(D&D 3.5) Ramifications/Ill Effects increased skill points for the base classes?

[Coidzor]

Specifically, what would be the problems to come from giving all of the base classes skill points as a bard/ranger(that is, 6 base)?

Edit: I realized I mistyped this somehow when I was first posting all of this. argh. Never meant to say that I was lowering the amount of skill points any class was getting, more raising the minimum. Which of course is lowering the relative number of skillpoints at the upper end, but, y'know, that's a given if one is raising the minimum without necessarily raising the maximum.

Scenario is: base classes have a minimum of 4+ skillpoints for full casters, 6+ minimum for the rest?

[Eldariel]

Specifically, what would be the problems to come from giving all of the base classes skill points as a bard/ranger(that is, 6 base)?

Would make the skill monkey classes less special; not something you want, the skill points are 1/3rd of a Rogue's power and a big reason Ranger is better than Fighter, for example (and why Monk sucks...well, one of those anyways). That said, with how many skills the system has, such a change is needed.

I've been running flat +4 skills to every class lately and it's worked like a charm; I've got players with Appraise, players with Forgery, players with a variety of Crafts and Professions and such without having to give up mechanical necessities of their class! I've been thinking of giving few more though, especially to presently lacking classes. Also, I've been handing out, Spots, Listens, Diplomacies, Sense Motives and other basic skills open-handedly. Makes Fighter more interesting when he doesn't believe that the moon is purpleish-green if told so.

Thanks to the fact that the monkey classes have specialized skill lists, this isn't causing any trouble at all. In fact, in our latest game the party is only composed of skill monkeys because people like having the vast coverage these skillpoints provide (that said, Int is still never under 14, hence my comment about making further additions).

[Saph]

Main issue would be that it takes away a good part of the reason for playing a skill class. The wizard will now have the most skills of anyone in the party due to his high Int.

- Saph

[Panda-s1]

Main issue would be that it takes away a good part of the reason for playing a skill class. The wizard will now have the most skills of anyone in the party due to his high Int.

- Saph

But that could very well already be the case. Unless you have a rogue in the party, then it would be the same as usual.

It also undoes the whole issue of certain classes sucking out of combat.

[Starsinger]

I think it's a wonderful idea, "balancing" classes with skill points was a stupid idea in the first place.

[Tsotha-lanti]

I think it's a wonderful idea, "balancing" classes with skill points was a stupid idea in the first place.

Absolutely. 4 might be enough, depending; Conan d20 gives every class at least 4+Int skill points. (Or is it 5? I forget if they included the human bonus point or not, what with there not being non-humans.)

[BooNL]

I second Eldariel's opinion. More skillpoints means more uses of those obscure skills.

Don't make it a flat number though, as said monkeys are supposed to be the rulers of skills, so they should always be in the lead.

[wadledo]

I myself think that a better solution would be to combine a bunch of skills.
Spot+Listen+Perception
Hide+Move Silently=Stealth
Etc.

That way, classes with lots of skill points keep their large amount, and classes with less skill points can actually afford cross class skills.

[arkol]

I just made a character for a new campaign right here in the oots boards. A beguiler with a starting int of 20. That's 11 skills every level. The DM used the perception/stealth skills. Plus a bonus 5 skills points to use on craft/profession for background purposes mostly. And still, after covering the basic stuff (perception, stealth, trap stuff and social skills, cocentration and whatknot) I feel I don't have many skill points to go around with the less used skills.

So yeah go ahed and bump the skill points for EVERY class. Make rogues/scouts 10 per level, ranger/bard etc.. 8 per level and so on. I would probably keep the big powerhouses (wizard, druid and cleric in core) alone however. Not that THAT gonna fix them, but they don't any more help really.

[Saph]

But that could very well already be the case. Unless you have a rogue in the party, then it would be the same as usual.

It also undoes the whole issue of certain classes sucking out of combat.

Typical numbers for an average party, assuming a 28/32 point buy:

Rogue has about 10 skills/level. (Starting Int of 14ish.)
Ranger has about 7 skills/level. (Starting Int of 12ish.)
Wizard has about 6 skills/level. (Starting Int of 18ish.)
Fighter has about 3 skills/level. (Starting Int of 12ish.)

