D&D 3E/3.5 Eliminating Class and Cross-Class Skills (3.5)

[Jacob Marley]

I have been giving a lot of thought to the idea of eliminating class and cross-class skills from my next 3rd Edition campaign; more accurate would be to say that all skills are class skills. Before I implement such an idea, I would like to get a feel for what the benefits of such a system is; as well as where any potential pitfalls may be.

Potential benefits I see are:

• It opens up character concepts. (Ex. Fighters who are well-versed in Arcana, Monk scholars (History), etc.
• Many Prestige Class requirements are easier to meet.
• Multi-class accounting is easier.
• Potentially encourages players to put ranks in the flavor skills (Craft, Perform, and Profession)?

Potential pitfalls I see are:

• Many Prestige Class requirements are easier to meet. Potential to abuse stacking of Prestige Classes.
• Opposed DCs may be easier to meet as there is the potential for more characters to have ranks in particular skills.
• Easier to build characters to abuse Skill Synergies.

I am not overly worried about most of my players abusing the system as they tend to be more build-to-concept types than they are power gamers. I am, however, worried about unintentional consequences. Will DCs become too easy to make? Will opposed rolls come down to whoever rolls better on a d20 regardless of ranks? Am I missing something obvious? Has anyone tried something like this? Thoughts?

Thanks.

 

[TanisFrey]

I would not be in favor in totally eliminating cross class skills. I would do one of the following.

1) Give everyone the Able Learner feat. Effect cross class skill cost 1 skill point per rank, you are still limited to 1/2 ranks of class skills.

2) Allow persons to buy cross class skill up to the class skill limit, they still pay 2 skill points per rank.

3) Import the Pathfinder skill system. In this system you do not get the skill points multiplied by 4 at first level, just class plus Int modifier. All ranks cost you only 1 skill point. The cap on the number of ranks are equal to you level. Class skills get a class bonus of +3 if you have at least 1 rank into. You need to recalculate prestige class skill requirements by lowering them by 3 ranks, with a minimum of 1 rank.

 

[Dandu]

I have thought about giving people the choice of taking Int mod number in skills to be permanent class skills.

 

[JamesonCourage]

I don't use cross-class and class-only skills at all, and I've seen no negative effects at all. However, I play in a classless system, so there are no prestige class requirements to aim for, so all skills are basically conceptually based anyways. Also, I've eliminated synergy bonuses, and so I don't have to worry about that being exploited.

I would note, however, that I have known all of my players for the last 10-12 years, and since we're all very close friends, there's no reason for any of us to try to exploit the system.

As far as Dandu's suggestion, I like the way it sounds in a standard 3.X game. It puts an even greater importance on Intelligence, but since Intelligence does cover one's ability to learn, it seems fitting that the more intelligent you are, the easier it is to have skills outside your potential area of expertise.

 

[Alexander123]

I don't think I would eliminate class skills and cross class skills. Class and cross class skills give you the feeling that you are actually a trained professional in a field and that anyone who wants to master a certain field also has to undergo the training by taking levels in the particular class which offers the skill.

 

[ValhallaGH]

I think you've hit all the high points, positive and negative, excluding synergies (skill synergies will be easier to acquire, which goes on both lists).
Expect to see a lot of Hide, Move Silently, Spot, and Use Magic Device. Enough ranks in the last two lets you do almost everything else in the game, so even Fighters will be tempted to take them.

Opposed rolls won't be any more screwy than they already are. Ability scores and skill focus feats (or magic bonuses) will still be there to differentiate.

Obvious things you've missed: Pathfinder style skills (can put in ranks equal to character level; having any ranks in a Class Skill gets you +3 ranks in the skill). This works really well in my Trailblazer 3.5 game.

As implied, I've done something similar a few times. All such experiments have had great success. Have fun and good luck.

 

[CuRoi]

I don't think you are floating into unchartered waters. I think you will be fine. The only thing you will see is a slight blurring of lines between classes in the skill category. The only one who may be adversely affected is the party rogue/skill monkey. Rogues are already easy to replace with spells, so opening up all skills to any player may push them even further behind on the curve. That may or may not be something you have to address.

For my solution....I haven't "tried" this yet. I'm in the middle of creating a Frankenstein amalgam of House Rules / Rules Re-Write for my next DnD game and I have done away with cross-class skills as they exist in the current game.

Anyway, it's still a work in progress, but I agree the whole idea of eliminating cross-class skills along with the benefits you list above (and useless skills, and rapid skill inflation, etc.) My approach is a bit extreme and relies on altering alot of fundamental rules - so if you want to see the unchartered waters, oops I probably broke something version just for brainstorming purposes...

