removing class & cross-class skills - convince me why this is a bad idea

[Geoff Watson]

One advantage of class skills is that it in encourages certain classes to take class-suitable skills, without preventing them from taking other skills. Some classes have better skills than others as part of the class balance.

If all skills were available to everyone, most characters would take the 'best' skills (UMD, Tumble, Spot, etc) and ignore the skills suited to their class.

Fighters are NOT prevented from taking Spot as a skill. They just won't be as good at it as a Ranger or Rogue. Whats the point of taking Hide as a skill if everyone can max out Spot? (and most would if they could).

Geoff.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

well what i always have done is allow players to choose to crossskills and make them class skills at 1st level ,also all class with 2 skill points a level now get 4

 

[drothgery]

Hmm... I'd figure the biggest argument against making all skills class skills for everyone is that it really stomps on the niche of skill monkey types (rogues, bards, rangers, and any other high skill point type* with a broad skill list).

* 6+ skill points/level if other class features don't demand high Int; 4+ if they do.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

The three arguments I have seen are:

- Limit entry into PrC's
- Avoiding stomping on skill monkey's niche
- The Spot skill....

The first two have been talked about already, and the last mentioned in passing. Spot is a valuable skill for all characters and tends to be the 'no-brainer max' for everyone.

Without cross class skills the advantage Rogues and Rangers have in combat over the fighter suddenly dissappears.

My 'fix' to this is to tweak the 'Skill Focus' feat to grant +2 to the skill *and* make it a class skill. That way your player who wants a sneaky fighter simply takes a feat and 'poof!'

I have considered removing the double cost from cross class skills, but since I use E-Tool's for character generation and haven't figured out to to code that

 

[Kaodi]

Maybe someone suggested this already, but perhaps the thing to do would to make only trained skills cross-classable (with one caveat, Knowledge).

So... Autohypnosis, Decipher Script, Disable Device, Handle Animal, Open Lock, Psicraft, Spellcraft, Tumble, Use Magic Device, Use Psionic Device.

 

[GlassJaw]

Hmm... I'd figure the biggest argument against making all skills class skills for everyone is that it really stomps on the niche of skill monkey types (rogues, bards, rangers, and any other high skill point type* with a broad skill list).

I don't think so. The strength of the skill monkeys it the high number of skill points they get at each level more so than their skill list. The class skills list for a class with very few skill points doesn't matter as much - they just don't have the points to compete with the skill monkeys.

So even if you allow the low-skill classes a wider range of choices, I don't think they will make the high-skill classes less desirable.

 

[Arkhandus]

Yeah, my main beef with it is:

1) Bluff, Hide, Move Silently, and Rogues become redundant and fairly useless. Here me out on this: Everyone will max out Sense Motive, making the 'feint in combat' option worthless, since feinting is opposed by a Sense Motive check that adds the victim's BAB to the roll, so it's almost impossible for the victim to fail if they have full access to Sense Motive. Only a few classes normally have access to it as a class skill, so it's normally a reasonable tactic for Rogues and others to catch enemy warriors effectively-flat-footed. Hide and Move Silently won't matter much because people will max out Listen and Spot in order to avoid being surprised or missing important details. Especially with Invisibility and Silence spells around, the actual Hide and Move Silently skills will be rather undervalued

2) Anyone can take over the skill stuff, so there'll be no reason for a Rogue, Bard, or similar character in the group; people will avoid the only-situationally-useful roguish types and instead throw in another warrior, priest, or mage. You'll have many redundant classes in the game that no longer fill a useful role. The wizard-type will just handle all Intelligence skills, the warrior-type will just handle the awareness skills and maybe one or two other skills if they've got the points, and the priest-type will handle the social skills, while magic alone handles stealth and finesse because there's no point playing a Rogue when you can be an always-effective Barbarian or Cleric (with several Rog skills instead of typical Brb/Clr skills).

 

[Arkhandus]

Oh, there won't be any incentive for rogue-types though, Glassjaw. The average Human Fighter, lowliest of the skill-users, can still pick up Listen, Spot, and Sense Motive when cross-class skills are abolished, all they really need to neutralize their main combat weaknesses.

If they play a Barbarian instead, like anyone who prefers effectiveness for their warrior-types, they'll also be able to pick up Diplomacy and Intimidate, becoming an awesome butt-kicker and faceman where needed. They won't need a Rogue or Bard to handle it. They might also pick up Open Lock, if Intelligence is sufficient, to handle the occasional doorway or container that they can't just demolish (especially after getting an adamantine weapon).

The Cleric can pick up the three big awareness skills too, and will be more awesome with them through high Wisdom, and a Druid could pick up Survival and Diplomacy too, also becoming a good faceman and really, only one person in the group needs Survival (if they're any good at it, they'll be able to consistently provide the whole group with food, water, and shelter on any wilderness trek, with minimal need for trail rations, Create Water, or Create Food & Drink spells).

The Wizard can pick up the three awareness skills too, plus Concentration, Spellcraft, Knowledge (Arcana), Disable Device, and Search. They'll probably skimp on or avoid Listen and Spot, and skimp on Knowledge, but that's no big deal since everyone else in the group will be highly perceptive. Concentration only needs to go up enough to consistently Cast Defensively, too, then its points can be allocated on perception skills.

And that leaves 1 slot open in the typical party, for another brute, archer, blaster, or priest, and they need not skimp at all on their combat effectiveness, since everyone will have decent utility capacity. And a whole lot of classes will go unused (bard, rogue, swashbuckler, etc.) for lack of any need for a skillmonkey, faceman, sneak, or the like. The party will get more use out of having another major buttkicker without the situational usefulness of those other classes. And for some of us, that's not so much of a good thing.

 

[Aus_Snow]

There will be no issues of great import. If you feel compelled, then perhaps consider further differentiating skill points on whatever basis seems reasonable. And done.

 

[Griffith Dragonlake]

Encouraging player creativity is a good thing. Consider the following options:

Diplomatic Wizard: Skill Focus (Diplomacy), max cross-class ranks in Diplomacy, headband of charisma, and repeated castings of Eagle's Splendour.

Stealthy fighter: (with DM's permission) swaps out heavy armour and medium armour proficiencies with skill focus (hide in shadows) and skill focus (move silently). Max cross-class ranks in hide in shadows and move silently. Pumps dexterity as levels are acquired. Buys Elven cloak and boots. Buys ring of invisibility.

Not to mention they could take levels in Bard and/or Rogue.

Another alternative already mentoned is to swap out class skills. Maybe the fighter swaps out swimming and climbing for move silently and hide shadows.