PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Skill list simplification



paladin_carvin
2008-10-24, 12:15 AM
I was deciding to simplify my family game by merging or folding skills together, making there be less skill checks. Here is what I came up with.

Listen+Spot= Survey: While there are some instances when someone will have better vision than hearing and vice versa... it would just be easier to give a bonus for checks while looking. I mean, both already have many 'micro' bonuses... just look at the bonuses from hawk and owl familiars.

Hide+Move Silently= Sneak: Seriously... why are these split up? Perhaps because listen and spot are, but I see no other reason. If you fail either the gig is up, I don't know of many who ever put ranks in one but not the other.

Climb+Jump+Swim= Athletics: While you might excel in one or the other, these all together equate to one thing: outdoor athleticism. The main reason to put these together is that now they might be worth putting ranks in.

Balance+Tumble= Acrobatics: While tumble is far more useful, I see no reason to not fold balance in. After all, it all centers on the same kind of skill: being able to fall and not fall.

Diplomacy+Gather Information= Charm: This may be more of a stretch, but in the end it's all about social grace.

Open Lock--->Disable Device: Both basically rogue specific skills where you manipulate intricate parts. Why are they separate?

Ride-->Handle Animal: While certainly riding an animal is different than handling them, they are very tightly related. I actually suggest 'Ride' be a feat (like Track), though given to multiple classes as a feature (Certainly: Paladin; Most Likely: Ranger, Druid; Possibly: Barbarian, Fighter). I'd give it to the first three.

Intimidate-->Bluff: At its core, intimidation is very much the same as bluffing. After all, the intimidate skill is not about scaring someone utterly- you just need to shove a knife in someone's face and they will or won't based on character. A good intimidater has to convince another person that what threat he poses visual and common sense is not as great as it really is.

Heal-->Survival: Considering D&D healing that is not magical is all based on herbs and application, it makes perfect sense to merge them.

Use Rope-->Slight of Hand: This is a stretch that I am aware of. This is just a thought stemming from a great desire to simplify things logically. They are both based on hand dexterity on a medium scale (greater scale is bow and rapier, lesser scale would be locks and traps).

I messed with the knowledge skills, but I won't bore you with that.

So, I ask: what do you think? Would this cause power gaming? Too simple?

Aquillion
2008-10-24, 01:16 AM
I would say absolutely not to combining Listen+Spot or Hide+Move Silently. Those two are split up for a very good reason: They ensure that only characters with a decent number of skill points can master all the 'iconic' rogue skills. Without that, anyone who has Sneak or Survey as class skills can easily be as good as a rogue...

More generally, you will have to reduce skill points along with this (I assume you realize that!) And anything with significant skill prerequisites is going to be broken, too.

Generally, the reason why skills are broken up has nothing to do with 'logic' (and it's a mistake to approach them using logic.) It has to do with forcing players to spend a certain number of skill points to be good at certain roles. The designers wanted it to require a lot of skill points to be good at alert stealthiness, since that's so iconic to the rogue; combining them breaks an important part of the game.

KevLar
2008-10-24, 02:01 AM
I like most of them, and often use a lot of them. But then again, I have an obsession with skills. I've played 18-INT Rogues and still complained for not having enough skill points. :smalltongue:

Listen+Spot=Survey
...or Perception. This makes sense at first glance, but there are situations where the difference is important. Invisible foes, incorporeal foes, one-eyed or blind or deaf people, etc. Plus, I like playing characters who are very good at one skill and completely suck at the other, it's fun. So it's acceptable, but I prefer not to use that one.

Hide+Move Silently= Sneak
.. Or Stealth. Definitely. Anyone who trains in hiding, simultaneously trains in moving silently.
@Aquillion: I believe that keeping Stealth a cross-class skill for other classes (except Ranger and Scout and the like) prevents them from stepping on the Rogue's toes.

Climb+Jump+Swim= Athletics
No problem with the first two, but I wouldn't add Swim, it's a bit too specific.

Balance+Tumble= Acrobatics
Entirely acceptable.

Diplomacy+Gather Information= Charm
Umm... I'd say no. The Giant's Diplomacy variant is a must for whomever wants to tinker with skills, and adding Gather Information on top of that doesn't make it easier.

Open Lock--->Disable Device
Yes, definitely. Essentially, opening a lock is disabling a device.

Ride-->Handle Animal
No, these are different, and I can easily imagine someone who is good at cooing animals but not at riding a heavy horse - or vice versa. There's even a trait doing exactly that.

Intimidate-->Bluff
You do have a point. But in the end, I think these are different things, and the skill synergy covers it. (However, we often use circumstantial modifiers to Intimidate that have nothing to do with charisma. When a 6 ft tall guy with a spiked full-plate and a huge greatsword walks in a tavern, he doesn't really have to do anything to scare people.)

Heal-->Survival
No. People who can survive in the wild may often know how to heal themselves, but not always, and -more importantly- healers have no reason to know how to survive in the wild. Or follow tracks.

Use Rope-->Sleight of Hand
While Use Rope is generally regarded as a bad idea for a skill, Sleight of Hand is too rogue-specific to encompass it. Simple commoners use rope just fine.


I messed with the knowledge skills, but I won't bore you with that.

So, I ask: what do you think? Would this cause power gaming? Too simple?
Come on, bore us with the knowledge skills. I'm curious. :smallsmile:
And no, I don't think this causes power gaming. Skill points are pathetically few in 3.5, IMO, and any boost is acceptable. Plus, having a wide variety of skills doesn't break anything, accumulating insane modifiers on some of them does. (Diplomacy, bluff, potentially knowledge.)

@Aquillion: In most of my games, we give extra skill points to everyone, one way or another. I understand that this style is not for everyone, but I don't think it breaks anything. (It's D&D. There are druids. Playing a fighter who is miraculously good at athletics AND intimidating is not that big a stretch. :smalltongue:) But I agree that some planning about which skills are class-skills for which class is needed.

Kurald Galain
2008-10-24, 02:51 AM
Since you're asking "why" a number of times, let me point out that the reason is tradition. I'm not going to argue about whether that's a good reason, I'm just giving some background here.

Rogues in second edition had eight special Rogue Abilities, to wit Hide, Move Silently, Listen, Find / Remove Traps, Open Locks, Climb, Decipher, and UMD. Obviously, when the 3E system was designed, these were all put on the skill list.

These skills were added to other class lists as appropriate. The "find" part of FRT was moved to the search or spot skill, since other classes should also be able to find things but not necessarily remove them.

Note that one of the most common houserules for 2E was a "perception" score as the seventh attribute; the concept that wisdom has anything to do with finding things was new to 3E (which was probably done to make wisdom more useful to non-clerics). Of course, one perception score is easier than two; Pathfinder makes it worse by creating five perception scores.



Climb+Jump+Swim= Athletics
Balance+Tumble= Acrobatics
By your logic, climb should fall under acrobatics. Run should fall under athletics. Frankly, whoever thought that climbing was based on strength was simply looking for excuses to file some skill under "strength" because otherwise there wouldn't be any.


Heal-->Survival:
I disagree. Hunting for food is unrelated to being a medic.


Use Rope-->Slight of Hand:
Better yet, drop use rope entirely; I'm not aware of people actually using it much.

By the way if you're looking into this, take a look at any White Wolf character sheet. They have a very well thought-out skill list.

KevLar
2008-10-24, 03:55 AM
Frankly, whoever thought that climbing was based on strength was simply looking for excuses to file some skill under "strength" because otherwise there wouldn't be any.
I agree. "The most important muscle of a climber is the brain", as this guy said.


http://www.wolfgangguellich.com/gallery/pics/Wolfgang2-1.jpg

But with D&D conventions, what can you do? Make it Int-based or Dex-based? It doesn't add up. In reality you need INT+DEX+STR+WIS+CON. In that order. So, since strength doesn't make you a great climber, but is nevertheless necessary to haul yourself up, I'm willing to waiver that little inconsistency away. :)

bosssmiley
2008-10-24, 05:46 AM
Generally, the reason why skills are broken up has nothing to do with 'logic' (and it's a mistake to approach them using logic.) It has to do with forcing players to spend a certain number of skill points to be good at certain roles. The designers wanted it to require a lot of skill points to be good at alert stealthiness, since that's so iconic to the rogue; combining them breaks an important part of the game.

:smallconfused:

Ah, the 'role protection' argument. What a load of twaddle. If you actually want stealth to be a protected role in 3E then make it a class ability, not a function of skills (which are available to anyone willing to spend points on them).

