Pathfinder Reshuffling Skills ...

[Jeff Wilder]

Comments very welcome. These are changes we're making and playtesting. Reports to follow later.

PERCEPTION
Pathfinder -- Combined Spot, Listen, and Search into Perception. Also added other senses (taste, touch, smell).
Problem -- Perception is just too much for one skill. Who won't max it out if they can?
Change -- Divided Perception into two skills, one active and one passive: "Observe," which is INT-based, and represents actively looking for something, whether it be traps, a weird taste or smell, or a clue at a crime scene; and "Notice," which is WIS-based and covers all of the same things. Observe also includes picking up the tell-tales of a truly valuable item (Appraise), and Notice also includes the ability to get a sense of when someone is trustworthy or evasive (Sense Motive).

In general, Notice DCs will be unchanged from Perception DCs, and Observe DCs will be 5 lower than Perception DCs. To balance that out, Notice is always a free action or even no action at all. Observe, on the other hand, will generally take at least a move action, and using Observe will generally be noticeable by people paying attention to you. Notice cannot be used to detect a trap with a DC higher than 20.

Classes with Observe as a class skill are bard, ranger, rogue, and wizard. Classes with Notice as a class skill are barbarian, druid, ranger, rogue, bard, paladin, and monk. Races with bonuses get them to both skills.

Just one cool example of how this would work in practice: if a rogue with, say, +11 in Notice is moving down a corridor containing a pit trap (DC 20), that rogue would (assuming Take 10) automatically perceive the trap while still 10 feet away. By contrast, to find the same pit with Observe, the rogue would only need a +5, but it takes time and the attempt to find it is noticeable if anybody's paying attention.

APPRAISE
Pathfinder -- Gave better rules and the additional use of identifying magical items.
Problem -- It's a lame-ass skill in a heroic fantasy game.
Change -- Folded Appraise into Observe.

SENSE MOTIVE
Pathfinder -- Pretty much left Sense Motive as is.
Problem -- None, really. It's not a hugely useful skill, unless the DM allows it to be used as a lie detector, and it fits nicely into Notice, where it balances Appraise's place under Observe.
Change -- Folded Sense Motive into Notice.

ACROBATICS, CLIMB, JUMP, and SWIM
Pathfinder -- Combined Jump with Balance and Tumble into Acrobatics. Left Climb and Swim alone.
Problem -- Jump doesn't fit well at all under Acrobatics, because a superb jumper should not always be a superb tumbler. Tumbling is a specialized skill, and Jump is an "everyman" skill. Climb and Swim, on the other hand, just aren't useful enough to stand on their own, and a good athlete is usually pretty good at athletics in general.
Change -- Removed Jump from Acrobatics, and combined Climb, Jump, and Swim into Athletics, which is STR-based.

LINGUISTICS
Pathfinder -- Combined Forgery, Decipher Script, and Speak Language into Linguistics.
Problem -- We don't like the inclusion of Speak Language into the skill, and think it works fine as is. Speak Language is useful enough to be worth 1 or 2 skill points.
Change -- Speak Language works the same as in 3.5. We're also going to allow spoken communication with Linguistics, at +5 to the DCs. As with getting the meaning of a text, this takes one minute per conversational exchange. It can be done at more normal conversational speed if the PC takes a -10 to the Linguistics check. Failing a check by 5 or more is a miscommunication. Finally, you can identify a language, spoken or written. DC is 10, going up with rarity and complexity.

DISABLE DEVICE
Pathfinder -- Combined Open Lock and Disable Device into one DEX-based skill.
Problem -- We don't like the skill being DEX-based. We kinda like the conceptual difference between a cat-burglar and a safe-cracker, though of course nothing stops a rogue from being both!
Change -- Disable Device is INT-based.