If you give all classes skill points of 6, the new numbers will be:

Rogue has about 8 skills/level. (Starting Int of 14ish.)
Ranger has about 7 skills/level. (Starting Int of 12ish.)
Wizard has about 10 skills/level. (Starting Int of 18ish.)
Fighter has about 7 skills/level. (Starting Int of 12ish.)

So this houserule helps Fighter and other martial classes, but bear in mind that it also buffs some of the classes that least need buffing, such as Wizards and Clerics. Skill classes like Rogue and Ranger are significantly nerfed, as the high skills is one of the main reasons people play them in the first place.

So I think this needs more work.

- Saph

[Sinfire Titan]

What about this:

Melee classes with 2+Int get 4+Int and extra skills to cover the excess points they can't spend.

Classes like Monk and Soulknife get 6+Int (as they are wannabe Rogues).

Rangers, Bards, Factotums, and other JoATs (well, sort of) get 6+1d4+Int (roll each level).

Rogues and other dedicated Skill Monkeys get 10+Int.

Full Casters get 2+Int (because casters are Overpowered, and extra skills don't mean squat to them).

[Devils_Advocate]

Giving everyone the same number of skill points per level would unbalance the game, much like giving everyone the same number of hit points per level would unbalance the game. Unless you also changed other things to be more samey.

Really, though, if you want to go in the direction of bringing the classes into balance by making them work the same way, I think you're better off working with 4E. It pretty much does this already, from what I gather.

Giving a fixed number of extra skill points per level to everyone would be more balanced. I'll go out on a limb and guess that you could probably increase everyone's allowance by as much as 4 without seriously wrecking anything; I think that that would help everyone roughly equally. Well, you might want to give at least, some classes, like Fighter and Sorcerer, more class skills. Maybe make Listen and Spot class skills for everyone.

And that way, it makes a difference how much you dump Int, no matter what class you're playing.

You'd need to add skill points to every monster with Int 2+ if you wanted to be consistent about it.

[Curmudgeon]

Giving a fixed number of extra skill points per level to everyone would be more balanced. I'll go out on a limb and guess that you could probably increase everyone's allowance by as much as 4 without seriously wrecking anything; I think that that would help everyone roughly equally.

It wouldn't help everyone equally. The classes are balanced based on the ratios of skills. If you give everyone +4 skill points you're tripling the allotment at the low end (+200%), but only bumping the high end by +50%. It would be fairer to go from 2/4/6/8 to 3/6/9/12 or something similar.

[arkol]

The classes are balanced based on the ratios of skills.

Er... hmmm... they are?

[Curmudgeon]

Er... hmmm... they are?

Sure. Skills are about 4 times as important to Rogues as they are to Fighters. Giving each class +4 points at each level (+12 at 1st level) would make a little bit of difference to a Rogue, and a huge difference to a Fighter. But giving the Fighter +1 skill point while giving the Rogue +4 skill points would keep the relative importance of skills balanced.

[GreyMantle]

Yeah, more often than not (ignoring some things like UMD), skills are either background information stuff that's fun to have but not always necessary (knowledge, perform, etc.), or made totally obsolete by magic by 5th or so levels (the various movement and stealth skills). When you also consider that they take so much time to do for so little a benefit, it's obvious that skills are really annoying.

I've made a couple rule changes to modify their use. I started by drastically reducing the skill types into ones that actually matter, and then I use a trained-esque system where you start with twice the skillpoints you would normally get (2(6+Int mod) for example), though every class gets a minimum of 4+int. Putting one point into a skill gives you the max number of ranks for a cross-class skill, while two makes you totally awesome in it (you can only be totally awesome in class skills). I tend to handle multiclassing amounts on a case-by-case basis.

I also use a system similar to skill tricks, where, if you have x ranks in a skill, you'll get some new power. So having 12 ranks in acrobatics (balance and tumble) might let you move over safe liquids as long as you don't stop. And so on. It works well, I've found though the new benefits add a bit of bookeeping.