The D&D skill list as it stands is full of cruft (Open Lock, Use Rope, Knowledge:Nobility, etc.). Cull it down to about 20 meaningful skills (+ Craft and Knowledge subskills).

The Rogue *still* gets to be king of skills, simply by virtue of having the most points to spend. But other characters don't have to sit there shrugging - or resorting to viciously penalised untrained checks - if they lack a pet skillmonkey in the party.

Thane of Fife
2008-10-24, 06:09 AM
I disagree with Disable Trap + Open Lock. The latter is a Dexterity skill - your character knows how to open locks, the skill determines only if he's good enough to open this one. The former is Intelligence-based. Can your character figure out how to disarm the trap? Preferably not while setting it off.

Is there really any correlation between knowing how to pick a lock and being able to disarm a bomb?

KevLar
2008-10-24, 08:20 AM
Is there really any correlation between knowing how to pick a lock and being able to disarm a bomb?
I bears repeating. Using just ONE stat modifier is a horrible oversimplification for most skills, anyway. It was designed that way for convenience, not accurate simulation.

If we wanted accurate simulation, we would use INT+DEX for both Open Locks and Disable Device (you think it's a piece of cake to understand how a complex lock works? it isn't, it's like a puzzle where you can't see the pieces) and adjust the DC accordingly. Or we'd use first INT (to figure out how it can be disabled) and then DEX (to do the job - you wouldn't trust a genius butter-fingers to disarm a bomb, would you?). And then we realize that all this has become far too complicated, and we stick with one modifier and get done with it.

Personally, I'd use Dexterity, on the grounds that the "figuring out how it works" part is covered by your training (skill points) and the rest is up to your deft hands. Others say Intelligence. Take your pick. :smallsmile:

TRM
2008-10-24, 08:29 AM
I always thought that Star Wars Saga and 4th Edition did a good job of merging skills to be more intuitive and limit the number of skills everywhere.
I don't remember exactly what those two versions did, but I think it was fairly similar to your list. Except:


Heal-->Survival: Considering D&D healing that is not magical is all based on herbs and application, it makes perfect sense to merge them.
Skip that part. In a game where Heal is actually useful (such as a low magic game or an especially gritty game), players should be encouraged to take it separately from Survival. And, as previous posters have said, the two skills aren't that similar to begin with.

Glyphic
2008-10-24, 08:41 AM
For comparison, I did something of similar lines, but I'm not entirely happy with it yet, nor have I tried it out in a rea game. I also have no idea of where to put Truespeak, autohypnosis, or any other non-core skill.


Appraise + d.script +sense motive
---> Inspection (int)

M.s + hide
---> Stealth (dex)

spot + listen + search
---> Perception (wis)

Jump, climb, swim, escape artist
---> Athletics (Str) or (con)

Disable divice, open lock, slight of hand, craft poison
---> Skull druggery (Int) or (dex)

Bluff + forgery + disguise
---> Deception (cha)

Heal
---> Heal (wis)

survival + K.geography + K.Nature
---> Wilderness Lore (wis) or (int)

Concentration, Control shape
---> Concentration (Con)

Diplomacy, Gather information, Intimidate
---> Negotiate (Cha)

Spell craft + K.Arcana
---> Spell craft (int) or (cha)

Use magic device
---> Use magic device

Balance + tumble
---> Acro circus (Dex)

K.Dungeoneering + use rope
---> Dungeoneering(int)

Perform + profession +craft
---> Artisan (Cha) or (int)

D. Architecture +craft
---> Architecture(int)

K local + K history + Nobility/royalty
---> Historian

K.Religion + K. The planes
---> Cosmic Lore (int, wis, or Cha)

Ride + handle animal
---> Animal affinity (cha)

Talya
2008-10-24, 09:06 AM
I mostly agree with SW Saga, although I'd amalgamate it slightly more.

Acrobatics (Tumble, Balance)
Athletics (Climb, Jump, Swim)
Endurance
Initiative
Knowledge
Mechanics (not in D&D)
Perception (Listen, Search, Spot)
Pilot (not in D&D)
Ride
Social (Gather Information, Bluff/Deception, Diplomacy/Persuasion)
Stealth (Hide, Sneak, Sleight of Hand)
Treat Injury
Use the Force (not in D&D)

That's probably taken it too far in a skill point based system, but I do believe this would be ideal for star wars saga.

Kurald Galain
2008-10-24, 09:44 AM
Appraise + d.script +sense motive
---> Inspection (int)
These three have literally nothing to do with one another.



Jump, climb, swim, escape artist
---> Athletics (Str) or (con)
I'd say that endurance is irrelevant to at least two of the above.



Disable divice, open lock, slight of hand, craft poison
---> Skull druggery (Int) or (dex)
Objection, again. Craft poison is completely unrelated.



Spell craft + K.Arcana
---> Spell craft (int) or (cha)
Putting knowledge skills under charisma is rather weird.



K.Dungeoneering + use rope
---> Dungeoneering(int)
Combining a knowledge skill with sleight of hand is also strange.



Perform + profession +craft
---> Artisan (Cha) or (int)
As is putting arts and craft skills under charisma,



K.Religion + K. The planes
---> Cosmic Lore (int, wis, or Cha)
As well as lore skills under either charisma or wisdom.

I'd say the OP's list makes more sense.

Magnor Criol
2008-10-24, 09:52 AM
Listen+Spot => Survey: Like Kevlar, I think I'd call it "perception" or "senses" but I agree with the idea wholeheartedly, and your reasoning behind it. Like you said - there's already so many circumstancial bonuses as it is, it doesn't seem inordinate to merge them and rule that, say, a blind creature can't make sight-based Perception checks.
Also, I don't agree with the premise that Spot and Listen are "iconic" rogue skills; those should be things that any character can do. Honestly. Anyone can pause and listen or stop and survey the area. Town watches, for example - they're warrriors, not rogues (or experts). Give rogues a bonus based on their cautiousness if you really want them to do better.

Hide+MS => Stealth: Again, agreed. Make it a class skill only for rogue (and any non-core stealthy characters) and that'll save the niche for the rogue.

Climb+Jump+Swim=>Acrobtics: Meh, ambivalent. I'd agree offhand; the points raised earlier contrary are good ones, but in the spirit of simplifying the skills list, I think this is a good step.

Balance + Tumble => Acrobatics: Agreed.

Diplomacy + Gather Info => Charm: I don't really like "charm" as a name for this, though I can't come up with an alternatative offhand. Really, though, I'm kinda sketchy on this one; I agree with your logic, but...I dunno. Again, in the spirit of simplification, this one probably works fine. Do take a gander at the Giant's diplomacy rules, though, I think you'll find they're really quite simple and straightforward - much moreso than the current Diplo rules.

Open Lock + Disable Device => Disable Device: Agreed. Again, the points brought up earlier were valid, but I like the explanation that the skill points cover the "figure it out" (Int-based) bit and the Dex modifier covers the doing it. Perhaps some sort of synergy, or penalty for low Int, but that may be getting to complicated.

Ride + Handle Animal => Handle Animal: This one I don't like, though again, I understand your logic. See KevLar's point on the matter.

Intimidate + Bluff => Bluff: Nice logic, I hadn't thought of it that way. I think it makes sense, really.

Heal + Survival => Survival: Though your logic makes some sense, I don't agree with this. Like others said, the two are pretty disparate, really. A healer could spend all their life in the city, getting their healing supplies in boxes and not ever knowing what a fresh one looks like. Survival covers so much more. Just stick with the synergy bonus to cover the overlay.

Use Rope + Sleight of Hand => Sleight of Hand: This is a stretch, but I'd agree with it, I guess, more because I've never actually known anyone to actually use Use Rope than anything. I don't think the two really merge conceptually, but it's such an underused skill - both of them, really - that it hardly matters.

Knowledge skills: I'd be interested to hear what you did. The Giant has some variant Knowledge skill rules, too, that're pretty nice.

Sorry, Aquillion, but I'm going to have to agree that the notion that you should keep certain skills unmerged to protect the rogue's interests doesn't hold water. While I can understand the idea that splitting them up is supposed to represent how the characters must put more skill and practice into it, the rogue argument loses it. They still get the absolute most skill points of any base class - I think that extends even to non-core, though I'm not as familiar with them; certainly the 8+Ints area true minority - and leaving Stealth as a skill for them and them alone covers their superiority. And I wholeheartedly don't agree that the Senses should be rogue-only.