SLEIGHT OF HAND and BLUFF
Pathfinder -- Made no significant change to these skills.
Problem -- Sleight of Hand just doesn't see very much use in any non-thief-centric game we've ever played. That, combined with the fact that the described uses for Sleight of Hand are so similar to how feinting and distraction are described under Bluff (distraction is basically a Sleight of Hand of oneself!), it made sense to combine them.
Change -- Folded Sleight of Hand into Bluff.

RIDE and HANDLE ANIMAL
Pathfinder -- Made no change to these skills.
Problem -- The skills aren't useful enough to stand alone. After all, Ride is just a specialized form of Handle Animal.
Change -- Fold Ride into Handle Animal (CHA-based). The only core classes that don't have Handle Animal are bard, cleric, rogue, sorcerer, and wizard.

SPELLCRAFT
Pathfinder -- Folded Concentration into Spellcraft.
Problem -- Spellcraft is INT-based, so this is yet another bone thrown to wizards. On the other hand, Concentration really doesn't cover enough to stand on its own.
Change -- The skill formerly known as Concentration is now a caster level check, modified by spellcasting attribute.

ASSIST BONUSES
Pathfinder -- Pathfinder got rid of synergy bonuses, but still allows Aid Another to assist with skills.
Problem -- Not much. Just want to expand on it a little.
Change -- First, any reasonable skill can be used to assist with another skill use. For example, Knowledge (history) could be used to assist with a Linguistics check to identify an ancient language. Second, you can assist yourself. (In practice, this works out kinda like on-the-fly synergy bonuses.) It might take extra time, but that won't often matter. Third, assist bonuses from the same skill don't stack. Two people can search a room with Observe and get a +2 bonus. A third person just duplicates effort.

[BryonD]

Just shooting from the hip here...

PERCEPTION - I like it. I was also concerned that the elimination cross class skill ranks combined with the merger of spot and listen would make everyone into super detectors. Granted, limited skill points are a partial control on that.

APPRAISE - I'm not sure I agree with throwing it into Observe, but I can't argue that it isn't lame. And I don't think many campaigns hinge on Appraise checks, so making it be "free" with observe is probably not worth disputing.

LINGUISTICS - I have my own languages sub -system that I like. So I agree here, but for slightly different reasons.

DISABLE DEVICE - I agree. A Feat to let that Dex 20 INT 8 Rogue do things "by touch" would be fine also.

RIDE and HANDLE ANIMAL - I'd keep those separate. (though a +2 to Ride for every 5 Handle Animal ranks would work for me)

[Psion]

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

PERCEPTION
Pathfinder -- Combined Spot, Listen, and Search into Perception. Also added other senses (taste, touch, smell).
Problem -- It's just too much for one skill. Who *won't* max it out if they can?
Change -- This one is complicated to explain, but actually pretty simple in execution. We just thought about how perception works, conceptually, and there are two facets of it: active and passive. "Active" is actually *trying* to find or perceive something. It's based on how well you put clues together and quickly make sound deductions. "Passive" is more intuitive, and based on just noticing things in the normal course of activity.

Spycraft (and by inference, the upcoming Fantasy Craft) does this. The passive skill is Notice; the active skill is Search.

This folds right into Spycrafts Active/Secret/Passive check distinction. Usually, if the player is making the roll, it's search. If the GM is making the roll, it's notice.

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I think I can find no fault in these suggestions.

[freyar]

Since we're tweaking skills a bit:

Splitting Perception into Observe and Notice could simplify the racial Perception bonuses, too. Instead of worrying about which senses, you could just get a +2 to either Observe or Notice. For example, I'd give elves +2 Notice (which is something I'd associate with the secret doors business).

But maybe this is throwing out too much flavor? Just a thought.

[Kaisoku]

Have you checked the new Appraise?

It's now the primary factor in Identifying magic items. 3 rounds and a successful check and you know the magical abilities of the item.

Identify gives a +10 to the Appraise check, but the DC is on a scaling difficulty... DC 20 is for anything 1001g to 5000g items, and it gets worse from there.
So having ranks in Appraise could be fairly useful to the group.

