Opinions on a feat granting skill ranks

[Greatwyrm]

The preview of Spycraft from AEG has a feat which grants 4 skill points for a character to distribute as they see fit. These skill points are subject to all the normal rules such as class skills, cross-class, max ranks, etc. Do you feel this would be balanced enough to introduce into a standard D&D game?

If you vote, please leave a post as to why you chose what you did.

 

[Dr. Zoom]

I can see this feat being balanced with those stipulations. After all, you could only use them to max out your skill ranks. I would be curious to see how many players would choose a feat like this. What is the name of the feat?

 

[Greatwyrm]

The feat is called Training. It's in the Skill Feats section of Spycraft Lite.

 

[Ristamar]

I voted 'No.' I don't think it's a good idea to start giving out skill ranks through feats. Bonuses? Fine. Ranks? No. It easily violates tenets already established in d20/D&D.

 

[Fast Learner]

Clearly imbalanced to me. I work under the assumption that the feats that give you two points in two specific skills because they're related are strong enough, putting trust in the designers of the core rules. Four points to spend anywhere you want is way, way, way more powerful and, imo, inappropriate.

 

[Greatwyrm]

I voted 'No.' I don't think it's a good idea to start giving out skill ranks through feats. Bonuses? Fine. Ranks? No. It easily violates tenets already established in d20/D&D.

Do you feel this way because the bonuses from feats like Alertness and Skill Focus don't qualify as ranks for synergies?

 

[ruleslawyer]

Giving out skill ranks might pose problems, but giving out skill points (which is what I sense this feat does) really isn't that big a deal. 4 skill points is a fine trade-off for a feat; in fact, it's a pretty weak trade-off, given that feats like Alertness and Skill Focus allow you to transcend the normal limits of skill checks by giving bonuses.

In answer to your question, Greatwyrm: Yes, it's balanced. Actually, I'd almost never burn a feat for this, so it might even be underpowered.

 

[Greatwyrm]

Clearly imbalanced to me. I work under the assumption that the feats that give you two points in two specific skills because they're related are strong enough, putting trust in the designers of the core rules. Four points to spend anywhere you want is way, way, way more powerful and, imo, inappropriate.

If it was limited to ranks in class skills, would that be better? How about two ranks in two skills instead of four ranks anywhere (cross-class still counts double, exclusives still excluded)?

 

[Greatwyrm]

Giving out skill ranks might pose problems, but giving out skill points (which is what I sense this feat does) really isn't that big a deal. 4 skill points is a fine trade-off for a feat; in fact, it's a pretty weak trade-off, given that feats like Alertness and Skill Focus allow you to transcend the normal limits of skill checks by giving bonuses.

You're correct; 4 skill points, not 4 skill ranks. I'll go back and edit my post.

 

[Gaiden]

The fact that they are ranks completely unbalances the current system of feats giving BONUSES to skills. Actually having more ranks opens up the possiblity of synergy bonuses as well as PrC qualifiers that would not normally be there. Take for example a 2nd level rogue who now can boost and additional four skills by one rank making them each have 5 rather than 4. In effect that rogue has just gotten a total of +12 to his skills assuming he maxes out the right skills. No other feat in the game can do that.

It's too powerful. Stick with the four points being distributed however the player sees fit according to all of the rules you posted with the caveat that they are bonus points and not ranks.