Glyphic, See Kurald's post for my thoughts on your skill list. He covers them well. Honestly, it seems like you're just adjusting skill attribute tie-ins for SADding characters; putting Know. Arcana under Charima screams "sorcerer want know magicy stuff too." :smalltongue:

paladin_carvin
2008-10-24, 11:56 AM
After seeing the responses, here are my apologetics: (for those who are weak on your Greek, it means to defend :smallbiggrin:)

Overall: There is a theme here of people saying that Int should be involved with most skills if you think about it logically. And you are right. But, that made something I never quite got finally click: why amount of skill points are based on Int. Every single skill in the game is effected by Int because your intelligence effects how many things you can teach yourself. Think, for example, about Open Lock: being able to open a lock requires being smart enough to understand them more than just deft hands. But, it requires a smart enough person to learn about opening locks while learning other things, or you simply can't learn that many things.

Overall 2: Electric Boogaloo: I have always felt that characters did not get enough skills. As a DM, I am always happy to find ways to let characters have more skills as long as they don't abuse it.

Spot+Listen=Survey: First, I like perception better than Survey. I will from now on use that term. I was trying to avoid the term alertness since it is already the name of a feat. Most people can listen and see at a different level. Spot and listen are not really about that though. They are about being able to pay attention to details around you, and further so, being able to do so under pressure.

Hide+MS=Sneak: I like the term stealth. The only opposition I saw to this is the idea of protecting the idea of Rogue. I think anyone can be stealthy though.

Climb+Jump+Swim=Athletics: I considered not including Swim... and perhaps in a campaign with more experienced players I'd not allow it. In addition, any campaign with significant swimming (aquatic, boat, lake/sea, shore) should of course have it separate. But, with less experienced characters I think it's fine, especially since the only body of water they will be around is a river, which they rarely would be around.

Balance+Tumble=Acrobatics= Seemed everyone agreed on this

Diplomacy+Gather Information=Charm: I didn't like the name charm either. What do people think of 'Grace'? I read the Giant's concept on Dip and I love it. Though, honestly, it seems to have more in relation to bluff than anything else. Still, while I would use those rules for 'Grace' in those situations, I think there is still reason for a skill that can change someone's attitudes. Grace would cover all three of these functions in my opinion. It would just require limiting the effect of Grace to change attitudes. I think, for one thing, changing attitudes should take more time, at least for beyond one category... or perhaps the change could bell-curved. For example, to change someone's attitude from 'Nemesis' to 'Enemy' would be next to impossible and take a long time (if a person thinks or knows you killed their brother, just getting them to simply hate you in stead of making revenge on you their life goal is very hard[success: 'Fine... I give. I can't take hunting you anymore. I'll go on my way. But if I ever see your mug again, I'll kill you), just like changing 'Friend' to 'Intimate' (think how long it takes to take a relationship with a friend to 'bosom buddy' or life mate). In the center of the bell curve, things wouldn't take too long. With a bit of effort you can change a person from a negative acquaintance (that person you charmed the bar wench from under his nose, the town guard who you got in a scuffle with while horribly drunk; with a little bit of effort and explaining they may come to accept you) and it might not take too long to change a person from neutral to positive acquaintance (if you are an amiable fellow, like Elan, you could make friends with a stranger pretty easy and pretty quick). And, quickly explaining, the middle could take a middle amount of time (a goblin convincing a paladin over some time that he is not actually evil or trouble could do so with some time. [success: Perhaps you aren't like the other goblins I've seen.... but I'm keeping my eye on you.])

[[Wow... that was longer than I planed...]]

Open Lock+Disable Device=Disable Device: I explained how I thought Int effected this. These are related since a lock, essentially, is a device. This remains quite a Rogue skill. It's cross-class for everyone but them and it can't be used untrained. This skill is, ironically, locked up pretty tight.

Ride+Handle Animal=Handle Animal: I do understand your thoughts, and I was iffy on this one myself. I will be using this since my game has very inexperienced players. Given the setting, I believe fully that in order to be able to ride effectively you must understand animals. Just training to ride better you will understand animals better. In a modern setting, this might be different, since you more likely than not would have someone else taking care of your horse while you lived your life and you only interacted with animals when you go to ride. This is very unlikely in D&D, even for royalty. They of course would have handlers, but animal care would be intensely related since owning and using a horse was a key to what separated royalty (or at least knights) from commoners. Consider also that one of the major uses of Handle Animal is to train a creature; this is something that any mounted person would want (nearly need) to understand. Being able to ride, of course, takes training, which is why I like the feat method analogous to Track.

Intimidate+Bluff=Bluff: Most seem to agree with this. I will reinforce my point of circumstance. A 6 ft tall dude in spiked armour busts into a bar... you are scared and take precaution, or, if your character doesn't take to such things, they don't. Once you start to threaten people, then the intimidation begins ([Example: I'm going to kill someone every minute until I find the rogue that slipped in here.] Here, he is intimidating people to give up knowledge, point out the rogue or... to the rogue, threaten to put the people's deaths on her conscious. If, for example, the bar tender is not intimidated but still aware that the 6 foot tall guy could still kill him, he in stead would start yelling at him to get out (counter intimidate...) or grab something to defend himself... or even run out of the bar (but this is still not doing what the guy wanted)) In the end, the effort the guy made was to convince everyone that they must do what he says because he will do something terrible if they don't. The function of character level and penalty/bonus to intimidate due to size covers pretty much everything for the 'I'm bigger and badder, fear me' part.

Heal+Survival=Survival: You are all correct. This would only be reasonable for a group of beginners, like my group. In medium and high magic games (hell, any game with a positive energy cleric) barely needs heal check other than a weird emergency to stop bleeding to death. Still, the skills are only thinly related.

Use Rope+Sleight of Hand=Sleight of Hand: Yea, this is almost entirely because Use Rope is so rarely reasonable to take as a skill. SoH was the most reasonable skill to fold it in to. Though, since my Dad's character that I made for him was inspired by movie cowboys, perhaps I should give him some Use Rope and make up some lasso rules... that actually sounds pretty awesome, actually. Has anyone ever heard of such a rule?

In addition:
Search: While I would like to fold something into this, this is NOT a perception roll. There is a reason this is based on Int. This has nothing to do with attention. This is entirely about knowing where to find things. This is going 'where would I hide a map in this office' or 'where on this filthy dead orc would he hide his secret orders'. A kid with ADD can be a great searcher but it would be impossible for him to pay attention enough to hear even a person not sneaking. While one real world example is not enough to make a solid argument, search is a thing that requires action and time. Spot and Listen are instantaneous.

I will make another post for my knowledge thoughts, I'm sure this is long enough.

TheThan
2008-10-24, 12:26 PM
I did the same thing in the game homebrewed system I’m making. Only I defined what each part of the skill does. For example for the athletics skill, I have rules for climbing, swimming, and jumping. For some classes I’ve decided that they can only use a part or an aspect of the skill. For instance, a rogue has the “use magic” skill, but its restricted to the “using magic devices” aspect of the skill. It keeps certain characters from gaining too much freedom with their skills.

But then again I’m also using the skill system from starwars saga, so each skill scales with level, so things shouldn’t get out of control anyway.

paladin_carvin
2008-10-24, 01:17 PM
Knowledge: I decided that knowledge should be divided down into 4 categories. I like splitting things in quarters... it's an elemental thing.

Knowledge: Arcane- I put spellcraft in here. I think they are tightly related. I wanted to put another knowledge set in there, but nothing made sense.

Knowledge: Divine- I like the knowledge: Cosmos... At any rate, this is mostly Religion and Planes, but I felt it made sense that it could be used like spellcraft as well, but it could not identify anything other than spells being used... perhaps only spells from divine caster (no items and such).

Knowledge: Science- Or 'White Magic' as they would call it at certain medieval traditions. Geography (or, at least geology), craft:alchemy (not herbal), Engineering, craft:black powder explosives, Anatomy (though, this is consistently directed to 'heal'), biology, physics... etc.

Knowledge: Worldy- I considered 'Street Smarts'. Knowledge local, geography (mapping), nobility and royalty, dungeoneering (this might be Science), history.

Knowledge: Nature- Fold into Survival. I've always viewed survival as understanding the wild. Tracking works by being able to observe how it has been disturbed. In addition, most nature things are intuitive, not book learned. Anything like botany and biology would be covered by Science or Heal (and if heal is in survival, it's still here).

