Modifying skill rank rules

[Matthias]

Sorry for the edits, my phone is being dumb.

These rules are meant more as a suggestion for a future revision of Pathfinder rather than implementation as a house rule, though it would not be a big deal to implement as a house rule.

* Lower the class skill rank bonus from +3 to +2. This is certainly a hit to lower level characters but I'm not sure how we might compensate for this.
* This bonus increases by +1 for each secondary class that also posseses the skill. For example, a cleric with ranks in spellcraft who takes a level in wizard gets an additional +1 bonus--and if he later became a cleric/wizard/inquisitor, his class skill bonus would increase to +4 (but bit if he became a cleric/wizard/fighter). This benefit can be gained retroactively such as by a multiclassed character taking ranks for the first time in a skill on both his classes' lists.

This could be implemented as a house rule (such as for published monsters and NPCs with precalculated total skill bonuses) simply by subtracting 1 from every skill's calculated total bonus and then (with multiclassed characters and monsters with class levels) applying a +1 for each "shared"class skill, cumulatively for each secondary class taken.

 

[IronWolf]

What problem are you trying to solve with these modifications?

 

[Crothian]

Pathfinder went out of its way to reward single class characters. It seems that you are trying to change that by adding in a big bonus for multi class characters.

 

[Tovec]

What this house rule does is give other classes a class bonus to the skill, a random bump. It is a fine houserule but given the Pathfinder focus on one class characters, this is just completely bizarre.

What are you trying to achieve? What is the issue you are trying to correct?

Pathfinder went out of its way to reward single class characters. It seems that you are trying to change that by adding in a big bonus for multi class characters.

Agreed.

Why should multiclass characters get this bonus, instead of single class characters?

 

[Matthias]

Rewarding multiclassing is exactly what it's for...I think it meshes nicely with the benefit of overlapping class skill lists with MC characters.

 

[Crothian]

Why do you want to reward multi classing? Castors still won't do it because losing out on spell casting is much worse then skill bonuses. I think it also could be a pain in the neck record keeping because you need to keep track of each classes class skills and it would take a few classes to get the bonus above +3 for a number of skills. It doesn't seem worth the effort especially since in the long run skills are a weak part of the characters abilities.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I kind of have to agree that this is not that great of an idea - in 3e and 3.5 multiclassing was rewarded, leaving little reason for a non-caster to remain singleclassed.

A more palatable reward for multiclassing is already present - it is easier to qualify for a prestige class when class dipping than when remaining true to your class.

Really though, why reward something that already offers benefits in the form of new abilities, possibly spells, and a wider pool of skills? Remember, in Pathfinder a class skill remains a class skill. You will always have that bonus, and adding ranks always costs a single point. A multiclassed character has more skills that gain that bonus. (Yes, I'll take a level in rogue... I want those skills for my ranger....)

Look to archetypes as well - there can be some interesting synergies in class abilities.

The Auld Grump

 

[Nimloth]

Imho

Players will multiclass when in suits them and this change is not going to be an incentive to multiclass, unless I was focusing on 1 skill. If the only thing I wanted from a character was to be THE BEST IN THE WORLD AT >insert skill here<, then I might try to use this rule. Otherwise, like Crothian said, "it also could be a pain in the neck record keeping".

Why do you want to reward multiclassing?

 

[N'raac]

It doesn't reward all multiclassing a fighter/wizard combo will get lots of class skills, greatly expanding the skills that get a +3 bonus if at least 1 rank is assigned to them under the RAW. This proposal would make such a multiclass less favourable (looked at solely from skill ranks) than a wizard/sorcerer.

You can build a great swimmer, though!

 

[Matthias]

Players will multiclass when in suits them and this change is not going to be an incentive to multiclass, unless I was focusing on 1 skill. If the only thing I wanted from a character was to be THE BEST IN THE WORLD AT >insert skill here<, then I might try to use this rule. Otherwise, like Crothian said, "it also could be a pain in the neck record keeping".

Why do you want to reward multiclassing?

Because, for one thing, multiclassing consists of delaying access to future levels (and class features) of your primary class to gain access to low-level features of one or more other classes, whether by taking only a few levels in a secondary class or by leveling up all classes at the same rate. This is a net decrease in power for multiclassed characters compared to single-classed ones.

Ideally, when I am making up a character, I want to be able to approach the option of multiclassing not as a problem I have to accept of sacrificing power for versatility but as an alternative build that will still compete pretty well with the single-classed PCs (or NPCs) in the campaign. There is also a goal held by some players to level-up their characters as fast as possible up to the limit given by the GM or the ruleset and multiclassing should provide incentives to be competitive with that mindset as well.

Here is a litmus test: Applying the rules you are using with multiclassing, propose to the players in a group that half the PCs must dual-class at 10 and 5 levels respectively and the other can be single-classed with 15 levels. If you encounter a certain amount of argument or complaints then multiclassing just isn't good enough yet to compete with the attractiveness of "level-grinding" and of getting the full benefit of sticking with a single class for the entire campaign.

We can also compare multiclassing with taking levels in a prestige class. Prestiges can give you some weird wild powers that you normally can't find in a standard class, and prestige features can provide interesting alternatives to the class features of the class/es you're already playing, access to which you are delaying in favor of prestige-class levels. You are delaying access to future class features of your primary class but the prestige class makes up for this with the powerful abilities it provides. Multiclassing, however, doesn't measure up quite the same way because you have to start at the ground floor of the secondary class, which doesn't grant you anything exactly spectacular. What is more, the higher the level you begin multiclassing, the greater the cost in the delay.

Granting a +1 "synergy bonus" for shared skills wouldn't and isn't meant to solve this problem by itself, but in combination with other bonuses built-in to multiclassing, we could make single-classing vs. multiclassing less of a false dilemma when it comes to creating competitive characters.