Heck, a Rogue could get Detect Magic with his Minor Magic ability, and then pump ranks into Appraise and be the group's Identifier.

With this kind of useability, I don't see it needing to be folded into any other skill. It would make "Observe" a bit too strong if you ask me.
Also, knowing prices on things is a bit more than just "noticing" something, it requires a bit of back knowledge of value of items... It doesn't fit like Disable Device being a Dex skill.


Lastly, regarding changing these skills.

Perception: I can see this kind of change working. It makes the distinction between actively searching for something, and the "Surprise!" factor.

Appraise: Well, you have my take on that up there.

Linguistics: I think languages need to be redone anyways. Make this skill about trying to speak/read a language you don't know, and then have a new mechanic for complicated skill checks in learning fluency in a language (and then adding to the list).

Disable Device: I can see the reason for both sides of this problem. Actually disabling a device requires manual dexterity... however knowing how a trap works requires Intelligence. For sake of reducing skills I'm still in favoring of mixing with Open Locks.

Ride/Handle Animal: Maybe the best way to handle this one is to make the skill use for general/simple things with an animal. Someone who knows how to ride a horse well, knows how to calm them, etc.
Perhaps the training animals aspect would work best as a feat enhancing this skill. Classes that should have the feat (Ranger and Druid) would get it for free, etc.

[Wulf Ratbane]

I'm also using Perception (Spot/Listen) as a passive skill (Take 10 at all times) and Search as the active version. Exactly as you described.

I took my design cues from D&D Online.

[Wulf Ratbane]

I'm also using Perception (Spot/Listen) as a passive skill (Take 10 at all times) and Search as the active version. Exactly as you described.

I took my design cues from D&D Online.

[Krensky]

Disable Device + Open Lock: Open Lock is really a subset of Disable Device. The arguments that sabotage is INT and lock picking is DEX is too simplistic. The things INT covers are just as important in picking a lock as manual dexterity. Perhaps more so. Now, granted your average D&D lock is rather pathetic as locks go, but I blending these two and making the result Dex based feels like the appropriate D&D thing to do.

As for Linguistics I've mostly be scratching my head over adding Forgery to it, but the strength or weakness of the skill relates more to the table play style then the rules.

Ride and Handle Animal could probably be folded together, and while I agree Perception could probably be split, the counter argument to that would be that players will tend to pump Notice and ignore Observe.

[dogoftheunderworld]

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

...PERCEPTION...

I like these changes - very cool...

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

...Classes with Observe as a class skill are bard, ranger, rogue, and wizard. (And, relevant to our games, artificer.) Classes with Notice as a class skill are barbarian, druid, monk, ranger, rogue, bard, paladin, and monk.) ...

Best of all, Monks get Observe Twice! Viva le Monk!

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

APPRAISE
Pathfinder -- Pretty much left Appraise as is.
Problem -- It's a lame-ass skill.
Change -- Folded Appraise into Observe.

I would remove Appraise all together and fold that skill description into Craft/Profession. Don't you need some knowledge of an item to appraise it?

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

... other stuff

I am agreeable with your other observations.


If nothing else, the open playtest of Pathfinder is gathering an awesome list of house rules for people to cherry pick!

[Greg K]

I like the changes ( Now, if they would remove the +3 bonus for class skills or limit it to skills taken at first level).

I agree with the idea of removing appraise and making a function of having either the appropriate craft or profession skill (I'd also add Handle Animal for appraising the quality of an animal).

[Jeff Wilder]

Originally Posted by Krensky

The arguments that sabotage is INT and lock picking is DEX is too simplistic. The things INT covers are just as important in picking a lock as manual dexterity. Perhaps more so. [Bl]ending these two and making the result Dex based feels like the appropriate D&D thing to do.

I'm a little confused, as your conclusion doesn't seem to follow from your statements.

