Skill increasing feats worth it?

[Metallian]

If the skills in question are really central to the character concept, and you plan on using them a lot, I say go for it. A +5 that stacks with everything else is never anything to sneeze at...it's 25% of a d20!

4 ranks + 4 ability score modifier + 5 from feats = +13 at first level. That's pretty damn good. IMHO, that +5 will still be good later on.

However, like I said, only if it's something you're going to do a lot. Make sure you really want to be "the sneaky guy" before blowing two (or three) feats on stealth skills.

Rangers get Hide in Plain Sight now, right? That +5 will come in really handy later.

The Metallian

 

[rowport]

"Skill-boosting feats are good/bad depending on the kind of campaign you're playing in and the style of players. If it's a kick-in-the-door-kill-and-loot-monsters campaign, they're probably not that useful. If it's a more varied campaign, then yes, they can be pretty useful."

I think this is the key, really. For combat-heavy campaigns, the skill focus or boosting feats are not going to come into play as often, and will therefore be sub-optimal choices. Then again, in very combat-heavy campaigns a skills-focused character (like the Ranger or Rogue you originally mentioned) will already be at somewhat of a disadvantage. Keep in mind, also, that the "Steathy" skills can play a valuable role both in and out of combat, so there is increased utility from that perspective. In sum, I would suggest going with your character conception in any case, which sounds like a skills-maxed stealthy guy!

(Personally, I love that my Ranger/Rogue routinely has skills that outshine our group- that is his "sweet spot", just like our Fighter routinely does the most damage of our team. When we switch over to 3.5 next month, I plan to pick up the Stealthy feat!)

 

[Zaruthustran]

I'm planning a 3.5 ranger and thinking about the skill enhancing feats (skill focus, and all the 2 fers). Do people think they're worth it in general? I'm starting at third level as a human, and it would be kinda cool to start with +5 to hide and move silently (stealthy and skill focus hide and move silently), but it also kinda seems like a waste. I'm also considering alertness and athletic instead of the skill foci.

I want a commando type of ranger.

I think skill focus feats can be worth it, for the right type of character. Persuasive and skill focus: bluff are great for a social bard because that's all he does--and bluff bonuses are hard to come by.

But stealth... stealth skill bonuses are very easy to come by. You can use cover or concealment to give yourself Hide bonuses. You can get your DM to approve Masterwork footpads to give yourself a Move Silently bonus. You can make sure he knows about the significant penalties to Listen and Spot that come from distance. Or you can get cheap magic items: elven cloak and elven boots. At most go with Stealthy alone, just so you can say "My character is Stealthy" with conviction. But pass on the skill focuses.

If you want to go commando--er, to go with a commando CHARACTER--then I recommend you spend your feats on Extra Favored Enemy. Commandos are sneaky killers, emphasis on killers. Take Extra Favored Enemy two times and you add two new favored enemies at +2, plus a total of +4 to any one or two favored enemies.

Example of 11th level ranger who took Extra Favored Enemy twice:

Favored Enemy Human +6
Favored Enemy Aberration +4
Favored Enemy Giant +4
Favored Enemy Evil Outsider +2
Favored Enemy Magical Beast +2

Remember that a dead foe can't spot or hear you.

Only thing is that I'm not sure if Extra Favored Enemy can be taken multiple times. If it can't, then I'd spend your feats on Extra Favored Enemy, Stealthy, Combat Reflexes, and Expert Tactician. Expert Tactician is the feat from Song & Silence that gives you a free attack whenever a foe is denied their Dex bonus. Which means that if you sneak up to two guards and surprise them, you get two extra attacks (one on each) as well as your surprise partial action. If you then win Init, you get two more Expert Tactician attacks plus your full attack(s). Pretty brutal, especially if the guards are a favored enemy.

11th level Str 18 two weapon fighting melee ranger (normal bastard sword used with two hands and normal armor spikes) and expert tactician attacking favored enemy (human, from example above) with surprise and winning init:
Surprise round: Expert Tactician attack at +15 (1d10+6 +6); surprise round attack +15 (1d10+6 +6)
First round (foe still flat-footed): Expert Tactician attack +15 (1d10+6+6); full attack with two-weapon fighting +13 (1d10+6+6) +13 (1d6+2+6) / +8 (1d10+6+6) +8 (1d6+2+6) / +3 (1d10 +6 +6) +3 (1d6+2+6).

Bang. You sneak up, you do 6d10 + 72 and 3d6 + 24 damage, and the bad guy goes away before the end of round 1. Very Commando.

-z

PS: remember your party members! Invisibility, Silence, Fly, Etherealness, illusions, and other common spells can negate or reduce the need for stealth skills.

 

[Mike Sullivan]

Several people have commented that, at high levels, the bonuses from the skill-bonus feats will be outstripped by ranks in those skills. That seems to me not to hold up to careful examination. We're talking about +2, +3, or +5, here. Would you turn down an extra +2 or +3 to your attack bonus as a 20th level Fighter just because your BAB of +20 "outstrips" the +2 or +3? I mean, sure, the +20 to hit is obviously a lot more important than +2 or +3, but that doesn't make the +2 or +3 less helpful.