[sblock]
Each class has it's own primary class skills and two "key attributes" which their primary skills center on. (i.e. for a Barbarian it is Strength and Con.) For their class skills, players pick their best bonus of the two key attributes and use that modifier as opposed to Intelligence to calculate their total skill points. They can then use these to purchase training in their classes primary skills.

They will then get a secondary bank of skill points modified by either their Int or Wis modifier which they can spend on any skill. There are limits to how high they can make these skills, but it is hard coded into the overall system I'm mashing up so its a bit tricky to explain (but the Barbarian from above will never be really good at Intelligence skills for instance).

Of course, I eliminated at least one of your downsides by just dumping skill synergies and replacing it with a more proactive "Synergy" that the player has to pursue as opposed to the static auto bonus.[/sblock]

 

[TanisFrey]

Obvious things you've missed: Pathfinder style skills (can put in ranks equal to character level; having any ranks in a Class Skill gets you +3 ranks in the skill). This works really well in my Trailblazer 3.5 game.

I said that in my post, but it is worth repeating.

 

[Jacob Marley]

Thanks for the replies!

I would note, however, that I have known all of my players for the last 10-12 years, and since we're all very close friends, there's no reason for any of us to try to exploit the system.

This is true of my group as well; which is why I am not overly worried about intentional abuse. My main concern was potential, unintentional consequences that I may have missed.

Obvious things you've missed: Pathfinder style skills (can put in ranks equal to character level; having any ranks in a Class Skill gets you +3 ranks in the skill). This works really well in my Trailblazer 3.5 game.

I have looked at the Pathfinder skill system, as well as the systems used in SW Saga, Mutants & Masterminds, and 4th Edition. What I am looking at implementing is actually pretty close to what was done in Mutants & Masterminds.

The only thing you will see is a slight blurring of lines between classes in the skill category.

This is both my hope and fear. That is, I'd like to see certain classes -- namely, the martial classes -- do more than just Climb, Jump, and Swim. On the other hand, certain skills (Hide, Move Silently, Spot) are so useful for adventuring that each PC will have a substantial number of ranks in them.

I'll need to ponder this issue a little more.

 

[Celebrim]

Let me suggest a comprimise position.

I run a high skill usage game. By that I mean that in most any session, even one where combat dominates our time usage, I generally expect there to be more skill checks than attack rolls. I think the biggest con you will have is that having a diverse list of skills is part of a classes features, and that in particular, in a well designed game part of the attraction of a class is that it provides skills that aren't otherwise easily available to the character or to the party as a whole. One of the dangers - especially in a low skill usage game where attack rolls are far more common than skill checks and only a few skills dominate - is that every player will see spot, listen, tumble, and the like as essential skills clearly superior to other choices and these necessities may squeeze out the variaty a class system is designed to encourage. Being the party best in a skill - being the go to guy in certain situations - is part of a player's sense of worth and enjoyment.

By contrast, I think of your potential benefits, only one you envision is both real in the sense that it will happen and strongly desirable in that you'd want it to happen: "It opens up character concepts. (Ex. Fighters who are well-versed in Arcana, Monk scholars (History), etc." I think you realize this to least a certain extent, because you list less costly 'access to PrCs' as both a pro and a con. I personally think you should be thinking of that as almost wholly a con.

Openning up character concept flexibility is in fact desirable but it is not so desirable that I think you should do away with cross-class skills wholesale. Instead, I think you should make a change actually tightly focused on achieving that particular desire.

In my game I have a system of advantages and disadvantages. PC's are assumed to be 'advantaged characters' and start the game with a free advantage (and other bonuses) compared to the vast majority of NPC's. One of those advantages is called 'Unusual Background' and it allows the player to choose any three skills that aren't class exclusive (in other words, not skills that are effectively class features like Use Magic Device) and make them class skills of a particular class. So, for example, if you want to play a fighter who is versed in martial arts, you could take the advantage 'Unusual Background (Martial Artist)' and every time you took a level in fighter have Balance, Concentration and Tumble be among your class skills. Or, you could play a wizard who lacked a formal apprentiseship and learned his trade on the street and take 'Unusual Background (Gutter Mage)' and have Bluff, Hide, and Sleight of Hand be on your wizard's class skill list. (The other advantages are similarly designed to open up flexibility in starting character design, but don't as elegantly address the problem you are having now.)

Basically, I think that what you need to do is simply give Unusual Background or its equivalent to every PC, allowing them to customize their skill list slightly and usefully, but in a way that still preserves and enforces usual concepts like characterization, skill siloing, and group coohesion. Going this route will allow for customization and flexibility while minimizing the chance of unintended consequences and because it is flavorful it encourages PC's to at least partly choose skills because they match a concept, and not sololy because of mechanical utility.