Calling 4e designers & developers.... Please explain the skills to class ratio

[tuxgeo]

upbringing = background - check them out.. makes class skills out of something not a class skill.(thats easy peasy no house rule at all).
. . .

Clarification requested: Does it work that way in the Character Builder? (I still haven't downloaded that thing.)
I ask because the latest information I received regarding the Background stuff from PHB2 was that all such effects based on backgrounds required DM approval. . . .

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Clarification requested: Does it work that way in the Character Builder? (I still haven't downloaded that thing.)
I ask because the latest information I received regarding the Background stuff from PHB2 was that all such effects based on backgrounds required DM approval. . . .

It works in the character builder, but it is an optional choice.

 

[Angellis_ater]

Don't forget that the martial classes that get fewer skills also get an almost-unconditional +1 bonus on their weapons of choice; that might be worth a skill or two. Plus, they also get more hit points and healing surges than most of their equivalents (defender vs. defenders, strikers vs. strikers, etc.) That might have something to do with it, too.

I might not be playing the same game here - but last time I checked the Fighter has an equivalent number of hit points to all other Defenders in the game (or less, see Warden). The Fighter also has an equivalent number of healing surges to all other Defenders in the game (or less, see Paladin).

Actually - I don't think the martial classes in general have any "unconditional +2 bonus to their weapon of choice". Rogues have +1 to hit with daggers, Fighters do indeed get it, Rangers have Prime Shot (which btw also Warlocks get) which doesn't impact a melee ranger whatsoever, and Warlords have no form of +1 bonus to attacks.

Sorry, don't see the logic here...

 

[drothgery]

I might not be playing the same game here - but last time I checked the Fighter has an equivalent number of hit points to all other Defenders in the game (or less, see Warden). The Fighter also has an equivalent number of healing surges to all other Defenders in the game (or less, see Paladin).

Or more (see swordmage).

 

[Garthanos]

Clarification requested: Does it work that way in the Character Builder? (I still haven't downloaded that thing.)
I ask because the latest information I received regarding the Background stuff from PHB2 was that all such effects based on backgrounds required DM approval. . . .

Yes backgrounds work exactly that way in Character builder..

I wouldn't worry about it with the generic background benefits.

And yes if your DM can say no you cant do that... the clause indicating DM's consent is in all likelihood there because the regional benefits such as those in the Character Builder for FR are indeed 3 times as useful as bland generic ones - the regional benefit is about as useful as a feat
and more "interesting" than the bland ones.

Of course DM's can have all kinds of character creation guidelines if they want like excluding certain races whatever, If your dm is an adversarial bast%%%% who didnt allow generic background benefits I would recommend finding a new one.

 

[tuxgeo]

Re: Needing DM consent for background benefits:

Yes backgrounds work exactly that way in Character builder..

I wouldn't worry about it with the generic background benefits.

And yes if your DM can say no you cant do that... the clause indicating DM's consent is in all likelihood there because the regional benefits such as those in the Character Builder for FR are indeed 3 times as useful as bland generic ones - the regional benefit is about as useful as a feat
and more "interesting" than the bland ones.

Of course DM's can have all kinds of character creation guidelines if they want like excluding certain races whatever, If your dm is an adversarial bast%%%% who didn't allow generic background benefits I would recommend finding a new one.

Thanks to Mustrum_Ridcully and Garthanos for the quick responses. That makes sense: the Character Builder has to be able to accomodate all DM situations, including DMs who allow such things and DMs who don't.
(I'm guessing that the RPGA might have a standardized ruling about that for games played in tournaments, so everybody can start off with the same level of customization.)

 

[Hjorimir]

Really, so how does Endurance help me in combat? Or History or Streetwise. You're making a real general statement (Which IMO, should be some skills are very useful in combat... though it often depends on the particular situation) and providing nothing to back it up... care to expound?

Also, then what are the non-combat abilities in D&D 4e? If not skills what then?

Well, when the group was asked to make Endurance checks for that climb up the mountainside to reach the cave where they are fighting, those that made that check didn't have to spend a healing surge and having more healing surges sure seem useful in combat.

Also, the fact that you can be involved in social skill challenges while in combat where skills like History, Streetwise, Diplomacy, Insight, etc. are useful means that the skills are...well...useful (ergo, they matter).

Are some skills more likely to be useful in combat? Absolutely, but the same can be said of certain powers (especially Utility powers).

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I don't think there are any game balance reasons for different number of trained skills.

What is possible is that it was guided primarily by the "flavor" of the class. A Rogue needs to rely on wit and skills, a Fighter... doesn't.

It might also be guided by the number of class skills in the first place. The class skills itself are certainly motivated by fluff/flavor. A Fighter lacks Arcana not because he would be more powerful with it, but because it doesn't belong to his archetype.

But as a result, the Rogue ends up with a lot of class skills and the Fighter with a lot less. To allow the Rogue to gain a feeling of necessary competency he needs to cover more of his class skills than the Fighter, so he gets more trained skills, too.

 

[ExploderWizard]

But as a result, the Rogue ends up with a lot of class skills and the Fighter with a lot less. To allow the Rogue to gain a feeling of necessary competency he needs to cover more of his class skills than the Fighter, so he gets more trained skills, too.

Exactly, and this is the issue with the system. In earlier editions, the thief traded combat ability for that necessary competency. Now that every class can contribute equally in combat, having some classes more competent at skill use serves no purpose.

Why screw over certain classes in the name of flavor? Flavor wasn't a barrier when it came to giving clerics at-will laser attacks so it shouldn't be a problem when letting the fighter be useful at something besides swinging a sword.

 

[Mallus]

Why screw over certain classes in the name of flavor?

Because it's a D&D tradition?

(only this time, the thief isn't on the receiving end)

Easiest thing to do would be to give every 4e class 4 class skills and done with it. Actually, just gave them any 4 Trained skills of the player's choosing (and be done with it).