Re-doing Cross-Class Skills

[Jondor_Battlehammer]

Niche protection is also achieved thru the number of skill points. A fighter with 2 per level will never be as able to compare vs a rogue with 8. Its really a triple penalty for anyone that wants non standard skills without multiclassing heavily.

To your specific idea, I thinks its a good one, and in no way unbalancing. It would give anyone that dedicated the points in spot and listen, plus maybe alertness, to be a very credible sentry vs ust about any monster or non sneaky class. It would also cause rogues to be a litle more cautious, but paranoia should run in any class with hide as a class skill.

Personally, I run a skill heavy campaign, lots of RP where many skills can shine. I give +2 skillpoints per level, 1for1 ranks on all skills, and limit non class skills to level in ranks. Very housey, but it hasn't unbalanced anything even in a 6-8 player group. Niche protection is maintaine by giving out a potential +3 ranks to a class skill vs non class, which is equal to a feat per skill if you want to max it out.

 

[jollyninja]

I just killed the concept entirely. it seems kinda unnessisary to me in the first place.

 

[monboesen]

What are your thoughts on this?

We have done this for years and it works out fine. The most popular cross-class skills seems to be the perceptive ones (listen, search, sense motive and spot) and various knowledge skills. Not really that surprising I guess.


Anyway no one at our table have ever felt their niche threatened by the rule and it generally makes characters more interesting and less one dimensional.

 

[Baron Opal]

IMC, all base classes give out 4 sp / level and I use Iron Heroes skill groups for thematic skill focussing. (Except for akashic and rogue, of course. They still get their usual sp allotment.)

Originally I did the reverse of Jurgen's idea where I kept the 2:1 cost of cross class skills but removed the lower limit.

 

[Goblyn]

I've also just done away completely with the cross-class skill idea. It's just easier that way. The OP's idea is less extreme and thus perfectly viable in my eyes.

 

[Treebore]

I also got rid of cross class entirely. Training is training, if you have the skill, you have the skill. CC never made sense to me, so out the door it went.

 

[nerfherder]

What are your thoughts on this?

I did it in my AE campaign and it worked fine. It encouraged players to take a few points in the odd interesting, but not class-skill.

 

[Evil Monkey]

Therefore I would suggest keeping the maximum ranks for cross-class skills, but making them cost the same number of skill points as regular skills. This way, the niches of the classes remain protected when it comes to skills, but it does allow for some more diversity among characters. With the double cost, characters will be hard pressed to even catch up to other party members who only have high ability scores linked to the relevant skills, but without this restriction, they can at least be somewhat credible in these skills.

What are your thoughts on this?

Like some other posters above, I have already implemented this in my campaign and agree that it doesn't unbalance the game or anything. It also makes the math much easier when calculating skill points and making sure no one's sneaking an extra rank in there.

 

[D.Shaffer]

While I havent eliminated Cross Class skills, I HAVE made it so you can choose what your class skills are.

 

[mmadsen]

Therefore I would suggest keeping the maximum ranks for cross-class skills, but making them cost the same number of skill points as regular skills.

Agreed.