All Skills as Class Skills?

[Rokes]

Has anyone ever house ruled all skills as being "class" skills (i.e. no cross-class skills)? What are the long term ramifications of such a house rule?

The biggest "abuse" I can see is that fighters and the like will have easy access to UMD. Is this such a problem, given the weakness of fighters at high levels?

Beyond that, it means that it'll be easier to get into some PrCs, and maybe create a slightly stronger combination of base class / PrC.

What I'm hoping to do is open it up for my players to further customize their character. If they want to play a diplomatic fighter, so be it. (role-playing vs. rolling diplomacy debate aside) If they want to play a Monk who studies the planes or history, so what?

 

[Darklone]

I've seen this houserule been discussed in the HOUSERULES forum...

Usually the maximum number of ranks is kept (i.e. half max ranks for cross class skills) then it works rather fine.

 

[Nail]

It's a terrible idea.

Not only does it cast aside some of the flavor each class has, it *really* steps on the toes of the Rogue and the Bard.

In addition, it's prime territory for cherry-picking and min-maxing, expecially on skills such as UMD and Tumble.

Don't do it. Stay Good, Rokes, stay good!

 

[hong]

How does this make for cherry picking?

 

[Nail]

"Cherry Picking": Definition: Taking ripe cherries off of the tree they grew on.


Mmmmmmmmm.....cherrrrrries.

 

[hong]

Yeah, but this means everyone has a cherry tree, d00d.

 

[Darklone]

Looking at all those Int 10 fighters and barbarians I don't see them getting many cherries.

 

[hong]

I actually mentioned this as a possible house rule way back in 2001, IIRC. It's popped up now and then. The major downside is that rogues lose some of their sparkle, so you might want to give them more skill points (which might not be a bad idea anyway).

 

[Nail]

Yeah, but this means everyone has a cherry tree, d00d.

"A cherry tree in every pot!"

 

[hong]

Hey, it worked before....