Heroes Heroes of High Favor: Dwarves

Urklore · Mar 27, 2003

In the Heroes Heroes of High Favor: Dwarves there is the Refined Skill Focus feat, providing +3 to any one skill or +2 to two skills, or grants two ranks in one skill.

So does this sound like to you if someone took it and got 2 ranks in a skill, they could enter a prestige class earlier. Is this anyone else's interpretation?

2WS-Steve · Mar 27, 2003

That's the way it sounds to me too. I imagine that's the main reason one would want skill ranks.

Voadam · Mar 27, 2003

My understanding from wulf's statements on these boards before is that that was the author's intent but the feat does not explicitly say it provides an exception to the max rank per level cap so a DM can rule as they like.

Two ranks would be a cheap way to bump up a cross class skill.

Wulf Ratbane · Mar 27, 2003

Voadam said:
My understanding from wulf's statements on these boards before is that that was the author's intent but the feat does not explicitly say it provides an exception to the max rank per level cap so a DM can rule as they like.

Two ranks would be a cheap way to bump up a cross class skill.

Yes, that was the intent.

As a DM, I personally don't have a problem with it exceeding the max ranks. Giving up a feat for 2 skill ranks, at least where most Prestige Classes are concerned, is for the most part a losing proposition.

But clearly, if you want to be good at something and skill ranks are essential, or more useful than the +3 bonus, go for it.

I have had criticisms from other designers that the +2 ranks somehow "breaks" the system, especially with regards to prestige class qualifications. I strongly disagree, first on the basis that Prestige Classes should never be "balanced" according to their entry requirements-- at least as far as those requirements are simply used to "defer" entry into the class to a higher level: that's just bad design.

Secondly, I've challenged this opinion several times to provide a single clear example where the system breaks down, but no one has yet done so. It always seems to boil down to, "But... but... you just can't do that!"

Though I freely admit that on "first glance" it seems like "trouble," I don't generally design based on "first glance."

Wulf

2WS-Steve · Mar 27, 2003

Wulf Ratbane said:
I have had criticisms from other designers that the +2 ranks somehow "breaks" the system, especially with regards to prestige class qualifications. I strongly disagree, first on the basis that Prestige Classes should never be "balanced" according to their entry requirements-- at least as far as those requirements are simply used to "defer" entry into the class to a higher level: that's just bad design.

Wulf

I wholly agree with Wulf here. Unless and until it's clearly built into the core rules that feats or classes acquired at high levels give you more than feats/classes at low levels, the level at which you can acquire an ability shouldn't be used as a balancing factor.

The one problem here is that WotC has been a bit inconsistent in this regard, especially in the splat books, e.g. Dwarf's/Giant's/Dragon's Toughness. But if you look at the PHB fighter his 14th level feat is pretty much the same as a 2nd level feat. The feats that do provide a better benefit come at the end of a long feat chain and there it's the requirement to buy a bunch of possibly less-useful feats that does the balancing.

Darklone · Mar 28, 2003

Wulf...

Thanks for your books.

Wulf Ratbane · Mar 28, 2003

You're welcome. Thanks for enjoying them.

Psion · Mar 28, 2003

Wulf Ratbane said:
I have had criticisms from other designers that the +2 ranks somehow "breaks" the system, especially with regards to prestige class qualifications. I strongly disagree, first on the basis that Prestige Classes should never be "balanced" according to their entry requirements-- at least as far as those requirements are simply used to "defer" entry into the class to a higher level: that's just bad design.

Secondly, I've challenged this opinion several times to provide a single clear example where the system breaks down, but no one has yet done so.

What, you ignored my entire post the last time this came up?

Sorry Wulf, I strongly disagree with you. A basic tenet of prestige class design is that you can make the class abilities as powerful as a class ability of a single class character of that level. So, if you are designing a prestige class that has 5th level abilities as a prerequisite, then you can give it a class ability at first level that would normally be reserved for a 6th level ability in a single class.

If you "short circuit" the class requirements by making 6th level abilities available at fourth level, you are making the prestige class's more powerful abilities available sooner than they were intended.

drnuncheon · Mar 28, 2003

Psion said:
If you "short circuit" the class requirements by making 6th level abilities available at fourth level, you are making the prestige class's more powerful abilities available sooner than they were intended.

...at the cost of a feat, which you only have 2 to 4 of at 3rd level. Most PrCs I've seen don't rely on a single skill keeping you from getting the class early, either. Most melee PrCs are going to have a BAB requirement. Most spellcaster PrCs are going to have a minimum spellcasting requirement. And most other PrCs have multiple skill requirements.

Taking the DMG PrCs as examples:
- Arcane Archer - no help.
- Assassin - if you took the feat twice you could get in at 3rd level. That's all your feats, unless you're a human, in which case you've got one to spend.
- Blackguard - no help
- Dwarven Defender - no help
- Loremaster - no help - you'd never have enough feats at 5th level to get into the class if you bought RSF twice.
- Shadowdancer - you could get in a whopping 1 level early, if you were a human. Otherwise you won't have enough feats.

I think this is a case of something that "looks scarier than it is" - the only really problematic one is the assassin, which is easily countered if you're concerned about such things by adding a BAB requirement. (An assassin ought to know how to handle a weapon, right?)

J

Psion · Mar 28, 2003

drnuncheon said:
...at the cost of a feat, which you only have 2 to 4 of at 3rd level.

So? No other feat out there will give you access to a whole new level of spells or spell like abilities.

Most PrCs I've seen don't rely on a single skill keeping you from getting the class early, either. Most melee PrCs are going to have a BAB requirement. Most spellcaster PrCs are going to have a minimum spellcasting requirement.

I would dispute the characterization "most", but many, true.

And most other PrCs have multiple skill requirements.

And many people find this to be bad design, as it leaves little room for flexibility in character design if you consume most or all of the character's base skill points meeting prerequisites.

That said, skill rank HAS been used as a determining factor in many PrCs, and designers are safe to use it as such under the core rules. But if you adopt the meaning that this feat lets you bypass rank requirements, you distort the intent of designers who were safe in the assumption that using skills as a virtual level limiter for class entry.

Taking the DMG PrCs as examples:
(...)

That only one of the DMG classes fits the bill here does not change the fact that the DMG and PrC design criteria set forth skills as a method of limiting entry, and designers have proceeded upon the assumption that they could build classes using skill as an entry level limiter. Just looking on my hard drive, the first prestige class I ran into could be affected by this feat. I see that the cerebral rager has one skill requirement of seven ranks, the rest are 4 or less ranks and it only requires a 1st level spell and a first level class ability. This, in turn, parleys potent abilities like killing look two levels sooner and results in a higher DC for saves for abilities that would have normally been available at that level.