Getting rid of Cross-Class skills?

[Otterscrubber]

I've never fully understood why cross class skills exist. I understand the concept that some characters are more skilled (or at least skill based) than others, but isn't that accomplished by limiting how many skill points each class has in the first place? It's not like every class has the same number of skill points to start, it would make sense then. Why further pigeon-hole characters by giving them half as many skill points as others AND THEN making skills cost twice as much?

Skill points represent that someone has taken time to learn a skill. Why would one person be better at listening (or swimming) than another? Isn't this taken care of with ability score adjustments?

 

[Grayhawk]

I've changed cross-class skills in my game to cost the same as class skills, but the maximum ranks remain the same.

This way a character isn't penalized for learning stuff outside his archetype, but he will never be able to upstage those to whom the skills come more naturally.

This may present a problem with multi-classing, but my players almost always stay single classed.

 

[Crothian]

The answer is the multi class rules. If a character really wants to be better a cross class skill they should multi class. Class Skills are a great way to distinguish between the classes and prestige classes.

 

[Darklone]

I've changed cross-class skills in my game to cost the same as class skills, but the maximum ranks remain the same.

That's the best and most common houserule to this topic that I know of.

 

[Otterscrubber]

I've changed cross-class skills in my game to cost the same as class skills, but the maximum ranks remain the same.

I like this a lot as well.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

In my last campaign, I made all skills class skills and it had no negative effects. Even keeping the cross-class limit on ranks was unnecessary, given that most classes simply don't have enough skill points to max out more than a few skills. As always, YMMV.

 

[StAlda]

Skill Focus

I would probably not get rid of cross-class skills altogether. I like the suggestion above - all skill ranks cost 1 point, but keep the max allowed for cross-class skills.

However, I'd go one step further and say if you take the Skill Focus Feat for a skill that is cross-class, from that point forward that skill is now treated as a class skill. You paid a feat to enhance it, it's yours.

 

[Buttercup]

I like the idea of giving every character, at creation, the choice of making any single cross-class skill into a class skill from there on out. Of course, I'd insist that it be backed up by the character's biography.

 

[Old Gumphrey]

..

It's interesting that so many people waive this rule. If you let people grab cross class skills for free, why bother multiclassing? That is one of the reasons the system exists. I can agree that it's pretty tight-fisted as-written but there's a reason for it. If you want versatility you have to give up power; that's how it's always been in 3e.

 

[Terath Ninir]

It's interesting that so many people waive this rule. If you let people grab cross class skills for free, why bother multiclassing? That is one of the reasons the system exists. I can agree that it's pretty tight-fisted as-written but there's a reason for it. If you want versatility you have to give up power; that's how it's always been in 3e.

So what? The fact that the rule is there and has a reason in the game designer's mind does not make it a *good* rule.

I use the rule that cross-class skills have the cross-class limit, but still only cost 1 point per level. There's no reason to penalize the character by a factor of 4; 2 is more than enough.

I like the Skill Focus rule. If you're focused in the skill, shouldn't that mean that you're, well, *focused* in it? Yoink!