Gaiwecoor
2008-10-24, 09:53 PM
Paizo's Pathfinder has done this ... here are the bundles they came up with:

Acrobatics (Dex) - Balance, Jump, Tumble
Diplomacy (Cha) - Diplomacy, Gather Information
Disable Device (Dex, although I honestly believe it should still be Int) - Disable Device, Open Lock
Linguistics (Int) - Decipher Script, Forgery, Speak Language
Perception (Wis) - Listen, Spot, Search
Spellcraft (Int) - Spellcraft, Concentration
Stealth (Dex) - Hide, Move Silently

Use rope was disbanded altogether, for some reason.

I have a group that has been play-testing this, and it seems to work out fairly well. We haven't seen anything unbalancing about it, and it gives you a few more of those skill points to spend.

Zeful
2008-10-24, 10:42 PM
By your logic, climb should fall under acrobatics. Run should fall under athletics. Frankly, whoever thought that climbing was based on strength was simply looking for excuses to file some skill under "strength" because otherwise there wouldn't be any.
If you don't have upper body strength you can't climb. I don't see how limber/quick you are actually makes you better at climbing, and being a tree climber for 10+ years I can assure that even climbing a tree is more about strength then dexterity (or constitution)[/QUOTE]


Listen+Spot= Survey: While there are some instances when someone will have better vision than hearing and vice versa... it would just be easier to give a bonus for checks while looking. I mean, both already have many 'micro' bonuses... just look at the bonuses from hawk and owl familiars. I'd call it Perception, but survey more or less describes what it does.



Hide+Move Silently= Sneak: Seriously... why are these split up? Perhaps because listen and spot are, but I see no other reason. If you fail either the gig is up, I don't know of many who ever put ranks in one but not the other.

Climb+Jump+Swim= Athletics: While you might excel in one or the other, these all together equate to one thing: outdoor athleticism. The main reason to put these together is that now they might be worth putting ranks in.

Balance+Tumble= Acrobatics: While tumble is far more useful, I see no reason to not fold balance in. After all, it all centers on the same kind of skill: being able to fall and not fall. Agree all around



Diplomacy+Gather Information= Charm: This may be more of a stretch, but in the end it's all about social grace. Yes and that's why both are affected by Cha, but both are vastly different. Being sociable enough to make friends (Diplomacy) has very little to do with how you manage to wheedle information out of people. Being good at one might give a synergy bonus at the other that's about it.



Open Lock--->Disable Device: Both basically rogue specific skills where you manipulate intricate parts. Why are they separate? A more appropriate argument might be; Is a lock not a device?



Ride-->Handle Animal: While certainly riding an animal is different than handling them, they are very tightly related. I actually suggest 'Ride' be a feat (like Track), though given to multiple classes as a feature (Certainly: Paladin; Most Likely: Ranger, Druid; Possibly: Barbarian, Fighter). I'd give it to the first three. I'll agree.



Intimidate-->Bluff: At its core, intimidation is very much the same as bluffing. After all, the intimidate skill is not about scaring someone utterly- you just need to shove a knife in someone's face and they will or won't based on character. A good intimidater has to convince another person that what threat he poses visual and common sense is not as great as it really is. True but someone good at making threats seem real may not be as good at lying . I'll admit that I got better at lying by learning to scare people, but that may not be true for everyone.



Heal-->Survival: Considering D&D healing that is not magical is all based on herbs and application, it makes perfect sense to merge them. I disagree the heal skill is mostly about sutures and battlefield medice more. Overall your choices to make a lot of skills combined do make sense with some exceptions. I would like to see how you did the knowledge skills.

Philistine
2008-10-25, 01:07 AM
I would say absolutely not to combining Listen+Spot or Hide+Move Silently. Those two are split up for a very good reason: They ensure that only characters with a decent number of skill points can master all the 'iconic' rogue skills. Without that, anyone who has Sneak or Survey as class skills can easily be as good as a rogue...

I disagree with this. Making "Stealth" a cross-class skill for classes that aren't meant to be stealthy, as suggested by a number of people previously, is plenty. And really - how many classes currently have Hide and Move Silently as class skills? Don't most of those classes already get more skill points than the average as well? So doesn't it follow, then, that classes like the Ninja, Ranger, and Scout are in fact intended to be about as stealthy as Rogues?

As for "Survey," or "Perception," or whatever - yes, Spot and Listen should absolutely be combined into a single skill. And it should be a class skill for every class, as well. Seriously, Fighters and Clerics can't learn to pay attention to what goes on around them? Scouting without Stealth doesn't impinge on the Rogue's role.


More generally, you will have to reduce skill points along with this (I assume you realize that!) And anything with significant skill prerequisites is going to be broken, too.

I strongly disagree with this. What class in 3.x is not starved for skill points? Roges get as many skill points as any class, yet a typical Rogue is still barely able to cover the 'iconic' Roguely skills. Eight iconic skills vs eight skill points per level; leaving the Int bonus (if any) to add Tumble and Bluff. And maybe Appraise. Or Escape Artist. Or Forgery. Or Disguise. Or Diplomacy. Or Intimidate. Or... (Gee! Some of those do sound pretty Roguely, huh? Too bad nobody ever takes them, because nobody can ever afford them. Combining skills would be a good way to get some of those lesser- and never-used skills into play once in a while.)

Most other classes have fewer of their 'iconic' abilities on the skill list, but their skill point budget is cut even farther. Some classes simply don't get enough skill points to do anything useful - except meet prerequisites for PrCs. That's bad game design, pure and simple. Pruning the skill list just might help classes like Fighters and Clerics actually use their skill points for - gosh! - skills, for a change.

So... Reduce skill points? Hardly. Even with the changes described in this thread, I'd say a general increase is still warranted. Say, 4+Int or 6+Int as the minimum for any class, with Rogues getting 12+Int to 15+Int.

Meanwhile, limits on skill ranks per level would still keep characters from filling in PrC prerequisites any sooner than they would have. So how would trimming down the horrifically bloated 3.x skill list "break" that, exactly?


Generally, the reason why skills are broken up has nothing to do with 'logic' (and it's a mistake to approach them using logic.) It has to do with forcing players to spend a certain number of skill points to be good at certain roles. The designers wanted it to require a lot of skill points to be good at alert stealthiness, since that's so iconic to the rogue; combining them breaks an important part of the game.

Generally, the reason why skills are broken up as they are in 3.x appears to be that the designers fell into the trap of thinking "more = better." It has to do with them focusing each individual skill as narrowly as possible so that they could inflate the list. The designers wanted us to think that they had some sane or sensible plan in mind when they created the system, since that encourages sales; combining skills fixes (or at least starts to fix) an important part of the game.

FMArthur
2008-10-25, 01:44 AM
I don't think Intimidate and Bluff have much to do with one another. Personally, I'd like to see Intimidate just moved to 'general-purpose actions' and out of skills. It should be based on level, or wisdom, or something else than what it is right now. My super-friendly charisma clown is somehow more imposing than a dragon who didn't happen to put ranks into Intimidate? Ridiculous.

paladin_carvin
2008-10-25, 02:02 AM
If you don't have upper body strength you can't climb. I don't see how limber/quick you are actually makes you better at climbing, and being a tree climber for 10+ years I can assure that even climbing a tree is more about strength then dexterity (or constitution)
I completely agree. Dex may effect you not hurting when you fall but... uh, that's really tumble... or acrobatics. Maybe a spider or other animal... er, but they already have that rule if you've ever read the animal section of the MM.



True but someone good at making threats seem real may not be as good at lying . I'll admit that I got better at lying by learning to scare people, but that may not be true for everyone.

....

Overall your choices to make a lot of skills combined do make sense with some exceptions. I would like to see how you did the knowledge skills.

I think that is very interesting, the scaring bit. I think it lines up completely though. In many ways, it's all 'acting'.

As for things further... well, please read the rest of the thread ^_^

paladin_carvin
2008-10-25, 02:14 AM
I don't think Intimidate and Bluff have much to do with one another. Personally, I'd like to see Intimidate just moved to 'general-purpose actions' and out of skills. It should be based on level, or wisdom, or something else than what it is right now. My super-friendly charisma clown is somehow more imposing than a dragon who didn't happen to put ranks into Intimidate? Ridiculous.

First of all, I am much much more afraid of clowns than dragons. I know far more people afraid of clowns than dragons... hell, it's one of the most common fears among those I know. If he promises to go away, I'd probably gladly do what a clown says.

