Here's what bothers me with the core rules: A multi-class wizard/rogue who is level 1 in both classes is way better if she were a rogue first than if she were a wizard. This is because of the starting ranks being 4 X the class amount. I suppose this is supposed to represent a childhood of learning skills in that class, but that is inconsistent.
No other classes abilities are stronger from a childhood of preparation, so why should skills be? Does a fighter who starts off at leve1 1 know some stuff that a character who just picked up a level in fighter doesn't know? NO!
Here's the solution: Consider level 0 characters. All level 0 characters get:
3 X (4 + Int Bonus) skill points
to allot amongst their class skills and cross-class skills as determined by their class. Then they get level 1 points from their class just like they just leveled up in the class (they can allocate this points all at once of course).
This weakens classes that are used to starting out with lots of skills, so to compensate I would advocate increasing the class amounts for those classes:
Rogue: 10
Ranger:7
Bard: 7
Here's an example. Jimmy is a bright little rogue with a +2 intelligence bonus. He would normally get 4 X (8 + 2) = 40 skill points at first level. Under this house rule, he would instead get 3 X (4 + 2) + (10 + 2) = 30.
Starting rogues would be weakened. But by level 6, they'd be the same power as they would be under core rules. Any beyond that, they'd start to surpass core rule rogues. So while it shifts rogue power slightly to the higher levels, the overall usefulness of the class is not impacted.
More importantly, DMs would no longer have to figure out what to do with players who start their wizards and fighters off as rogues in order to gobble down the skill points.
What say ye? Questions, concerns?
No other classes abilities are stronger from a childhood of preparation, so why should skills be? Does a fighter who starts off at leve1 1 know some stuff that a character who just picked up a level in fighter doesn't know? NO!
Here's the solution: Consider level 0 characters. All level 0 characters get:
3 X (4 + Int Bonus) skill points
to allot amongst their class skills and cross-class skills as determined by their class. Then they get level 1 points from their class just like they just leveled up in the class (they can allocate this points all at once of course).
This weakens classes that are used to starting out with lots of skills, so to compensate I would advocate increasing the class amounts for those classes:
Rogue: 10
Ranger:7
Bard: 7
Here's an example. Jimmy is a bright little rogue with a +2 intelligence bonus. He would normally get 4 X (8 + 2) = 40 skill points at first level. Under this house rule, he would instead get 3 X (4 + 2) + (10 + 2) = 30.
Starting rogues would be weakened. But by level 6, they'd be the same power as they would be under core rules. Any beyond that, they'd start to surpass core rule rogues. So while it shifts rogue power slightly to the higher levels, the overall usefulness of the class is not impacted.
More importantly, DMs would no longer have to figure out what to do with players who start their wizards and fighters off as rogues in order to gobble down the skill points.
What say ye? Questions, concerns?