The DC's that you face are likely to scale up as you go up in level. That being the case, it's not really important what your total bonus is, it's the relation of your total bonus to the DC's that's important. If we make the (possibly unwarranted) assumption that DC's of important challenges scale up at approximately +1/2 character levels, the +3 from skill focus will be about half as good at level 20 (assuming you've dilligently maxed the skill) as it was at level 1.

 

[Norfleet]

Skill increasing feats aren't generally worthwhile for anyone who doesn't have a buttload of bonus feats or needs them for a PrC, and even then, it's very very questionable.

The benefit of a skill increasing feat is effectively a miniscule bonus that doesn't scale with level, and only makes a difference at all during a brief period of midlevel play. At low levels, even with a +2-3 bonus, the skill function is still dominated by noise. At high levels, the amount of skillpoints you've plowed into the skill will start dominating any effect gained from +skills. As skill increase is only useful up to the point that the noise is overcome, over the long run, you're probably shooting yourself in the foot.

Some have suggested their use for cross-class skills: I find this laughable, since a cross-class skill at anything other than very low levels will quickly lag behind any real use, and likely will never acquire the amount of points needed to even partially overcome the noise factor involved in usage. Cross-classing is typically done only for a select few skills where the target DCs are low, so noise is overcome with only moderate values, or to qualify for a PrC: In those cases, the skill is generally abandoned afterwards, particularly if (cough 3.0 Blackguard cough) it doesn't appear on the class skill list, or is simply not useful for the deployment of the class you had in mind: In all cases, the skill boosting feat does nothing to help, because skill boosting feats do not make any contributions towards actually qualifying for these classes. If they *DID*, they might become viable considerations for allowing builds which otherwise couldn't qualify for something in time to do so, but since they do not, they are largely useless.

For instance, SF: Concentration is a +3 boost. At low levels, this doesn't do squat, because the DC for a Def-Cast is 15+Lvl, which means a wizard casting an L1 spell defensively is up against DC16 and needs a +15-ish concentration to pull this off. Damage cast is only slightly better, 10+D+L. Figuring an average damage of maybe 4, that really isn't any better. Since +15 is out of reach for any sane character, it's safe to say that SF:C is more or less meaningless at low levels.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I don't think the skill increasing feats like Skill Focus of Alertness hold up over the long haul. I do really like picking up Cosmopolitan to really max out a unusual skill for that character class.

Examples:
--Spot for a cleric.
--Bluff for a paladin (you can push the envelope of honesty under your code if your DM is sporting).
--Tumble for a wizard.
--Use Magic Device for a fighter.

Instead of a measly net +4, Cosmopolitan gives a mid-level character a +7 or better when pumping up a cross-class skill. And the net bonus will scale up with level.

 

[Norfleet]

Cosmopolitan isn't a skill increasing feat, per-se, it's primarily a crossclassing feat. The +2 bonus is simply icing on the cake: You'd take it even without that.

 

[Sanackranib]

Cosmopolitan isn't a skill increasing feat, per-se, it's primarily a crossclassing feat. The +2 bonus is simply icing on the cake: You'd take it even without that.

True. you are thaking it to make it a class skill. but the +2 really does help too.

where this really gets ugly is when you are playng a human fighter with an 18 INT and the Quick learner feat. (8 skill points per level with all that) then if you start taking Cosmopolitian you will have the skill points to max out your new skills. I had a multiclassed Rogue 4/Fighter 2/Lasher 1/Temple Raider 1 who went this route. makes for a good BAB
AND lots of skills

 

[Vaxalon]

You guys are COMPLETELY ignoring a HUGE group of characters that really need those feats.

NPC's.

The shopkeeper, the blacksmith, the prime minister... they just don't need combat or spellcasting feats.

I, as an author and DM, applaud the inclusion of the skill-boosting feats in 3.5.

 

[green slime]

For instance, SF: Concentration is a +3 boost. At low levels, this doesn't do squat, because the DC for a Def-Cast is 15+Lvl, which means a wizard casting an L1 spell defensively is up against DC16 and needs a +15-ish concentration to pull this off. Damage cast is only slightly better, 10+D+L. Figuring an average damage of maybe 4, that really isn't any better. Since +15 is out of reach for any sane character, it's safe to say that SF:C is more or less meaningless at low levels.

I disagree that this is "more or less meaningless"

A 1st level Cleric with 12 in Constitution and maxed out Concentration skill has +5, thus a 50% chance to successfully cast defensively that cure.

If he takes SF:Concentration, he only needs roll an 8, in other words a 65% chance to succeed. Given that the clod on the receiving end may die if he fails, I cannot see this difference as "meaningless". Especially in light of how often this scenario comes up at low levels.

I do agree, though, that there are other feats that the budding cleric may want to try his hand at instead.