More important, think stats. A 'friendly' clown is unlikely to put ranks in intimidate, but even a good dragon would put quite a few. In addition dragons have a special intimidation ability; frightful presence. Intimidate is in every sense a fear effect, down to the point that those immune to fear can NOT be effected by intimidate. Frightful presence's DC is, in addition, based on Charisma.

And again to the clown; a high charisma clown could easily, with little extra effort, be EXTREMELY intimidating. Honestly, only a modest change in costume and even someone who likes clowns would be quite afraid. When you think about it, most super-villains wear costumes and make up not very different than clowns.

I find your argument flawed from beginning to end.

Severedevil
2008-10-25, 05:02 AM
The Dark Knight supports you view that a low-level clown with Cha and Intimidate can be scary as hell.


I strongly disagree with this. What class in 3.x is not starved for skill points? Rogues get as many skill points as any class, yet a typical Rogue is still barely able to cover the 'iconic' Roguely skills. Eight iconic skills vs eight skill points per level; leaving the Int bonus (if any) to add Tumble and Bluff. And maybe Appraise. Or Escape Artist. Or Forgery. Or Disguise. Or Diplomacy. Or Intimidate. Or... (Gee! Some of those do sound pretty Roguely, huh? Too bad nobody ever takes them, because nobody can ever afford them. Combining skills would be a good way to get some of those lesser- and never-used skills into play once in a while.)

Rogue Class Skills
Appraise - unnecessary.
Balance - unnecessary.
Bluff - unnecessary. (Your party does not need a good liar, although it may open options. If they decide to have one, it needn't be you.)
Climb - unnecessary. (In the odd circumstance you need an in-party climber, most fighting classes can do it as well or better than the rogue.)
Craft - unnecessary.
Decipher Script - unnecessary.
Diplomacy - unnecessary. (Your party does not need a sweet-talking expert. A pleasant Face facilitates interaction, but a very small bonus is easily sufficient. A powerful manipulator may open options, but even then it need not be you.)
Disable Device - unnecessary, except in a trap-heavy campaign. (Cleverness, expendables, and taking a little damage will substitute.)
Disguise - unnecessary.
Escape Artist - unnecessary, except in a grapple-heavy campaign.
Forgery - unnecessary.
Gather Information - unnecessary.
Hide/Move Silently - unnecessary. (The party should not require a sneak, though it opens lots of options. If they do, a number of other classes can do it, and a number of spells can substitute.)
Intimidate - unnecessary.
Jump - unnecessary.
Knowledge(Local) - unnecessary.
Listen/Spot - unnecessary. (The party benefits strongly from one or more members with sharp senses. However, they need not be you.)
Open Lock - unnecessary. (The party benefits from the ability to bypass some types of security without force or magic, but an indestructible spell-proof barrier should not have a mechanically circumventable lock. If it does, passing through the barrier should not be necessary.)
Perform - unnecessary.
Search - unnecessary, except in a trap-heavy campaign. (The party benefits strongly from a skilled searcher, but it need not be you unless trapfinding is central.)
Sense Motive - unnecessary. (The party may need a lie-detector in a game of intrigue, but it need not be you.)
Sleight of Hand - unnecessary.
Swim - unnecessary.
Tumble - probably necessary for high-level combat. (Most campaigns require everyone to contribute significantly in combat, and big creatures get lots of AOOs that you're probably too squishy to weather. Although a rogue with good Dex and Con need not be fragile.)
Use Magic Device - unnecessary, except in oppressively high-powered campaigns.
Use Rope - unnecessary.

Tumble aside, the rogue has no mandatory skills. Every option is useful in one context or another, but none are required except in a specialized game. A small number of his skills may be necessary for the party, but all of them can be covered easily a different PC.

Even if we decide all rogues need every 'iconic' rogue skill, there's no requirement that you max out every skill you use. If a skill is on the class skill list, that probably means it's either 'iconic' to the class, or anyone can do it. You can't be perfect at everything.

Wulfram
2008-10-25, 05:23 AM
I'd combine Diplomacy, Bluff and Intimidate into Persuade.

Diplomacy is persuading people that they want to be your friend (or at least, not your enemy), Bluff is persuading people to believe something that's not true and Intimidate is persuading people to do something because if they don't you'll do something to them.

Perhaps include a couple of feats to allow people to specialise in bluffing or intimidating, but you don't need seperate skills.

KevLar
2008-10-25, 05:51 AM
unnecessary
So, everything is unnecessary except Tumble. I conclude that you are referring to:
1) A hack'n'slash game (and one without traps)
OR
2) Combat situations in any other game

...That's horribly restricting. Skills exist, for the most part, to support out of combat situations. Some of us like those. People who select to play Rogues (or any other skill monkey) usually like those too. No skill is "necessary". But all of them give you options to accomplish all sorts of stuff and roleplay all sorts of situations. The fact that they are "unnecessary" in combat doesn't make them useless. And (for me and a lot of other people, at least) skill points by RAW aren't enough.

I agree that the Rogue is not obliged to max any (or all) of his "iconic" skills. And, from that post, that's about the only thing I agree with. :smalleek:


A small number of his skills may be necessary for the party, but all of them can be covered easily a different PC.
Would that be the cleric? Or the fighter? And what if I want to play a skilled character? You know, not because it's "necessary" but because I happen to like it?
I'm answering that for you: I use house rules and everybody's happy.

Severedevil
2008-10-25, 08:15 AM
I agree that the Rogue is not obliged to max any (or all) of his "iconic" skills.
Then we're in full agreement. That was my point exactly.

Philistine insinuated that a rogue has to spend all his skill points maxing a short set of 'iconic' abilities, and that as a consequence rogues have very few options when assigning their skill points. I strongly disagree - there is no skill on the entire list that a rogue has to take. (Indeed, most parties can do without any particular skill, especially if they're willing to hire a specialist when they know they have to go mountain climbing.)

Of course rogues should have many skill points and lots of class skills to choose from! I only meant that a rogue needn't restrict herself to Spot/Listen/Hide/Move Silently/Disable Device/Open Lock/UMD/whatever. They have thirty class skills for a reason...

My Rogue 4/Wizard 2, Tanya, took many ranks in Bluff to conceal her intelligence. She Disguise Self'd as a lost child to lure out a demon, and (Dance)'d to celebrate. 8+Int skill points per level allows for capable use of a variety of talents, especially if you don't max them all out.

Ravens_cry
2008-10-25, 09:29 AM
Use Rope+Sleight of Hand
Actually, Use Rope is a very useful skill, if you can convince a baddy to give up, which we have done on several occasions. We tie them up and deliver them to the city guard.

crimson77
2008-10-25, 11:14 AM
I was deciding to simplify my family game by merging or folding skills together, making there be less skill checks. Here is what I came up with.


If you are trying to save time or make things easier, many skill checks should be rolled by the DM. These are any checks that the player should not know their results (e.g., listen, spot, move silently, hide, slight of hand, etc). I use an excel program to roll these results with the player bonuses calculated right in. Therefore, I can hit F9 and quickly scan the relevant skills to see who passed and who failed. In less than 30 seconds I can give feedback to the party of what they saw or heard. This also cuts down on the DM rolling dice and everyone trying to figure out what is going on.

Just my to CP

paladin_carvin
2008-10-25, 01:06 PM
If you are trying to save time or make things easier, many skill checks should be rolled by the DM. These are any checks that the player should not know their results (e.g., listen, spot, move silently, hide, slight of hand, etc). I use an excel program to roll these results with the player bonuses calculated right in. Therefore, I can hit F9 and quickly scan the relevant skills to see who passed and who failed. In less than 30 seconds I can give feedback to the party of what they saw or heard. This also cuts down on the DM rolling dice and everyone trying to figure out what is going on.

Just my to CP

I can appreciate this view. But I feel very strongly about dice. I do not like to pre-roll, I do not like to roll for my players (unless needed) and I like to have players roll. Dice are the epitome of the uncontrollable; the fact that nothing you do is for certain. Sure, things are easier without as many dice rolls, but it removes a very important flavor from the game. That is what I think. But I also really like dice period, 'specially gaming dice (non-d6). I noticed that the dice were so many at one time that they were not understanding, I couldn't keep track, and I started just having them roll once and guessing which one for things like spot and listen.

Kurald Galain
2008-10-25, 04:15 PM
If you don't have upper body strength you can't climb. I don't see how limber/quick you are actually makes you better at climbing,
That's a straw man. If you're catatonic, you can't climb either, yet nobody suggests basing climbing skill on intelligence.