[J.Gellert]

I've always said that next time I run a campaign, I'll give everyone at least 4 skill points per level (and increase d4 and d6 hit dice to d6 and d8, for that matter). Haven't had a chance to, yet, so I can't speak from experience; it's just my idea that it won't break any games anytime soon.

[Devils_Advocate]

Sure. Skills are about 4 times as important to Rogues as they are to Fighters. Giving each class +4 points at each level (+12 at 1st level) would make a little bit of difference to a Rogue, and a huge difference to a Fighter. But giving the Fighter +1 skill point while giving the Rogue +4 skill points would keep the relative importance of skills balanced.

And we wouldn't want Fighters to have nice things, would we?

Furthermore, if skills are more important to Rogues -- because they rely on their skills to fulfill their role as scout, trapmonkey, and general breaker-and-enterer -- wouldn't more skill points be more useful to Rogues than Fighters?

Each character gets 4 extra skill points per level. The Rogue has a far better list of class skills than the Fighter to put them in. If anything, isn't the Rogue going to get more benefit?

I guess I'm just not seeing the "huge difference to a Fighter". What would a Fighter do with those extra skill points that's so great?

The main limit on skills is max ranks. Just giving out more skill points increases character versatility more than raw power.

Now, I guess it could be a bad idea for prepared spellcasters. They tend to have good skill lists and to be able to do nearly everything with spells anyway. Giving them plenty of skill points might allow one to cover too many bases. A wizard could have a superb rather than just passable modifier to every Knowledge skill, for example.

So, maybe keep Wizards and Clerics at Int+2 skill points per level, and bump druids down to that.

[Curmudgeon]

I guess I'm just not seeing the "huge difference to a Fighter". What would a Fighter do with those extra skill points that's so great?

Have options for both mounted and in-your-face combat by virtue of max. ranks in Handle Animal, Ride, and Intimidate. Be able to Climb and Swim. Be able to qualify for and afford skill tricks, which have skill rank minimums. Corner Perch, Wall Jumper, Dismount Attack, and Extreme Leap could add a lot of excitement to a pretty bland class. And you can make every nearby enemy quake with Never Outnumbered.

[Coidzor]

So how about 4 for casters(druid, cleric, wizzy)/5-6 for regular classes(monk, meleers)/10 for skillful classes(thinking bard and rogue here, *maybe* ranger) and making spot/listen/perception a class skill for everyone?

[Dagren]

One thing I've considered is giving Wizards bonus skill points equal to their Int modifier, but only useable on knowledge skills. Even with the a good int score, 2+int still isn't very many. Basically means that they get twice their int bonus due to their scholastic leanings, but have to take some knowledge skills (As opposed to dumping them in favour of combat skills. Why a wizard would need combat skills I don't know, but there you have it). Would that break balance to any great degree?

[Justin B.]

Leave the full casters where they are.

[Curmudgeon]

Full casters should never be improved unless you're very certain that you're improving every other class more.

[Eldariel]

Improving full casters on this front hardly breaks anything. They need a few skills, but the rest they can spend as they will. Sorcerer, for example, definitely deserves more than 2+Int; he's head-to-head with a Wizard and Wizard with his 16+ Int is going to generally have 6-7 skills on level 1, while Sorcerer is lucky to have 3. And they're supposed to be pretty equivalent on most points.

I'd throw the following chart if I were to do a more complete revision for PHB classes:

Rogue: 14+Int
Bard/Ranger: 12+Int
Monk/Barbarian: 10+Int
Sorcerer/Druid/Fighter: 8+Int
Cleric/Wizard: 6+Int


Basically, 6 more to the monkeys, Sorcerer and melee (Druid would get 6 more if it weren't so fcking insane already), 4 to the Big 3. Honestly, just because they're strong doesn't mean they shouldn't get extra skills; they won't be any more broken that way. Sure, they can afford a Profession or a Craft or some cross-class Balance, Climb or Tumble (seriously, Elves are the most common Wizards and yet they don't learn anything about climbing even with having lived in a tree their whole life? Srs?), whoppedoo. Mostly, it should just make life a bit more interesting.


