Profession every Class Skill?

[Sanackranib]

thats my whole point. it takes 6-9 levels just to get good with 1 skill that should be on everyones skill list

 

[Ace]

I also tend to drop the limit on cross-class skills and let players raise them as high as class skills. The only problem with that is that some classes get a paltry number of skill points. I'd like to give them more, but that chips into the rogue's benefit. So, I haven't figured out a good solution for that, yet.

Starman

I solved the problem by giving everybody 2 extra points

In 3e it was Ftr-4 Barb-6 Wiz-4 Rog-8 and so on

ALl 3 of the DM's in the group adopted it so I guess it worked Ok. I like it anyway

 

[FoxWander]

I've done a number of things to fix these kinds of problems.
1) I give everyone 4 free ranks in a craft/profession to reflect background.
2) I've eliminated cross-class skills completely.
3) Every class gets at least of 4 skill points, Bards get 6 and Rogues get 8.

So far there haven't been any problems. Everyone likes the versatility and the Rogues don't feel like they've "lost something" from their class either. Your mileage may vary however.

 

[Steverooo]

Should every class has at least a few professons for it?

Yes. Preferably differentiated by Class.

 

[Heretic Apostate]

I think, but probably am mistaken, that not everything in the background requires a skill check. Does the teamster need to make a Rope Use check whenever they tie a simple knot? Does a sailor need to make a Profession (Sailor) check every time the captain yells, "Batten down the hatches"? Some things are just too trivial to be a skill check, or an ability check.

At least, that's my belief...

 

[Sanackranib]

I think, but probably am mistaken, that not everything in the background requires a skill check. Does the teamster need to make a Rope Use check whenever they tie a simple knot? Does a sailor need to make a Profession (Sailor) check every time the captain yells, "Batten down the hatches"? Some things are just too trivial to be a skill check, or an ability check.

At least, that's my belief...

True not every action requires a skill check but when one does and you dont have any ranks . . .

 

[Alaric_Prympax]

Personally, I'm not a terribly large fan of the cross-class skill idea anyway. When skills are pretty much defined for you as "you can take this skill" and "you probably shouldn't bother taking this skill because you'll never be any good at it no matter how hard you try", that pretty much caters to stereotyping. Everyone knows, for instance, that fighters are blind as a bat and couldn't pass a spot roll to save their lives.

In 2E, at least, purchasing a proficiency across class lines may cost you extra, but you'll still be able to be good at it. In 3E, not only does it cost you extra, but you'll always suck at it no matter how hard you try. It's rather restrictive in that way: You can't REALLY develop a character which is somehow "different", even if you wanted to: A fighter, for instance, could never really be someone with a passionate interest in security, particularly traps: Even if you tried really hard, and had a good int, all of those skills are cross-class: No matter how many points you'd want drop into it, you run into a hard cap of half that of anyone else. Rogue skills are similar: In 2E, you could really begin to develop a field of specialty by 3rd level. In 3E, the limit of how many points you can even put into a skill at all effectively forces you to spread them out, and as a result, many of the skills are mostly useless until higher level.

Although I agree with all the views expressed in this thread wouldn't PrC's take care of this? Usually PrC's allow a wider range of special abilities and class skills and some give more points then the "core" class of the character.