& Sneak Attack: Skills and Proficiencies

[Celebrim]

So, let me get this straight. No bonus skills for high INT, and none of the rogues class skills are based off INT?

I can see why a conversion manual would be useless. At least one 3E rogue that my players created had Int as thier highest stat, and all of them had it in thier top 3 or so.

So, with no bonus skills for high int, does that mean that every non-spellcaster class can use Int as a dump stat?

Rapier seems to have disappeared as a result of the simplification to the critical system. More importantly though, they seem to have done absolutely no reform of weapon proficiency system - which was an area I had problems with.

Oh well, just another thing I'll have to do myself.

 

[Khuxan]

So, let me get this straight. No bonus skills for high INT, and none of the rogues class skills are based off INT?

I can see why a conversion manual would be useless. At least one 3E rogue that my players created had Int as thier highest stat, and all of them had it in thier top 3 or so.

So, with no bonus skills for high int, does that mean that every non-spellcaster class can use Int as a dump stat?

We don't know if Int has another use yet or if (I hope this is the case) you can choose any skills with your bonus skills from Int.

Rapier seems to have disappeared as a result of the simplification to the critical system. More importantly though, they seem to have done absolutely no reform of weapon proficiency system - which was an area I had problems with.

It's unlikely the rapier was removed. More likely, it is too powerful to give away for free and instead needs a feat.

There has been a reform of the weapon proficiency system, since each weapon now has a proficiency score. We just don't know what the reform is yet.

 

[Stogoe]

Int to Skills seems to be gone. I see no problem with that. Neither do I feel any dismay at making the rapier something special (ie, take a feat).

 

[hong]

The rogue article makes it even more imperative that we see how multiclassing works in 4E, so that we can form an informed opinion on the ease of creating lightly-armoured, mobile swordspersons. I mean, this is crucial to my plans to convert over to 4E the character that I've played in RttToEE, RttToH, NWN, NWN2, Jade Empire and Guild Wars.

 

[Lizard]

At this point, the truncated-to-the-point-of-seeming-uselessness skill list is my main mechanical gripe w/4e, as the rest of the mechanical problems (lack of non-combat skills, dain-bramaged 'ring' rules) I can easily houserule away. But it's going to be much harder to split skills or bring back skill points, since the skill "system" (if you can call something so simplistic a system -- and I'm basing this on SWSE, so I may be wrong) is so tightly integrated with the rest of rules.

How did they go from "Problem:Too Few Skill Points" to "Solution:No Skill Points"?

 

[Ahglock]

I just skimmed it, but where does it say Int doesn't add any skills? Does it expressly say it or does it not mention it. If it is just not mentioned maybe it adds to your # of skills but they just mention under the int stat not under the class description.

 

[Celebrim]

How did they go from "Problem:Too Few Skill Points" to "Solution:No Skill Points"?

Same way they went from 'Problem: Skills aren't important enough in play." to "Solution: Everyone has a pretty good chance of succeeding untrained."

In both cases, there is enough twisted logic in there to see why they came up with the idea, but you have to wonder whether the net effect is actually to discourage making high skill characters.

While I'm on the subject of how things will actually play out, will the skill system really be simplier if we have to write alot of things like?

"+4 bonus to perception when using vision"
"+2 bonus to thievery when picking pockets"
"+3 bonus to atheletics when swimming"
"+2 bonus to stealth when hiding in natural folliage"
"+6 racial bonus to atheletics when jumping"

And so forth.

 

[Khuxan]

At this point, the truncated-to-the-point-of-seeming-uselessness skill list is my main mechanical gripe w/4e, as the rest of the mechanical problems (lack of non-combat skills, dain-bramaged 'ring' rules) I can easily houserule away. But it's going to be much harder to split skills or bring back skill points, since the skill "system" (if you can call something so simplistic a system -- and I'm basing this on SWSE, so I may be wrong) is so tightly integrated with the rest of rules.

How did they go from "Problem:Too Few Skill Points" to "Solution:No Skill Points"?

The same way that in 2e they went from "Problem: Non-Weapon Proficiencies are lame" to "Solution: No NWPs".

I don't see how you couldn't split up some of the skills if you really wanted to, or even reintroduce skill points. It would be hard, but not too hard - every time it says Athletics, figure out if it's about climbing, jumping or swimming, and use that skill. Or create subskills - so you get +2 to all Athletics checks, but +5 to Swim or Climb or Jump... whichever you specialise in.

 

[mach1.9pants]

While I'm on the subject of how things will actually play out, will the skill system really be simplier if we have to write alot of things like?

"+4 bonus to perception when using vision"
And so forth.

I think that a simple '+4 bonus to spot' will suffice.. I hope the skill will list the specific 'sub skills' tha can be applied to them.
I really hope! One of the DDM2 figures has that, IIRC

 

[hong]

At this point, the truncated-to-the-point-of-seeming-uselessness skill list is my main mechanical gripe w/4e, as the rest of the mechanical problems (lack of non-combat skills, dain-bramaged 'ring' rules) I can easily houserule away. But it's going to be much harder to split skills or bring back skill points, since the skill "system" (if you can call something so simplistic a system -- and I'm basing this on SWSE, so I may be wrong) is so tightly integrated with the rest of rules.

How did they go from "Problem:Too Few Skill Points" to "Solution:No Skill Points"?

It will probably be handled the same way you handle the fighter being the weapon master. Instead of giving out bigger and bigger bonuses, you give out more options on what to do with the existing bonus. So, maybe stuff like reroll a skill check 1/encounter, ignore failed check 1/encounter, substitute skill X for skill Y, add +10 to your skill check if X, opponent takes -10 if Y, and so on. It's about breadth and flexibility not raw numbers.

I believe that's how SW SAGA handles it.