I suggest the doubters give it a shot in some game and see how crazy you can get with all the skillpoints you ever dreamed of (A word of experience: This won't change the fact that you'll still be wanting more). But yeah, I sorta like how you don't need to be a fcking Einstein to learn two different skills over your life.

[Devils_Advocate]

I say leave prepared full spellcasters with 2+Int, the idea being that their skilledness is tied up in knowing how to cast a lot of powerful spells instead of more mundane things. Those spells often let them do the same things as skills, after all. The Wizard doesn't even need to make Climb and Jump checks when he has overland flight, and so on. Casters are already overly skilled, just not in the game-mechanical sense. They can do a lot.

Giving 2 more skill points to everyone else to help them do more would help to narrow the gap.

[bosssmiley]

Band Aid on a shotgun wound.

Increasing the number of skill points is essentially meaningless so long as most skills either

1. do nothing worthwhile (i.e.: level-appropriate)
2. can be reliably outdone by low-level spells (glibness, spider climb, invis/silence, levitate, etc.), or
3. are just b0rked as written (Diplomancy, Craft).

Trying to fix skills so that they actually matter to characters is opening up a whole barrel of worms. That said, it will teach you the d20 system inside out...and, at least in my personal experience, send you running screaming for sanctuary in mechanical simplicity.

[#Raptor]

So yeah go ahed and bump the skill points for EVERY class. Make rogues/scouts 10 per level, ranger/bard etc.. 8 per level and so on. I would probably keep the big powerhouses (wizard, druid and cleric in core) alone however. Not that THAT gonna fix them, but they don't any more help really.

^^ Agreed.
Imho giving all classes another +2 skillpoints (so as arkol said - rogues/scouts 10, ranger/bard 8... etc) would be the simplest solution to the general skill points starvedness (from wich, lets be honest, almost all classes suffer).

Perhaps let there be a exception for wizards - they already get plenty of skillpoints from theyr int - and druids (they are way less MAD than clerics - wis & con, thats it for the shaper druid... a persist cleric needs wis, cha, con, str - and druids already get 4/lvl compared to the clerics 2/lvl).

I myself think that a better solution would be to combine a bunch of skills.
Spot+Listen+Perception
Hide+Move Silently=Stealth
Etc.

That way, classes with lots of skill points keep their large amount, and classes with less skill points can actually afford cross class skills.

Its a good idea - but why not use it together with the general skillpoints increase?
This way the dedicated skillmonkeys don't have to spend all theyr skillpoints on scouting related stuff.

[arkol]

I know that 4E combined a lot of preexisting skills into a single skill.

I know at least:
stealth (MS+hide)
perception (spot+listen)
atlethics (jump+climb?)
acrobatics (balance+tumble?)

sabotage? Not sure about if they did this one or not. Disable Device + Open Lock. If this actually exists in 4e and is not a product of my imaginations, it's based on what ability? Cause OL is dex and DD is int....

Others?

Is there really a necessaty to keep handle animal and ride seperate?

[ericgrau]

When you do skills as a matter of challenging the players (DM sets DCs), the skillmonkey becomes a joke as he still has a 25-50% chance of failing on tasks with a minor benefit, while the DM focuses on the few skills he remembers. Adding 2 skill points lets everyone participate in the misery, or has no impact on cross-class skills that can't meet the DC set for the skillmonkey, or has no impact on the extra skills the skillmonkey gets because the DM doesn't remember those anyway.

When you do skills as something that can be mastered (fixed DCs set in rules), the skillmonkey gets more and more tricks as he levels up. Some tricks with automatic success, and stronger tricks with risk. He can't get royally screwed over by failure so he wants to keep doing them. The few skills with increasing DCs also have up to +15 magic items granting auto-success anyway, or stronger tricks with risk. Adding 2 skill points makes the skillmonkey less essential, even for cross-class skills where others can still do something. There's even more overlap because not every skill needs to be maxed when you already have enough to make the DCs you want.

Btw if you want a consolidated skill system there's one in my sig coupled with some rules cheat sheets showing everything you can do. There's the same for the standard skill system (both have non-skill rules too).