Originally Posted by dogoftheunderworld

Best of all, Monks get Observe Twice! Viva le Monk!

Clearly, I have ranks in neither Notice nor Observe ...

Fixing that mistake in my post.

I would remove Appraise all together and fold that skill description into Craft/Profession. Don't you need some knowledge of an item to appraise it?

I dunno. Does a museum curator know how to make a katana or paint an impressionist masterpiece?

I'd consider giving a +2 for synergistic use of Craft or other appropriate skills, but I think Appraise fits just fine under Observe.

[Krensky]

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

I'm a little confused, as your conclusion doesn't seem to follow from your statements.

Let me approach this from a different angle.

The premise you use to inform your decision to make disable device and open lock separate skills with the former being Int and the later being Dex is erroneous.

You make lock picking a Dex based activity. In reality, while manual dexterity has some importance, the major component is intellectual. Knowing what type of lock you're picking, how it's constructed, what it's weakness are, etc. This is true whether you are using brute force, manipulation, bumping, or any other technique. Lock picking is far more of an intellectual activity then a dexterity issue.

However, we make the skill Dex based in game.

Lock picking is a specialized form of sabotage, which means it falls under Disable Device. A lock is a device, defeating it without the key or combination and without relying on brute force is disabling it. So lock picking should be part of the Disable Device skill.

Now, by the logic you say that means Disable Device should be Int based, so should the act of opening a lock illicitly. However you left Open Lock as Dex, which is where it belong if only to prevent people asking why it's Int based.

In essence: Combine the two and leave it Dex based.

[Jeff Wilder]

Originally Posted by Krensky

However you left Open Lock as Dex, which is where it belong if only to prevent people asking why it's Int based.

Um, no, I didn't. I think you must have misread.

I like Open Lock folded into Disable Device, just as Pathfinder did, and nothing I wrote indicated I was seaparating the skills again. I just don't like the combo being DEX-based, so we changed the skill (the combo) to be INT-based.

I'm still confused. You seem to be arguing that the skill Disable Device should be INT-based, but then you conclude that it should be left as DEX-based. Which is it?

[Krensky]

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

Um, no, I didn't. I think you must have misread.

Um... yes.. I did.

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

I'm still confused. You seem to be arguing that the skill Disable Device should be INT-based, but then you conclude that it should be left as DEX-based. Which is it?

The general argument is based in the logical break I thought was there with the two skills not being combined. As for changing the stat base, if it works for your table and you enjoy the flavor change, cool. It's a house rule I might even use in some campaigns. However, I believe Paizo should leave it as Dex based in the core rules for both compatibility reasons and for tradition. It also does make a certain amount of sense considering the primitive nature of locks in medieval Europe.

[Jeff Wilder]

Originally Posted by Krensky

I believe Paizo should leave it as Dex based in the core rules for both compatibility reasons and for tradition.

Mostly fair enough.

But ... isn't Disable Device with INT just as "compatible" as Disable Device with Dex? One way or the other, you're changing the stat-base of one of the underlying skills. In fact, I'd argue that Pathfinder making Disable Device INT-based is more compatible with 3.5, simply because of the name of the skill. In 3.5, Disable Device is INT-based. Keeping the skill INT-based, even though Open Lock has been folded into it, is one less thing for a DM to remember to change on-the-fly, right?

I of course agree that "thief" skills have traditionally been DEX-based. It just doesn't bother me to change things when they make sense and (arguably) play better, so "tradition" isn't particularly persuasive to me, unless all else is equal.

As I said to one of my players -- playing a rogue -- "As a high-INT, low-DEX person in real life, I believe I could learn to pick a lock or defuse a bomb. On the other hand, I'd be crappy at sneaking around or picking pockets." He found that pretty convincing.

[Jeff Wilder]

Note that I've updated the OP in this thread, making some additions and clarifications based on feedback from various sources.

[Kaisoku]

Seriously folks.. have you checked the new rules for Appraise?