While quickness has nothing to do with climbing, neither has weightlifting. Assuming sufficient strength to lift yourself, extra strength is really not going to help - but the ability to place your foot next to your ear and push upward from there, is.

Keld Denar
2008-10-25, 05:11 PM
I actually disagree with all of the people that disagree with the concept of rolling Heal into Survival. As written in the PHB, heal really only has 3ish functions. The first, an minor, is to be able to determine from inspection the relative condition of a hurt person, or to determine the mode of death of a corpe. This is hugely minor, and can be rolled into the perception check without too much bending of intent.

Then we go on to long term care. LTC of wounded people in a fantasy setting usually involves natural remedies. Look at Aragorn when Frodo got stabbed by the Ringwraith's blade. He was effectively "poisoned" and Aragorn assisted Frodo in making his secondary save with what? Kingsroot or Kingsfoil, or whatever that plant was. His abilty to tend Frodo was directly related to his knowledge of herbalism. Same thing with treating diseases and keeping wounds clean. The only thing that might be tough to wrap into Survival would be the setting and mending of bones, but D&D doesn't really get into that with its generic hp system.

Finally, there is triage, or battlefield medicine. The primary use is the DC15 check to stabalize someone between -1 and -9 so they stop taking damage every round till they bleed out. Primary triage care is the cesation of bleeding, which is most commonly the result of pressure, and the application of something to stimulate clotting. Clotting can be done with cloth or bandages, or just as easily with different mosses or plants. Heal certainly doesn't have anything to do with stitches on the combat field, because I don't know ANY doctor who can prepare materials and clean and sew a wound in less than 6 seconds, which is all it takes to perform that check. Having the right ones available when needed is related to herbalism again, where the character harvests the required materials as he finds them. The "check" at the time of treatment is then a function of having the required moss or plant or other clotting medium available at the moment to aliviate micromanaging of herbs. Its something the character just "does" as they are adventuring, and the check reflects this. Keeps things simple and streamlined.

Thus, I don't think its any stretch at all to include Heal as a function of Survival, and to eliminate it as a skill altogether.

Aquillion
2008-10-26, 12:17 AM
Thus, I don't think its any stretch at all to include Heal as a function of Survival, and to eliminate it as a skill altogether.
The problem with all that: There are a lot of classes that are supposed to be experts on healing and medicine, without having any wilderness survival skill. If you combine those two skills, my level 20 Healer either has to be an expert at surviving in the wilderness, or have absolutely no idea how to stop bleeding without using magic. Neither of those things make much sense.

It would be interesting to have some sort of survivalist-healing feat that lets you substitute your Survival skill for your Heal skill (although it'd probably have to do more than that or it would kinda suck as a feat). But combining them completely causes all sorts of problems, especially in the other direction (saying that everyone who is good at survival ought to be able to administer first aid makes sense. Saying that every expert on medicine should be able to hunt wolves for food really doesn't make so much sense.)

Ravens_cry
2008-10-26, 12:34 AM
Rolling Healing into survival; especially loses sense in d20 modern. Now, Mr. Mountain Man may know some form of first aid augmented by herbs and such, but what about my Determined Hero doctor character? He is your basic city slicker, but he IS a doctor. With the proper equipment, healing is what he is good at.
While I can see a certain synergy been allowed in certain situations, I don't see any need for a pulling them together.
combining sight and sound senses may save time, but really makes no sense role play wise. How do you play a blind guy? Either he is has Daredevil blindsense or he is deaf as a post as well.
Makes no sense to this corvus.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-10-26, 12:38 AM
Rolling Healing into survival; especially loses sense in d20 modern. Now, Mr. Mountain Man may know some form of first aid augmented by herbs and such, but what about my Determined Hero doctor character? He is your basic city slicker, but he IS a doctor. With the proper equipment, healing is what he is good at.True, for Modern, but back then the healers a lot of times were their own herbalists. The combination makes sense there, and means people will take an underused skill
combining sight and sound senses may save time, but really makes no sense role play wise. How do you play a blind guy? Either he is has Daredevil blindsense or he is deaf as a post as well.
Makes no sense to this corvus.The issue is senses v. perception. It's noticing that an animal wouldn't have snapped that twig, not whether or not you're 20/20.

Ravens_cry
2008-10-26, 01:12 AM
True, for Modern, but back then the healers a lot of times were their own herbalists.

True, but would that same herbalist, know just about catching and skinning animals and such? He would likely know good berries from bad, and what wild foods weresafe to eat, but hunting and tracking? I don't see the synergy.

RPGuru1331
2008-10-26, 01:53 AM
I would say absolutely not to combining Listen+Spot or Hide+Move Silently. Those two are split up for a very good reason: They ensure that only characters with a decent number of skill points can master all the 'iconic' rogue skills. Without that, anyone who has Sneak or Survey as class skills can easily be as good as a rogue...

The skill tax of 4 sp/lvl to scout is a little nasty, so there's something of an advantage in folding.

...And what's wrong with people who don't have high skill points sneaking like rogues? That just means that stealth encounters can actually include party members besides the rogue.

Kizara
2008-10-26, 08:11 AM
See my sig. It probably could use a bit more work (as discussed in that thread), but its still a pretty good system that has served my group well.

paladin_carvin
2008-10-27, 03:30 PM
Kizara
My thoughts on your changes:
I actually like your thinking for a lot of these. I really like adding slight of hand to stealth and escape artist to acrobat. Use rope being added to Survival could make sense in some campaigns but, as I already have mentioned, I have folded tons of things into Survival already. Scribing is perfect, in my opinion; it would be hard to learn one without the other. I wouldn't give 'smell' since most people have barely any meaningful use for it, short of for taste. If a person can identify smells it's usually due to other skills (ie, alchemy, craft, profession etc).

I also like your Sorcerer fixes, and I plan to yoink them.

You using the term 'Innuendo' made me decide to go to thesaurus.com and figure out a new word for all of these skills. My favourites? Bravado and Histrionics. A Histrionic person (in terms of psychology) would be able to act, bluff, seduce as well as intimidate. Bravado works too.

Raven
D20 most certainly has a huge difference between heal and survival. D&D, not so much. I will admit the big error is that while a survivalist (or one with an understanding of nature) would most certainly be able to heal over periods of time as well as do battle medicine, but there are people that can do those two things without knowing a lick about nature. Maybe it could be folded into divine lore... or Science. Science is already where anatomy and autopsy are.

In addition, for a blind character: there would be a penalty to perception (unless they were daredevil) and their success would only give them a audio perception. They wouldn't have the penalty when obviously only listening would help (behind a door, invisible).

Philistine
2008-10-27, 04:54 PM
((snippage))
combining sight and sound senses may save time, but really makes no sense role play wise. How do you play a blind guy? Either he is has Daredevil blindsense or he is deaf as a post as well.
Makes no sense to this corvus.

How would you play a blind character in D&D as is?

Playing a blind or deaf character in a game using a single, combined Perception skill requires a little more work on the part of the player and DM. Instead of seeing a cloud of dust on the horizon, a blind character might notice a faint vibration in the ground. Instead of seeing a glint of metal off a hiding character's gear, a blind character might be alerted to an unknown presence by a cessation of bird calls. It takes a little more creativity, is all; I don't see the problem.

Mike_G
2008-10-27, 06:42 PM
Rogue Class Skills
Appraise - unnecessary.
Balance - unnecessary.
Bluff - unnecessary. (Your party does not need a good liar, although it may open options. If they decide to have one, it needn't be you.)
Climb - unnecessary. (In the odd circumstance you need an in-party climber, most fighting classes can do it as well or better than the rogue.)
Craft - unnecessary.
Decipher Script - unnecessary.
Diplomacy - unnecessary. (Your party does not need a sweet-talking expert. A pleasant Face facilitates interaction, but a very small bonus is easily sufficient. A powerful manipulator may open options, but even then it need not be you.)
Disable Device - unnecessary, except in a trap-heavy campaign. (Cleverness, expendables, and taking a little damage will substitute.)
Disguise - unnecessary.
Escape Artist - unnecessary, except in a grapple-heavy campaign.
Forgery - unnecessary.
Gather Information - unnecessary.
Hide/Move Silently - unnecessary. (The party should not require a sneak, though it opens lots of options. If they do, a number of other classes can do it, and a number of spells can substitute.)
Intimidate - unnecessary.
Jump - unnecessary.
Knowledge(Local) - unnecessary.
Listen/Spot - unnecessary. (The party benefits strongly from one or more members with sharp senses. However, they need not be you.)
Open Lock - unnecessary. (The party benefits from the ability to bypass some types of security without force or magic, but an indestructible spell-proof barrier should not have a mechanically circumventable lock. If it does, passing through the barrier should not be necessary.)
Perform - unnecessary.
Search - unnecessary, except in a trap-heavy campaign. (The party benefits strongly from a skilled searcher, but it need not be you unless trapfinding is central.)
Sense Motive - unnecessary. (The party may need a lie-detector in a game of intrigue, but it need not be you.)
Sleight of Hand - unnecessary.
Swim - unnecessary.
Tumble - probably necessary for high-level combat. (Most campaigns require everyone to contribute significantly in combat, and big creatures get lots of AOOs that you're probably too squishy to weather. Although a rogue with good Dex and Con need not be fragile.)
Use Magic Device - unnecessary, except in oppressively high-powered campaigns.
Use Rope - unnecessary.

