Skill Advancement without Levels

[Chris Lawrence]

I've never liked the fact that A) if an expert such as a jeweller goes up in levels, he gets much better at fighting (thanks to HP, save and BAB improvement) even if he's never lifted a sword in his life, and B) experts who don't advance in levels can't actually be experts in their craft--at best a jeweller will have seven to ten skill points in his chosen profession. The solution I've been mulling over in my head is the following:

* In addition to level-based skill improvement, characters can also improve their skills independently of level as a result of doing their profession.

* At the end of every year, each character in the game world may get a chance to improve one of those skills that he or she uses in his or her profession. The chance is the number of months he or she has spent at his or her profession that year out of 12, rolled on a d12. So, for example, Sallis the Blade spent 2 months adventuring and 10 months at her regular job (she's an officer in the Corran army); so, if her player rolls 1-10 on a d12, then Sallis will have a chance to improve her profession (soldier) skill. However, because her job involves leadership, the DM rules that her player may instead choose to roll to see if she'll have a chance to improve her diplomacy skill if she likes. Let's say for the example's sake that her player chooses diplomacy.

* If a character is granted, through the d12 roll, the chance to improve a skill, then the player (PC) or DM (NPC) makes a skill check with the relevant skill. The DC is 15 for a low-pressure environment, 20 for a medium-pressure environment and 25 for a high-pressure environment. So, for example, if the Corran army is a rag-tag bunch of mercenaries and conscripted criminals in a kingdom which cares little about military efficiency, then there will be little pressure on Sallis to be a great officer and the DM will rule that it is a low-pressure environment. If, however, the Corran army is one of the finiest on the continent, then there will be a lot of pressure on Sallis to do her job well and the DM will rule that it's a high-pressure environment.

* If the skill check succeeds, then the skill does not improve (i.e. the character's present skill level was good enough to do her job well that year). If, however, the skill check fails, then the relevant skill goes up by one point (the character's skills were really put to the test this year and she was forced to get better).

I'm hoping that this system will allow the existence of lots of experts/commoners who are crap at fighting (level 1) but very good at their jobs. I'm also hoping that it's low-key enough to prevent abuse by PCs. Well, what do you think? Anything I should change? Anything I've overlooked?

 

[comrade raoul]

This looks really great. It does what you set out to do effectively and really does fix one of the implausible features of the system.

Another approach, however, is just to award skill ranks ad-hoc, and simply say something like: "With time and steady practice, characters can advance ranks in skills even when they're not adventuring." You could then simply stipulate that Joe the Butcher is a first level commoner with 8 ranks in Profession (butcher), and that Regdar has a few ranks in Craft (basketweaving) from his village past, without having to spend skill points. This is certainly less conceptually satisfying, but may be just as effective in practice, if not more so.

 

[Chris Lawrence]

Another approach, however, is just to award skill ranks ad-hoc... This is certainly less conceptually satisfying, but may be just as effective in practice, if not more so.

I agree. My thinking is that, in practice, the DM would simply estimate how many skill points any given NPC would have, but that the mechanical system to back it up would give the DM a basis for his or her guess. For example, the DM might have the PCs buying gear from Joe the Merchant. Joe is 50 years old, so he's probably been at his trade about 35 years, 12 months a year, so he's probably had about 35 opportunities to improve his skills. Say he failed his check about two-thirds of the time (each failure resulting in a one point improvement)--that means Joe should have about 24 extra skill points. The DM decides to give him 8 extra skill points in appraise, 4 extra in each of diplomacy and bluff, and the other 8 go to profession (merchant). Assuming full ranks taken in each of those skills at chargen, +1 bonus from ability scores, and skill-focus (profession), that gives Joe appraise 13, bluff 9, diplomacy 9 and profession (merchant) 16. I imagine that, with practice, such calculations could be done in a few seconds on the fly.

The mechanical system could also be useful for PCs and key NPCs in campaigns where there is a lot of down-time between adventures.

 

[Lorehead]

I don't think this would be terribly unbalancing, if you apply it only to skills that have low, fixed DCs. Apply the same house rule to a rogue's sneakiness or a caster's Concentration, and you'll run into problems. In particular, if one of those skills is a prerequisite for some feat or prestige class, I'd stick to the RAW.

Considering that experts' and commoners' combat stats will only matter if they participate in the same battle as the PCs, a simple solution is to say that they don't fight except as a desperate last resort. (Even then, an experienced expert or commoner would need plenty of luck to damage a monster with a CR of his level.) It's good that they have a decent number of HP, since that gives them at least a chance to escape alive.

If you consider this enough of a problem to change the rules, I would recommend giving all non-combatants a BAB of +0, regardless of level. I'd advise letting them keep the other benefits of gaining levels and leaving the skill system as is.

 

[Chris Lawrence]

Thanks for the feedback, Lorehead.

I don't think this would be terribly unbalancing, if you apply it only to skills that have low, fixed DCs. Apply the same house rule to a rogue's sneakiness or a caster's Concentration, and you'll run into problems. In particular, if one of those skills is a prerequisite for some feat or prestige class, I'd stick to the RAW.

I agree that caution would have to be shown here, but I don't think I'd mind characters getting earlier access to some prestige classes if they had earned it off-screen, in their down-time. It's a point-a-year max, so getting significantly earlier access to prestige classes would represent years of work for the character, which seems fair to me.

Considering that experts' and commoners' combat stats will only matter if they participate in the same battle as the PCs, a simple solution is to say that they don't fight except as a desperate last resort. (Even then, an experienced expert or commoner would need plenty of luck to damage a monster with a CR of his level.) It's good that they have a decent number of HP, since that gives them at least a chance to escape alive.

If you consider this enough of a problem to change the rules, I would recommend giving all non-combatants a BAB of +0, regardless of level. I'd advise letting them keep the other benefits of gaining levels and leaving the skill system as is.

I actually like having commoners and experts have low HP and saves . I don't like non-fighting characters getting beeter at dodging lightning bolts and sucking up damage by being a clerk or a valet. If giving NPC classes a chance to escape from fights is a priority, then a HP kicker (a la Hackmaster) would probably do the trick, but it really isn't a priority for me.

 

[Nebulous]

I've never liked the fact that A) if an expert such as a jeweller goes up in levels, he gets much better at fighting (thanks to HP, save and BAB improvement) even if he's never lifted a sword in his life, and B) experts who don't advance in levels can't actually be experts in their craft--at best a jeweller will have seven to ten skill points in his chosen profession.

You could also substitute attack bonus for extra skill ranks. This might help to offset the problem in a simple way. Or substitute attack for Skill focus feats. Just an idea.

 

[hazmat]

You could just create a d4 HD class a with all bad saves that gets X number of skill points. And the special ability: Max ranks in <Skill of choice> increases by 2.

I'm also a big fan of ad hoc skill rewards. I once had the characters in a campaign take a trip on a boat that took like 2 months of game time. I asked all the characters what they were going to do. All but one of the characters said they were going to help out or do something skill related.

Everyone but that one character got a free rank in Profession(sailor) and a free rank in some other related skill. I even gave the bard a free rank in perform. Though I think that might have been a bad call on my part.

 

[Chris Lawrence]

You could also substitute attack bonus for extra skill ranks. This might help to offset the problem in a simple way. Or substitute attack for Skill focus feats. Just an idea.

Hmmm... Perhaps aristocrats, experts and commoners could have the option to trade in any or all of their BAB, save and HP progression each level for a set number of skill points (maybe 2 per element traded in, giving 6 extra points for a full trade-in). Then award a set number of XP each year for doing their job, say 500, and scrap the maximum on skill ranks for any character going up a level as aristocrat, expert or commoner. So, after ten years, you've got a level five commoner, with the HP, BAB and saves of a first-level commoner, but 24 extra skill points, e.g. 12 in profession (fishing), 6 in craft (boatbuilding), 3 in Knowledge (local) and 3 in survival.

 

[cattoy]

what would you propose to balance out elves and other races with long lifespans? Given your premise, it stands to reason that elven craftsmen would be so skilled as to render non elves uncompetetive...

 

[Vrecknidj]

what would you propose to balance out elves and other races with long lifespans? Given your premise, it stands to reason that elven craftsmen would be so skilled as to render non elves uncompetetive...

Maybe individuals from very-long-lived races find that their lives aren't made all that much more meaningful by spending every waking hour honing some talent. Perhaps dwarves and elves find that there's more to life than work.

I like the suggestion of a class with low advancement in other areas. You could always create a new expert class that doesn't get any BAB or Saves advancement, and gets a nice bunch of skill points at every level. So, a 10th level expert in this system won't be a better combatant than anyone else, but will be very good at his/her chosen skills.

I'd only do this for NPCs, by the way, but it would give DMs a mechanic for it.

Dave