Under Appraise:

If you are trained in Appraise, you can use it in
conjunction with detect magic or identify to determine
the properties of a magic item in your possession. The
DC of this check is equal to 15 + the item’s caster level.
If successful, you determine the item’s properties and
command words. You cannot determine the powers of
artifacts through the use of this skill. You must be the
caster of detect magic to use this skill in this way.

Under Identify Spell:

This spell functions as detect magic, except that it gives you a +10
enhancement bonus on Appraise checks made to identify the properties
and command words of magic items in your possession. This spell does
not allow you to identify artifacts.

A high end magic item could be looking at a DC 30!

So even with a high Int score and the Identify spell, you will need some ranks in Appraise to reliably find out what magic items you have.


This seriously ups the value of Appraise, as it's the new mechanic for Identifying magic items.

Trust that the designers know what they are doing... they simultaneously fixed the hassle of magic item identification, as well as make a rarely used skill have a point in the game.


At the very least make sure you know the impact of the change you propose... rolling it into the craft and profession skills would be a nightmare with the new Identify spell mechanic. At least Observe can keep the mechanic, but I'm not sure it's required, or even makes thematic sense (knowing an object's worth is very different from just looking at it).

[Jeff Wilder]

Originally Posted by Kaisoku

[Observations on Appraise.]

Yes, the new use for Appraise has been considered.

In those cases where I want to give my players a mysterious magic item, I will. In most cases, I make magic items available in the hopes that they'll use them, which means making players jump through more hoops to identify them -- specifically and especially, expecting them to devote ranks to an entire skill -- doesn't thrill me. (That's why the Magic Item Compendium has the artificer's monocle.)

The reason Appraise is a rarely-used skill is that it's lame in concept, not that it isn't useful. It's not a skill that deserves to stand on its own, IMO, in a heroic fantasy game.

FWIW, I agree with you about using Craft and Profession for appraising items.

("Observe," BTW, means a lot more than "looking at something." That's why it's a skill.)

[Kaisoku]

"Active" is actually *trying* to find or perceive something. It's based on how well you put clues together and quickly make sound deductions.

Observe, even as you state it, is still pretty much "finding things, and putting 2 and 2 together", not "having a knowledge base on the value of items".

A country bumpkin might be able to make out the tripwire that is attached to the doorframe that will set off a trap... but not be able to tell the difference between pyrite and gold, or cubic zirconia and diamond. Or a gem and colored glass... or even cooking beans and a magical item that will lead to the realm of the giants in the sky.


As for the case of "Appraise is lame".. well, you could say that about a good number of skills. For a regular dungeon crawl, kill things and take their stuff, campaign you could honestly knock out Appraise, Craft, Diplomacy, Disguise, Forgery, Gather Information, Handle Animal, Heal, Knowledge, Perform, Profession, Ride, Sleight of Hand and Speak Language (hell, languages in general) and feel little to no effects.
Hell, if Bluff and Intimidate didn't have in-combat applications, they'd be on that list too.

So yeah... in a game where you never need to use most of those skills, you could just take them out or wrap them into something else and be done with it. Adventures have to go out of the way to find reason for putting these skills into a dungeon crawl.. so really, why have any of them, right?

Well, core rules aren't there so you can play only dungeon crawls... it's so other people can play any game style they want. Appraise isn't lame in a game that has a living economy, or is heavily based in a theme around valuable items (such as a Thief based campaign setting).


About the only thing you've convinced me is that you could roll the magic item identification into your Observe and write Appraise out of the game. Just like you can go the "Star Trek" route and write Languages out of the game and just tell the players they either understand what's being said by default, or they are speaking "in some foreign language" so you need to cast the right spell or just can't understand it, etc.

That's an awesome House Rule that would make standard dungeon crawl, high action gaming a little less messy. However, for a Core Rules book it would be neglecting a game style that was possible with the 3.5e rules.