Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="airwalkrr" data-source="post: 3068478" data-attributes="member: 12460">When I posted my variant skill system <a href="http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=173311" target="_blank">here</a>, I borrowed some ideas for this system. While I like some of the ideas, it does not appear that we have the same motivation behind changing the skill system. My personal opinion is that the 3e skill system is a well designed, coherent, consistent system that works well. I feel its only flaw is that it is cumbersome. Over the course of 20 levels, characters have many skill points to deal with and the time it takes to allocate those skill points, calculate synergies, and look for skill modifiers in game takes a while because the list is big. I find the system "realistic" but ultimately lacking in utility for a fast-paced game.I feel like your system is a halfway point between mine and the 3e rules. It is not quite as simple as my rules, but not quite as complicated as the 3e rules. Unfortunately, IMO, your skill system attempts to maintain the semblence of reality at the expense of simplicity. For me, the change is not significant enough to be worth my while. But that does not mean it might work better for others.That said, judging the system on its merits alone, I think it is a fine idea. I feel as if it is a variant system that would work just as well as the 3e skill rules in almost any campaign. As an acid test, if I were a player, I would have no problem with this as a house rule. I do not foresee any huge pitfalls of such a system, other than it might increase the relative "skill power" of characters (I have no problem with that as my skill system does the same). That may not be what some people are looking for.I have a few other observations of relatively minor importance. I have not done the numbers, but this system does seem to downplay the importance of Intelligence quite a bit. That might be an unintended consequence. I think a better choice, actually, might be to make this system be based more purely on Intelligence. Give PCs a number of skill points equal to their Intelligence score and reduce the skill points granted by each class by 8 or 10. Possibly increase the skill points granted by some classes like rogue or bard by 2 or 4 to compensate for this. So, say a rogue gets 10 + Intelligence score skill points. A rogue with an average Intelligence score (10) gets 20 skill points. That would let him be supreme in five skills (out of the 18 class skills you list for rogues). That isn't very much. Even by 20th level, he has only mastered 7.5 of 18 of his skills, which isn't very much. Maybe this is intentional (not sure). To rectify this, I would like to suggest you borrow one of my ideas. Give each class bonus skill points based on character level relative to how skilled the class is supposed to be. Give fighters and paladins (two of the least skilled classes in the 3e rules) an extra skill point at every five levels. This lets them master only one more skill in addition to those they start with. Give classes that are moderately skilled, like the druid or monk, bonus skill points every 4 levels. Give classes that are highly skilled, like the bard, bonus skill points every 3 levels. Give the most skilled classes, like the rogue, a bonus skill point every other level. You could adust those numbers up or down, perhaps low skilled classes every 6 levels to most skilled classes every 3 levels or low skilled classes every 4 levels to most skilled classes every level (even with an 18 Int under your system, a 20th level rogue has only mastered 9.75 skills if you change his bonus skill point to every level, which is barely over half his total clas skills).</blockquote>

Verification