Should the whole idea of class skills be done away with?

[BigFreekinGoblinoid]

Why stop at just eliminating class skills, and get rid of classes all together?

 

[Corinth]

Because players will create characters that fit into one or two character classes anyway, so you might as well formalize it.

 

[Carnifex]

Why stop at just eliminating class skills, and get rid of classes all together?

I don't have a problem with classes themselves. I like the focus they give a character, and creating an entirely classless system that still allowed PC's to emulate all the existing characetr classes would be rather alarmingly complex. The classes are good for simplicity & flavour among other things, but I just don't like the (unnecessary, IMO) strictures placed on how you spend your skill points.

 

[A'koss]

IME, the complaints here amount to little more than a tempest in a teapot.

Our group elimated cross-class skills probably a year after we started playing 3e and have never looked back. Game balance issues? Certainly, some classes have additional flexibility, but I've never seen that negatively impact the game. The only skill you might want to keep an eye on is Use Magic Device as it's no longer an exclusive skill in 3.5e. Rogues still have so many more skill points that they still end up being the "skill kings". Those fighters who wish to emphasize their intelligence have some options which has been very good for our game. They don't tend to gravitate towards skills that rogues emphasize anyway - stealth, open locks, search, disarm traps, diplomacy... Wizards and tumbling? It's a neat trick, but IME, it doesn't see much use in practice as the wizard is the class least likely to get into a situation to use it.

Just my 2 bits...

A'koss.

 

[Carnifex]

IME, the complaints here amount to little more than a tempest in a teapot.

Our group elimated cross-class skills probably a year after we started playing 3e and have never looked back. Game balance issues? Certainly, some classes have additional flexibility, but I've never seen that negatively impact the game. The only skill you might want to keep an eye on is Use Magic Device as it's no longer an exclusive skill in 3.5e. Rogues still have so many more skill points that they still end up being the "skill kings". Those fighters who wish to emphasize their intelligence have some options which has been very good for our game. They don't tend to gravitate towards skills that rogues emphasize anyway - stealth, open locks, search, disarm traps, diplomacy... Wizards and tumbling? It's a neat trick, but IME, it doesn't see much use in practice as the wizard is the class least likely to get into a situation to use it.

Just my 2 bits...

A'koss.

Good to hear from someone who's actually tried it, and to hear that it hasn't been too problematic What steps have you taken for things that give additional class skills as bonuses, like some of the cleric domains?

 

[bret]

I don't have a problem with classes themselves. I like the focus they give a character, and creating an entirely classless system that still allowed PC's to emulate all the existing characetr classes would be rather alarmingly complex. The classes are good for simplicity & flavour among other things, but I just don't like the (unnecessary, IMO) strictures placed on how you spend your skill points.

Since I like GURPS, I don't happen to agree that character classes are good for simplicity or flavor.

I've had to teach new people DnD rules. They usually have an idea (such as the one given above) that is not unbalancing but does not fit the stereotypes that the designers put in for the classes. The current system basically forces certain classes to be incompetent in some skills.

I know that GMs are allowed to modify the rules. Every time you do this, it makes it a little bit harder to explain just what your character is or does.

Lets take a simple example of a Big Bad Evil Guy. The tyrant wizard who rules a country.

I have trouble imagining such a person not being good at skills such as Intimidate and Diplomacy. They should probably also have some skill with Ride, since that would be a common mode of transport for nobility.

All of those are cross-class skills for a wizard or sorcerer.

Just what is so unbalancing about allowing a Fighter to take Profession: Fisherman?

Yes, there are skills that have combat utility. Fix the broken skills, then give everyone an opportunity to choose what skills they will be competent in.

When in a group running GURPS, after a little while everyone tends to get some skill in commonly used skills. There is still the specialist healer, but everyone knows enough first aid to be able to bandage wounds. There is still the specialist climber who leads the climb, but everyone knows the basics of how to climb. The groups tend to look more realistic, because no one stays incompetent at the skills that the group always needs. There will be a character that is clearly superiour at one skill, they are needed to handle the tough problems.

The way the DnD skill system is set up, even at high level it is quite likely that the wizard skill can't swim across still water or climb a rock wall with ropes and climbing gear and the fighter can't do simple first aid to handle a bleeding wound or put together a lean-to in the wilderness if the tents get destroyed.

The reason I say that the class/cross-class skill system is not simple is the volumn of messages I've seen about people misunderstanding how it works with multiclassed characters. I've also personally had to explain to new players why it is so tough for a certain character concept to be done in DnD when there is nothing wrong with the concept.


I've suggested a slightly different varient for fixing what I perceive as the problem. You never pay cross-class for the first 4-5 ranks of a skill, but are still limited to the lower cross-class skill maximum. This way a person can be halfway competent at a cross-class skill, but they will not outshine someone who has it as a class skill. It also allows a character to learn the basics of a skill that they never forsaw as being appropriate for their character, but during the campaign things evolved in that direction.

 

[randomling]

I've been toying with this for a while, myself. I liked the idea of having each character pick a couple of skills to be class skills, or having an extra class skill of their choice for each point of Int bonus. I'd probably marry these, I'd add a couple of restrictions though:

1) You can't do this beyond first level (so Int bumps at later levels would not give you extra class skills). Additionally, you can only have 4 "extra" class skills.
2) I like the d20 Modern system where the extra class skills system is tied to a profession. Maybe a similar thing could be put in place - like a "profession" feat? For instance...

Profession: Sailor
Benefit: Pick a number of skills equal to your Int bonus (no more than four) from the following list. If the skills are not class skills for you, they become class skills. If they are already class skills, you gain a permanent +1 bonus to checks for this skill.
Profession (sailor), Swim, Use Rope, Knowledge (geography)

Profession: Locksmith
Benefit: (Ditto.)
Disable Device, Craft (locksmithing)... and 2 others I can't think of.

I'm not suggesting making characters give up first-level feat slot, we could make this a "bonus feat" or just a Profession, as in d20 Modern.

What do you think?

 

[A'koss]

Originally posted by Carnifex:

What steps have you taken for things that give additional class skills as bonuses, like some of the cleric domains?

Skill Focus: +3 ranks in that skill.

 

[BigFreekinGoblinoid]

I don't have a problem with classes themselves. I like the focus they give a character, and creating an entirely classless system that still allowed PC's to emulate all the existing characetr classes would be rather alarmingly complex. The classes are good for simplicity & flavour among other things, but I just don't like the (unnecessary, IMO) strictures placed on how you spend your skill points.

I was just playing devils advocate a little bit... Other RPG engines certainly are better for classless play.. I do predict ( like others ) that a future edition of D&D will be entirely skill based ( with many class "packages" of course )

I do actually like the idea of allowing a character to trade skills for otherwise cross class skills - ie -- a fighter can take "use magic device" , but would have to exchange it for - perhaps "handle animal" which would become CC.

 

[Desdichado]

Why not just play Mutants & Masterminds without the super powers, then?