Skill Bonus items: An idea
- Thread starter Crothian
- Start date
). So, can you say more about this or do we have to wait till the book?Spatzimaus
First Post
Existing skill items are:
1> Too cheap.
2> Too easy for people to raise cross-class skills, covering inherent gaps in their character class.
3> Too easy to raise class skills ridiculously high, while Feats that add only 2 or 3 points are "balanced".
4> Too easy to swap off and on. If you suddenly need Hide skill, pull that Cloak of Elvenkind out of the haversack, and instaRogue!
Since this is a House Rule forum post, here's what my friends and I came up with a while back, although we haven't implemented it IMC. (Yet.)
DMG says 20*(bonus^2) gp. Change it to 100*(bonus)*(caster level) gp for the powerful skills, half as much for less useful skills. It's a DM's call, but the only things that I'd put in the low-cost group are things like Jump or individual Knowledge/Craft/Profession skills. Slotless items are double, of course.
The "bonus" is treated as skill points spent; that is, you get N skill ranks if it's a class skill for any of your classes, N/2 if it's cross-class. These pseudoranks are not actual ranks, so they don't violate the (3+level) maximum or let you qualify for PrCs. Likewise, Bards don't get new musical abilities from Perform items.
But, there's a new limitation: the item can't take your total rank beyond a number equal to its caster level.
(We're also considering an "attunement time" limit, where you have to wear the item at least an hour before gaining the benefit)
Let's say I make a Ring of Jumping that has bonus=10, caster level=16. Cost is 8,000gp since this skill is clearly in the "less useful" group.
If a Wizard (no ranks and cross-class) puts it on, he gets a +5 bonus.
If a Monk (no ranks but class skill) puts it on, he gets a +10 bonus.
If a Monk who already has 10 ranks in Jump puts it on, he'll hit the cap at +16 (10 from his own skill, 6 from the ring) since the ring can't take him beyond 16 ranks (its caster level).
(For 8000gp, the DMG says I could have a +20 ring)
What this does is kill those +30 items, since you'd have to be at least caster level 30 to make them. And, you stop having people take cross-class skill items so much. When the Cleric takes a Third Eye to get Spot and Search better than the Ranger has, there's a problem.
There'll also be some variety; If I want boots that raise Move Silently, for 5,000gp I could either get (+10 at CL 5, great for those cross-class people since they get +5) or (+5 at CL 10, great for Rogues who need a few more ranks), but not both.
1> Too cheap.
2> Too easy for people to raise cross-class skills, covering inherent gaps in their character class.
3> Too easy to raise class skills ridiculously high, while Feats that add only 2 or 3 points are "balanced".
4> Too easy to swap off and on. If you suddenly need Hide skill, pull that Cloak of Elvenkind out of the haversack, and instaRogue!
Since this is a House Rule forum post, here's what my friends and I came up with a while back, although we haven't implemented it IMC. (Yet.)
DMG says 20*(bonus^2) gp. Change it to 100*(bonus)*(caster level) gp for the powerful skills, half as much for less useful skills. It's a DM's call, but the only things that I'd put in the low-cost group are things like Jump or individual Knowledge/Craft/Profession skills. Slotless items are double, of course.
The "bonus" is treated as skill points spent; that is, you get N skill ranks if it's a class skill for any of your classes, N/2 if it's cross-class. These pseudoranks are not actual ranks, so they don't violate the (3+level) maximum or let you qualify for PrCs. Likewise, Bards don't get new musical abilities from Perform items.
But, there's a new limitation: the item can't take your total rank beyond a number equal to its caster level.
(We're also considering an "attunement time" limit, where you have to wear the item at least an hour before gaining the benefit)
Let's say I make a Ring of Jumping that has bonus=10, caster level=16. Cost is 8,000gp since this skill is clearly in the "less useful" group.
If a Wizard (no ranks and cross-class) puts it on, he gets a +5 bonus.
If a Monk (no ranks but class skill) puts it on, he gets a +10 bonus.
If a Monk who already has 10 ranks in Jump puts it on, he'll hit the cap at +16 (10 from his own skill, 6 from the ring) since the ring can't take him beyond 16 ranks (its caster level).
(For 8000gp, the DMG says I could have a +20 ring)
What this does is kill those +30 items, since you'd have to be at least caster level 30 to make them. And, you stop having people take cross-class skill items so much. When the Cleric takes a Third Eye to get Spot and Search better than the Ranger has, there's a problem.