Tumble aside, the rogue has no mandatory skills. Every option is useful in one context or another, but none are required except in a specialized game. A small number of his skills may be necessary for the party, but all of them can be covered easily a different PC.

Even if we decide all rogues need every 'iconic' rogue skill, there's no requirement that you max out every skill you use. If a skill is on the class skill list, that probably means it's either 'iconic' to the class, or anyone can do it. You can't be perfect at everything.

I disagree with almost every word of this.

I've never seen an adventure that didn't have traps or locks. The Move Silent and Hide pair with Spot, Listen and Search to make the scouting role work.

I generally play the Rogue, and my primary role, in 25 years of D&D, has been to sneak ahead, find and disable the traps, recon the bad guys, open the locked, trapped treasure chest/vault, disable the unnecessarily slow dipping device etc. Sneak Attack is nice, and Tumble helps with that, but in a dungeon out of combat, the Rogue skills come into their own.

Maybe the only necessary combat skill is Tumble, but in that case the Rogue is just a TWF flanking Fighter.

Sure, a DM could write an adventure that has no use for any of the iconic Rogue skills, but why would you, unless the party has no Rogue?

Draz74
2008-10-27, 07:16 PM
In addition:
Search: While I would like to fold something into this, this is NOT a perception roll. There is a reason this is based on Int. This has nothing to do with attention. This is entirely about knowing where to find things. This is going 'where would I hide a map in this office' or 'where on this filthy dead orc would he hide his secret orders'. A kid with ADD can be a great searcher but it would be impossible for him to pay attention enough to hear even a person not sneaking. While one real world example is not enough to make a solid argument, search is a thing that requires action and time. Spot and Listen are instantaneous.

As long as you're making an "overly simple, designed for beginners" system, you might as well roll Appraise and maybe even Forgery into Search.

paladin_carvin
2008-10-28, 04:39 AM
So here is my new list. I decided to try and include all of the craft, knowledge, performance and profession skills in with everything else. This should cover everything someone would want to do. Curious what you think to all of this. Also, I think I'm going to add that 'Speak Language' Variant.

Acrobatics (Dex*)- Tumble, Balance, Escape Artist, Dance
Animal Handling (Wis)- Animal H., Ride (feat), Pr. Driver/herder/rancher/Stable Hand/Teamster
Athletics (Str*)- Climb, Swim**, Jump, Pr. Porter
Carpentry (Int)-Cr. Weapons/tools etc. (wood only), Kn. Architecture Pr. Woodcutter
Deduction (Wis)- Sense Motive, Gather Information, Forgery (Detect Forgery)
Device Manipulation (Int)- Dis. Device, Open L, Use Magic Device (feat), Trap Making Pr. Miller
Guile (Int)- Kn. Local, Kn. geography, Search, Kn. Nobility and Royalty, Pr. Cook/Guide/
Histrionics (Cha)- Bluff (not feigning), Intimidate (Demoralize), Seduce, Disguise, Pe. Acting
Leather Work (Int)- Cr. Armour, tools, clothes etc. (leather only), Pr Hunter/Tanner
Masonry (Int)- Weapon/tool craft (stone only), Dungeoneering, Pr. Miner
Mercantile (Int)- Appraise, Pr. Merchant/shop owner/trader/innkeeper
Negotiations (Cha)- Diplomacy, Intimidate (Change Attitude)
Perception (Wis)- Spot, Listen
Performance (Cha)- Pe. Keyboard/Precusion/String/Wind/Sing
Scholastics (Int)- Kn: Religion, kn: planes, heal (LTC +2), kn: History Heal (1st Aid: 0, LTC +2), Oratory
Science (Int)- Autopsy, Anatomy, Geology, Cr: Alchemy, Firearm and ballistic crafts (First Aid, -2, Treat W/P/D +2), Engineering, Pr. Apothecary/Brewer
Sailing (Wis)- Kn. Sailing/oceanography, Pr. Boater/Sailor/Fisher (This can be used for Swim checks as well as Balance, Tumble, Climb and Jump checks while on a ship)
Scribe (Int)- Decipher Script, Forgery, Pr. Bookeeping/Scribe
Smithing (Int)- Cr: Armour/Weapons etc. (metal only)
Spellcraft (Int)- Kn. Arcana, concentration, Spellcraft
Stealth (Dex*)- MS, Hide, Slight of Hand
Wilderness Lore- (Wis)- Survival, Heal (1st Aid and LTC: with proper materials +2, w/o -4. Treat W/P/D only with materials at +4), Kn. Nature, Pr. Farmer/herbalist/hunter/lumberjack
War Craft (Wis)- Kn. War/Weapons, Pr. Soldier/Military Leader, Bluff (feign)

Kurald Galain
2008-10-28, 05:19 AM
Carpentry (Int)
Leather Work (Int)- Cr. Armour, tools, clothes etc. (leather only), Pr Hunter/Tanner
Masonry (Int)- Weapon/tool craft (stone only), Dungeoneering, Pr. Miner
Mercantile (Int)- Appraise, Pr. Merchant/shop owner/trader/innkeeper
Sailing (Wis)- Kn. Sailing/oceanography, Pr. Boater/Sailor/Fisher (This can be used for Swim checks as well as Balance, Tumble, Climb and Jump checks while on a ship)
Scribe (Int)- Decipher Script, Forgery, Pr. Bookeeping/Scribe
Smithing (Int)- Cr: Armour/Weapons etc. (metal only)

These sound rather pointless, at least for player characters.


War Craft (Wis)- Kn. War/Weapons, Pr. Soldier/Military Leader, Bluff (feign)
This one, too, because feinting isn't really a useful maneuver anyway.


Device Manipulation (Int)- Dis. Device, Open L, Use Magic Device (feat), Trap Making Pr. Miller
UMD should really be separate, for reasons of balance. Besides, activating magical items through force of will is completely unrelated to tinkering with mechanical devices.



Guile (Int)- Kn. Local, Kn. geography, Search, Kn. Nobility and Royalty, Pr. Cook/Guide/
The name "guile" doesn't seem related to, well, any of the skills listed here. Also, the perception (search) is unrelated to the trivia (all the other stuff).



Histrionics (Cha)- Bluff (not feigning), Intimidate (Demoralize), Seduce, Disguise, Pe. Acting
I'm assuming you meant "feinting". The name "histrionics" is rather silly.


Performance (Cha)- Pe. Keyboard/Precusion/String/Wind/Sing
Why isn't "acting" in here? Also, except for bards, perform really doesn't do anything meaningful.



Scholastics (Int)- Kn: Religion, kn: planes, heal (LTC +2), kn: History Heal (1st Aid: 0, LTC +2), Oratory
Oratory is charisma, not int. Many people who know a lot can't explain it well.

The main problem with your stacking is that several skills end up grouped under an attribute that really doesn't apply to the skill. Also, way too many things are put under intelligence, making the other stats much less important. I think more should be moved to dex and cha, in particular, unless your aim is to create homo universalis-type wizards.

