Is Inquisitive really broken

[Gez]

You should make it a feat one may take multiple time. That way, a human rogue with twice that feat would be able to have up to 60 skill points at first level. That's a nice, round number.

With four time that feat, 68 skill points at creation. (If somebody wonders how it is possible to have four feats at creation, here's the run-down: one standard starting feat, the human bonus feat, one bonus feat in exchange for a flaw (see Unearthed Arcana), and another bonus feat in exchange for another flaw. UA sets a limit at two flaws max per characters.)

 

[drnuncheon]

I like the feat. The only problem is bookkeeping. If the skill points aren't retroactive, when you take the feat becomes significant. Also, what happens if your Intelligence drops below 13 and you no longer meet the prerequisites of the feat? Do you lose skill points and if so, which ones?

This isn't any different than if you raised your Int, so the additional bookkeeping is minimal.

Based on prior precedent, you would not lose skill points for losing the feat - once one has a skill point it is permanent, barring level loss.

J

 

[Elric]

Attractiveness of a particular ability is not necessarily an indication of that ability's power. Anyway, that's why I expressed it as a range, because the strict value isn't really that important. If you think the bonus feat is worth 2.5 feats, then that still leaves the +1 skill rank as being worth 1.5 feats. Are you suggesting, then, that a bonus feat is worth roughly three fixed feats?
J

It certainly is if those 3 feats all add to random skills that you probably won't use anyway (listen/spot being exceptions). Unless your character is going to be self sufficient, you don't need the entire party to be good at every skill. Spot + Tumble. Beyond that, the power of skills goes way, way down. Why do you need 18 Int, being a human, and Inquisitive? What good is your 14th skill? If this feat also let you increase max ranks in a chosen skill by 3, it would be too good. But as it stands, all it does is add another (probably redundant) skill to what you can use.

 

[drnuncheon]

It certainly is if those 3 feats all add to random skills that you probably won't use anyway (listen/spot being exceptions).

Well, sure. And Weapon Focus is useless if you never get into a combat, too. If your game is set up that skills aren't important, then of course this feat is going to look OK. In my games, the characters frequently wish they had more skills, so this would be too good.

J

 

[Elric]

Well, sure. And Weapon Focus is useless if you never get into a combat, too. If your game is set up that skills aren't important, then of course this feat is going to look OK. In my games, the characters frequently wish they had more skills, so this would be too good.

J

I think you interpreted my sentence differently than I intended it. You read it as "It certainly is if those 3 feats all add to random skills that no one ever uses"

But what I meant was "It certainly is if those 3 feats all add to random skills that your character personally probably won't use anyway."

I'd like to revise my earlier list: Tumble seems to be the best overall skill to have. It is very strong and unlike most other skills, each party members needs to have it to gain the benefits. Even with Spot, a party with one very high score and the rest low scores will be ok. The problem with +2 Diplomacy and Gather Information, for example, is that only 1 (probably 2 for Diplomacy) character(s) is/are likely to have ranks in the skill in a party. Unless your character is that character, the +2 bonus doesn't do much because of the benefits of specialization. So, extra skill bonuses are not that necessary in a party, because your character is not an island.

Edit- You say that your group wants more skill points. That makes me think that the players tend to play classes with 2 sp/level and relatively low Int scores (or are not humans). If so, this would support my idea that this feat is strongest for characters with the fewest skill points, not the characters with the most skill points.

 

[Quasqueton]

In my games, the characters frequently wish they had more skills, so this would be too good.

The characters wish they had more skills, so a *feat* that gives them *1* more skill is "too good"? Damn, but you're tight with skill points.

I allow a similar feat in my game, but it gives 2 skill points. And I don't consider this a problem feat at all. Skills are perhaps the least abusable game mechanics in the game. I've read many house rules that automatically give characters 2 more skill points without trading a rare feat.

Quasqueton

 

[Terath Ninir]

I allow a similar feat in my game, but it gives 2 skill points. And I don't consider this a problem feat at all. Skills are perhaps the least abusable game mechanics in the game. I've read many house rules that automatically give characters 2 more skill points without trading a rare feat.

I have, in most games I've run, given 2 extra skill points to all characters every level (8 at first level). Plus I've given extra bonus "education" skill points (which can only be spent on Craft, Knowledge, Perform, Profession, and Speak Language) at 1st level. No one, including the rogues, ever has all the skill points they want, even with all the extra points they get.