There'll also be some variety; If I want boots that raise Move Silently, for 5,000gp I could either get (+10 at CL 5, great for those cross-class people since they get +5) or (+5 at CL 10, great for Rogues who need a few more ranks), but not both.
Great idea!
Wow! What an excellent and elegant idea.
This will allow people who are already good at a skill to be more consistently successful (ie, my Rogue with +10 in disable device uses a charge off of his "skill ring" and I now get two d20 rolls against the DC20), vs. giving an item with +10 to disable device on it...which is now going to be used by the Sorcerer or Fighter? This works much better. I could even see combo effects that grant a small bonus to the roll, and two dice. I wouldn't go above 2 d20 rolls, just for simplicity. I think would make for cooler skill items, that aren't as abused (used continuously), and instead might be used on whatever skill is critical, and only when it is really needed.
As has been said, I echo the concern with the ease of obtaining +10 or +30 skill bonuses from spells and items. This practice is demeaning to Rogues, and the other skill-advantaged classes, in general. They also don't fit well with the concept of low level balance. Additionally, these huge bonuses are easily abused at higher levels through min/max'ing things like Hide in Plain Sight, and having a skill bonus item which makes it impossible for anyone to spot you (of reasonably equivalent CR), without their own skill item to counter yours. That's no good. I think skill bonuses from magic items and spells should probably max out around +5, and if you want to make them more powerful, then make them either "one-shot" or "the bonus applies to a range of skills".
Wow! What an excellent and elegant idea.
This will allow people who are already good at a skill to be more consistently successful (ie, my Rogue with +10 in disable device uses a charge off of his "skill ring" and I now get two d20 rolls against the DC20), vs. giving an item with +10 to disable device on it...which is now going to be used by the Sorcerer or Fighter? This works much better. I could even see combo effects that grant a small bonus to the roll, and two dice. I wouldn't go above 2 d20 rolls, just for simplicity. I think would make for cooler skill items, that aren't as abused (used continuously), and instead might be used on whatever skill is critical, and only when it is really needed.
As has been said, I echo the concern with the ease of obtaining +10 or +30 skill bonuses from spells and items. This practice is demeaning to Rogues, and the other skill-advantaged classes, in general. They also don't fit well with the concept of low level balance. Additionally, these huge bonuses are easily abused at higher levels through min/max'ing things like Hide in Plain Sight, and having a skill bonus item which makes it impossible for anyone to spot you (of reasonably equivalent CR), without their own skill item to counter yours. That's no good. I think skill bonuses from magic items and spells should probably max out around +5, and if you want to make them more powerful, then make them either "one-shot" or "the bonus applies to a range of skills".
der_kluge
Adventurer
I thought everyone had access to the files on my computer? Hmm, will have to check out those "sharing" options again. 
Skill items are easy - treat them as bonus items. +5 skills = +1 bonus item. So, the cost of creating a ring that grants +10 to a skill is the same cost as creating a +2 suit of armor. (weapons have an increased cost because they confer a bonus to to-hit, and a bonus to damage).
+20 skills = +4 item.
That's it.
We have campaign variant rules which allow you to govern how many skill points you can place into an item. High magic campaign, there is no limit. Low magic, you have to have at least half as many ranks in the skill. So, creating a +20 skill ring, you have to have at least 10 ranks. Medium (the default), you have to have one-quarter as many. So, 5 ranks in this case. I think that's what we ended up with. You could do a 1:1, too. So, to create a +10 ring of jump, you'd need 10 ranks in jump, if you wanted to do it that way.
Skill items are easy - treat them as bonus items. +5 skills = +1 bonus item. So, the cost of creating a ring that grants +10 to a skill is the same cost as creating a +2 suit of armor. (weapons have an increased cost because they confer a bonus to to-hit, and a bonus to damage).
+20 skills = +4 item.
That's it.
We have campaign variant rules which allow you to govern how many skill points you can place into an item. High magic campaign, there is no limit. Low magic, you have to have at least half as many ranks in the skill. So, creating a +20 skill ring, you have to have at least 10 ranks. Medium (the default), you have to have one-quarter as many. So, 5 ranks in this case. I think that's what we ended up with. You could do a 1:1, too. So, to create a +10 ring of jump, you'd need 10 ranks in jump, if you wanted to do it that way.
Ravellion
serves Gnome Master
Perhaps you could use a similar mechanic to actually use the item, so you would have to have invested in the skill before you can use the item. Or jsut don't allow any custom magic items that give +30 to move silently (ie. +10 is the maximum for everything but Jump and Swim. +5 might be the maximum for spellcraft.)die_kluge said:
Rav