Kurald Galain
2008-10-28, 06:14 AM
Based on the above,

Academics (Int)- Kn: Religion, kn: planes, kn: History, cartography/oceanography, kn. war/strategy
Acrobatics (Dex*)- Tumble, Balance, Escape Artist, Dance
Animal Handling (Wis)- Animal H., Ride (feat), Pr. Driver/herder/rancher/Stable Hand/Teamster
Athletics (Str*)- Climb, Swim**, Jump
Craftsman (Dex)- Cr: Armour/Weapons etc. (any), Kn. weapons, Pr tanner/Farmer/Cook/innkeeper/miller
Deduction (Wis)- Sense Motive, Gather Information, Forgery (Detect Forgery)
Masonry (Int)- Dungeoneering, Pr. Miner, Kn. Architecture, Engineering
Negotiation (Cha)- Diplomacy, Intimidate (Change Attitude), Oratory
Perception (Wis)- Spot, Listen, Search
Presence (Cha)- Bluff (all), Intimidate (Demoralize), Seduce, Disguise, Performance (all), kn. military leader
Science (Int)- Autopsy, Anatomy, Heal, Cr: Alchemy, First Aid, Pr. Apothecary/Brewer
Scribe (Int)- Decipher Script, Forgery, Pr. Bookeeping/Scribe, Appraise, Pr. Merchant/shop owner/trader
Spellcraft (Int)- Kn. Arcana, concentration, Spellcraft
Stealth (Dex*)- Move silently, Hide, Sleight of Hand
Streetwise (Int)- Kn. Local, Kn. geography, Kn. Nobility and Royalty, Pr. Guide
Tinker (Int)- Dis. Device, Open L, Trap Making, knots/use rope
Use Magic Device (cha)
Wilderness Lore- (Wis)- Survival, Kn. Nature, Geology, Pr. herbalist/hunter/lumberjack/Woodcutter

(and note that most of the professions are irrelevant anyway)

KevLar
2008-10-28, 07:25 AM
So here is my new list. I decided to try and include all of the craft, knowledge, performance and profession skills in with everything else. This should cover everything someone would want to do. Curious what you think to all of this.
Umm... apart from the fact that many skill groups are based on a rather arbitrary stat, I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish with this. Most of these groups are nice for flavor and determining the character's background, but have nothing to do with leveling up while adventuring (except very specific cases, like advancing your sailor skills on a pirate campaign).

Maybe you'd prefer to use these ideas for a background/fluff bonus. There are a lot of house rules like that. For example: choose a relative background and get a bonus to 3-4 skills, which become class skills for your entire career. Or gain as a background bonus 4 ranks to any Profession/Craft skill you want. Or use Fax's Mechanically Fluffy (http://wiki.faxcelestis.net/index.php?title=Mechanically_Fluffy) variant.

But as normal skills, to which you have to invest skill points at each level, these groups make less sense, IMO.

Philistine
2008-10-28, 12:06 PM
Umm... apart from the fact that many skill groups are based on a rather arbitrary stat, I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish with this. Most of these groups are nice for flavor and determining the character's background, but have nothing to do with leveling up while adventuring (except very specific cases, like advancing your sailor skills on a pirate campaign).

Maybe you'd prefer to use these ideas for a background/fluff bonus. There are a lot of house rules like that. For example: choose a relative background and get a bonus to 3-4 skills, which become class skills for your entire career. Or gain as a background bonus 4 ranks to any Profession/Craft skill you want. Or use Fax's Mechanically Fluffy (http://wiki.faxcelestis.net/index.php?title=Mechanically_Fluffy) variant.

But as normal skills, to which you have to invest skill points at each level, these groups make less sense, IMO.

The context of the thread is that the OP intends to houserule some skill mergers, and is looking for logical combinations. These "skill groups," then, would be the results of those mergers. :smallamused:

paladin_carvin
2008-10-28, 02:56 PM
Thank you Philistine. My point is exactly what you said. Putting the profession in there makes is somewhat a reverse thinking of skills. In stead of being what you are investing your talent in (ie, I wish to stealthier) the addition of profession to these things thinks what jobs you would be perfectly capable of because of what talent you've been investing in (I can handle any new animal, so I can be Stable Hand with ease, and in reverse, I've been a stable hand all my life, so I can handle animals wonderfully). This has two effects. For a PC this means that they know jobs that they are capable of. This also means that NPCs with NPC classes can have more skills that make sense without breaking the same system that the PCs use.


Based on the above,

Academics (Int)- Kn: Religion, kn: planes, kn: History, cartography/oceanography, kn. war/strategy
Acrobatics (Dex*)- Tumble, Balance, Escape Artist, Dance
Animal Handling (Wis)- Animal H., Ride (feat), Pr. Driver/herder/rancher/Stable Hand/Teamster
Athletics (Str*)- Climb, Swim**, Jump
Craftsman (Dex)- Cr: Armour/Weapons etc. (any), Kn. weapons, Pr tanner/Farmer/Cook/innkeeper/miller
Deduction (Wis)- Sense Motive, Gather Information, Forgery (Detect Forgery)
Masonry (Int)- Dungeoneering, Pr. Miner, Kn. Architecture, Engineering
Negotiation (Cha)- Diplomacy, Intimidate (Change Attitude), Oratory
Perception (Wis)- Spot, Listen, Search
Presence (Cha)- Bluff (all), Intimidate (Demoralize), Seduce, Disguise, Performance (all), kn. military leader
Science (Int)- Autopsy, Anatomy, Heal, Cr: Alchemy, First Aid, Pr. Apothecary/Brewer
Scribe (Int)- Decipher Script, Forgery, Pr. Bookeeping/Scribe, Appraise, Pr. Merchant/shop owner/trader
Spellcraft (Int)- Kn. Arcana, concentration, Spellcraft
Stealth (Dex*)- Move silently, Hide, Sleight of Hand
Streetwise (Int)- Kn. Local, Kn. geography, Kn. Nobility and Royalty, Pr. Guide
Tinker (Int)- Dis. Device, Open L, Trap Making, knots/use rope
Use Magic Device (cha)
Wilderness Lore- (Wis)- Survival, Kn. Nature, Geology, Pr. herbalist/hunter/lumberjack/Woodcutter

(and note that most of the professions are irrelevant anyway)

This is fantastic. There are a few that I disagree with, which I will give simple apologetics for. There are also a few I'll just make notes on.

Academics: Love the name. I view academics in the Princeton line of thought. Princeton always emphasized oratory skills, and the concept of being able to speak anything you've learned. This is consistent with older schools like Oxford and Trinity, I believe. I do wish using varied ability scores was a more common concept. It is official in d20/D&D, but is mention in about two or three sentences as almost a throw away.
Athletics: After reading a bit on what a Porter traditionally is, I think fits amazingly well with Athletics.
Craftsman: Agreed. Amazing how I can make an attempt to simplify and still make things much more complicated than need be.
Histrionics (performance): Histrionics is a psychology and philosophy term. I happen to like it; it refers to a person who feels that life is a stage. Bravado would also work quite well.
Negotiations: Hmm... well, this is actually a good place for Oratory. I do like the Princeton thought, but this avoids the multiple ability score thing.
Perception: Search is not a wisdom based score, nor should it ever be. It has nothing to do with perception and everything to do with knowing how people place hidden things, be it switches, treasures, traps or whatever else people hide. Search is something that should be rolled into some INT skill.
Guile(streetwise): I chose guile because it seemed more like an 'int' based name. Streetwise has the word 'wise' in it, implying wisdom... and street smarts sounds far too modern. I'd put search back in here. Guile, to me, seems to be a skill for 'handy' knowledge. Rumors, politics, how to find things, how to get into places. If disguise was an Int check I'd put it here.
Tinker: I suppose that's a better word for it... I like adding rope in here.
Wilderness Lore: Geology being here makes tons of sense... why didn't I think of it?

mangosta71
2008-10-28, 03:11 PM
I don't know if I'd roll concentration into spellcraft. Spellcraft and Knowledge (Arcana) certainly, as they're training in the scholarly aspects of casting and recognizing magical effects, but concentration is more about the ability to focus and ignore distractions. Make it a separate skill, and roll autohypnosis into it.

paladin_carvin
2008-10-28, 04:10 PM
I don't know if I'd roll concentration into spellcraft. Spellcraft and Knowledge (Arcana) certainly, as they're training in the scholarly aspects of casting and recognizing magical effects, but concentration is more about the ability to focus and ignore distractions. Make it a separate skill, and roll autohypnosis into it.

The way I saw it, concentration was almost exclusively about spells. So, it would make sense to me that be more competent you were about spells, the more likely you'd be able to be maintain no matter what. For anything else, I thought a concentration check would be based on the pertaining skill, or on BAB if it involved fighting.

KevLar
2008-10-28, 08:45 PM
I'd just like to say thanks, people, because this thread persuaded me to finally begin writing down my own ideas about skills (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95102). Still in progress, but any feedback is welcome. :smallsmile: