Building Characters

[2WS-Steve]

I'll suggest s little house rule I've been contemplating for a while:

All skills are class skills.

BTW, this applies to both PCs and NPCs.

One of the biggest bears for me in NPC creation is keeping track of what skill points are spent at what level. By making all skills the same cost all I need to do is total up the skill points from all the classes and allocate them.

I'm definitely going to use this rule in d20 Modern and Grim Tales campaigns since the skill lists for those aren't really part of the balancing points for the classes anyway.

I'd also like to do this for D&D. Roleplaying-wise it seems right that a fighter might have good Spot and Listen skills--I figure a lot of fighters spend much of their time on guard duty. Even more unusual skill choices could be justified: if a player builds a fighter and dumps his points in Spellcraft and Knowledge (arcana) perhaps he works for a wizard or spends his time hunting down rogue spellcasters. Wizards with stealth skills might be scouting types. It should open up a bunch of ways for players to give their characters distinctive personalities, even at low level or if they went the ordinary, Wizard all the way up, class route. I figure, at worst, it makes player characters slightly more effective.

The only downside is that it might make some of the diverse skill classes like rogues, bards, druids, barbarians, and rangers a bit less effective relative to the other classes. I'm not sure if this is a real problem--if it is then I'd give those classes +1 sp per level.

 

[Voadam]

I'll suggest s little house rule I've been contemplating for a while:

All skills are class skills.

BTW, this applies to both PCs and NPCs.

One of the biggest bears for me in NPC creation is keeping track of what skill points are spent at what level. By making all skills the same cost all I need to do is total up the skill points from all the classes and allocate them.

I'm definitely going to use this rule in d20 Modern and Grim Tales campaigns since the skill lists for those aren't really part of the balancing points for the classes anyway.

I'd also like to do this for D&D. Roleplaying-wise it seems right that a fighter might have good Spot and Listen skills--I figure a lot of fighters spend much of their time on guard duty. Even more unusual skill choices could be justified: if a player builds a fighter and dumps his points in Spellcraft and Knowledge (arcana) perhaps he works for a wizard or spends his time hunting down rogue spellcasters. Wizards with stealth skills might be scouting types. It should open up a bunch of ways for players to give their characters distinctive personalities, even at low level or if they went the ordinary, Wizard all the way up, class route. I figure, at worst, it makes player characters slightly more effective.

The only downside is that it might make some of the diverse skill classes like rogues, bards, druids, barbarians, and rangers a bit less effective relative to the other classes. I'm not sure if this is a real problem--if it is then I'd give those classes +1 sp per level.

I've contemplated that as well. The "skill classes" still have more skill points than the "non-skill" classes so it is not a big deal, it just means more people than the ranger, rogue, and bard can potentially spot well. However since I DM in a shared world campaign I keep to most of the accepted group rules since it will go back to the other DM at some point and the fewer character changes the better. It also means that anybody can get into most prestige classes at the same level without taking a specific class path unless it requires spellcasting or lots of specific feats. It also means that fighters and barbarians can be as good at profession sailor as wizards.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I've been tinkering with Grim Tales skill set where you get background, occupational and three player choice skills. It would simplify things tremendously but at the same time, make entry into some PrCs that currently require multiclassing a little too easy.

 

[Desdichado]

I'm also a fairly big fan of the "wing it" mentality for all but really important NPCs. That said, I do like to have some generic PCs sitting around on index cards or in text boxes on a sheet that I can pull out if I need to. Helps to keep me honest and not forget how character creation is supposed to work...

 

[2WS-Steve]

...It also means that anybody can get into most prestige classes at the same level without taking a specific class path unless it requires spellcasting or lots of specific feats. It also means that fighters and barbarians can be as good at profession sailor as wizards.

Yah, those strike me as additional advantages as well. Giving players more options on how they get to a prestige class, and thus develop their character, often provokes some pretty cool roleplaying.

I've been tinkering with Grim Tales skill set where you get background, occupational and three player choice skills. It would simplify things tremendously but at the same time, make entry into some PrCs that currently require multiclassing a little too easy.

Personally, I don't think a prestige class should be balanced according to the convolutions of multi-classing required to acquire it, anyway. That just forces players onto rails during development and doesn't really serve to offset any added power (since it's not a cost for those players who wanted to go that multiclassing route in the first place).

Instead I see prestige class requirements that force sacrifices, like throwing away caster levels or forcing the player to waste a feat on one of those awful picks that gives you +2 Appraise and +2 Knowledge (gemcutting), as meaningful enough sacrifices that the designer can justify some added juice.

 

[Len]

(off topic)

forcing the player to waste a feat on one of those awful picks that gives you +2 Appraise and +2 Knowledge (gemcutting)

One of my co-players would actually take that feat if he could. (And I play the rogue in the party.)

 

[2WS-Steve]

One of my co-players would actually take that feat if he could. (And I play the rogue in the party.)

Poor sot. Some times I think these kinds of feats are just booby-traps for roleplayers. Here, take this feat for some skills that you might use once every four gaming session and then only provide a benefit if you would have otherwise missed your roll by just 2 points... As a GM, I use these sorts of feats to keep NPCs weak.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I've been tinkering with Grim Tales skill set where you get background, occupational and three player choice skills. It would simplify things tremendously but at the same time, make entry into some PrCs that currently require multiclassing a little too easy.

Well, this is really only a problem if your players are aware of prestige classes and their requirements at character creation.

You really need to retreat behind the curtain a bit, Joe. Your players have too much visibility to mighty OZ's tricks.

This seems like a nice place to point out that Grim Tales has NO prestige classes...

Wulf

 

[JoeGKushner]

You really need to retreat behind the curtain a bit, Joe. Your players have too much visibility to mighty OZ's tricks.

Wulf

Wulf, if I didn't just yank another quote into my sign, that whole, "Your players have too much visibility to mighty OZ's tricks" would go right there.

 

[molonel]

I stat NPCs when I need to. I know I can MAKE skill points fit if I take the time. But jeez, I really couldn't care less if we're talking about cross-class skills and filling out every single cotton-picking skill point with the same exactitude as some of my players. That's just mind-numbing. I wing it when I need to wing it, and if I need to be painfully specific, then I take the time and stat out the villain. The one thing I tend to be scrupulous on is spell selection. I had a DM who kept a long list of arcane and divine spells, and chose whatever spell seemed most appropriate on the fly. All of the enemy casters thereby became sorcerers, and it cheesed me off.

I also added this line to my campaign notes:

I cannot be prepared for every eventuality. If you choose to challenge the greatest wizard of the realm to single combat in the middle of a meeting of the Council of Twelve, interrupting a dramatic monologue and insulting him to his face, I will be happy to oblige you. But I will end the session there, and reconvene next time because building an epic 30th level wizard takes time.