM
Horribly unbalanced.

If you want Skill Monkeys to be more powerful, look at the Beguiler, Psychic Rogue, Wildshape Ranger, Swordsage, and Factotum. Each has plenty of Skills and useful abilities.

tsuyoshikentsu
2007-07-16, 07:03 PM
This reminds me of my favorite story about bad rules changes.

Post-CS, someone came on the Wizards CharOp boards and said, "My DM has said we can buy a feat for 4 skill points. Which one should I take?"

The first threee words of the next post were "All of them," as the director pointed him to the feat in question.

JackMage666
2007-07-16, 08:43 PM
If it were a specific list, and the feats on it were all skill-related (Skill Focus, Acrobatic, maybe Improved Feint [since it's Bluff related]) and it was a cross-class skill for all classes, that cannot, under any circumstance, become a class skill, then it coul dbe balanced. Depending on the list.