reapersaurus
Explorer
Wow - I guess my groups are more in line with Monte's approach than I realized.
Wasting skill points on 'background' skills
- Thread starter Wippit Guud
- Start date
KnowTheToe
First Post
Chronosome said:I think that's great, personally, though I do think it's traditionally an "NPC skill". If your DM's into rewarding your choice and making it matter in the game, then it's all good.
I'm a DM who would do just that.
I would reward the player as well. Most likely with some extra skill points or some unique magical item that would add flavor to the character concept, but not necessarily in power.
med stud said:
It seems to me 5 ranks is 'professional' skill in a field. This is the point that you have enough background knowledge that you can start applying it to related fields (if any) as evidenced by the skill synergy rules.
You would be good enough to handle most anything that came up on a farm, but might not know how to plan for some stuff. You might not know how much seed you have to set aside for next year, or how to plan the crop rotation, or some of the other things that could be expected of a farmer.
It is the difference between a good farmhand and the farmer in charge.
Remember that a commoner or expert also gets levels. When you look at normal skill levels, it appears that you want about 5-7 ranks to be really good.
As for the original question (is it a waste), it depends heavily on the GM and the campaign background. If the GM basically requires that the characters all be moderately optimized or better (books say you can handle this CR, lets do it), then it is probably a mistake. If the GM allows for more 'real' character personalities and doesn't require that characters max out all their skill ranks, then definately not a problem.
Kastil
Explorer
Whether or not it's a waster of skills points, at lest you used your points because o your background. I had a player would wanted to get 'free' skills because his mother/father were in that field. Ummm, no?
So if you're more into a 'Role' playing game instead of a 'Roll' playing one, who cares? At least you know you won't be starving when you settle down! Carrots anyone?
So if you're more into a 'Role' playing game instead of a 'Roll' playing one, who cares? At least you know you won't be starving when you settle down! Carrots anyone?
I have to disagree with Elder Basilisk's assumption that a certain type of character (in this case, a merchant-type rogue) is an inappropriate character for a D&D game.
What about a merchant-rogue who owns or works for a big overland import/export company and becomes the leader of the party traveling through a foreign land to open a new trade market? Lots of ranks of Knowledge (geography), Speak Language, Diplomacy, Appraise, etc. The other party members might be guards (fighters), scouts or guides (rangers), healers (clerics), people to help control the weather for pleasant travel conditions (druids) and seers to help divine the best routes (wizards and/or sorcerers).
Those are just examples off the top of my head, but I don't see why a rogue modeled off of a merchant framework couldn't work in that type of situation. Party spokesman, negotiating the party's way through dangerous social interactions with foreign people and even humanoids, etc.
What about a merchant-rogue who owns or works for a big overland import/export company and becomes the leader of the party traveling through a foreign land to open a new trade market? Lots of ranks of Knowledge (geography), Speak Language, Diplomacy, Appraise, etc. The other party members might be guards (fighters), scouts or guides (rangers), healers (clerics), people to help control the weather for pleasant travel conditions (druids) and seers to help divine the best routes (wizards and/or sorcerers).
Those are just examples off the top of my head, but I don't see why a rogue modeled off of a merchant framework couldn't work in that type of situation. Party spokesman, negotiating the party's way through dangerous social interactions with foreign people and even humanoids, etc.
Thresher
First Post
Salute anyone that puts points into a good dirt skill
Its a fairly realistic application, nobody from a common background in a pre-technology era should start without some basic skills to work, subsist or make a living for themselves.
There isnt any dole out there for people that sit on their arse and gnomes are earthy folk that tend to have an affinity for nature anyway.
Its a fairly realistic application, nobody from a common background in a pre-technology era should start without some basic skills to work, subsist or make a living for themselves.
There isnt any dole out there for people that sit on their arse and gnomes are earthy folk that tend to have an affinity for nature anyway.
Djeta Thernadier
First Post
Goddess FallenAngel said:
Djeta Thernadier (my character) is , by trade, an "antiques & artifacts" dealer. I have a bunch of ranks in things like Appraise. I have used Appraise often when we find treasure or artifacts. I also have a lot of Knowledge in things that although mainly used for finding what I need, have helped me out in other ways.
I don't think it's a waste at all.
Acmite
First Post
Re: Re: Wasting skill points on 'background' skills
Ahem. The cleric of Mayaheine would like his blacksmithing skills to be more important.
I just realised that I put 4 ranks in Blacksmithing and 3 ranks into Weaponsmithing. I'm glad I did it, but by the same token I probably should have put more into concentration and a Knowledge skill.
I'm glad that more characters are doing that in the Aerlis game. I'm not sure why it didn't happen more in the in-person games, though. I only took a (cross-class) rank in Wilderness lore because we had 2 wilderness types who were teaching my cleric.
It's one of the better things about the campaign--more choices that make sense for the character as opposed to mechanical benefits. Extra points would be nice, but would lessen the impact of those choices.
Cor Azer said:
Ahem. The cleric of Mayaheine would like his blacksmithing skills to be more important.
I just realised that I put 4 ranks in Blacksmithing and 3 ranks into Weaponsmithing. I'm glad I did it, but by the same token I probably should have put more into concentration and a Knowledge skill.
I'm glad that more characters are doing that in the Aerlis game. I'm not sure why it didn't happen more in the in-person games, though. I only took a (cross-class) rank in Wilderness lore because we had 2 wilderness types who were teaching my cleric.
It's one of the better things about the campaign--more choices that make sense for the character as opposed to mechanical benefits. Extra points would be nice, but would lessen the impact of those choices.
Wippit Guud
First Post
Wow, seems people are about evenly split on the issue.
Just for a little more in-depth background, he was a farmer for about 35 years (ages 5-40), so 4 ranks sounds about riight. He's also not core gnome - as he was raised by humans, he doesn't have any of the training bonusus they get, such as +4 dodge vsgiants. He did get a bonus feat, however.
I don't feel he needs more situations where farming is appropriate, I just wonder if the point wouldn't have been better spent somewhere else. True he only has 2 ranks on cencentration, but until we convert to 3.5 he has a 22 con (and the most hp's in the party, not bad for a straight-class wizard).
Beyond that, was just wondering if people do what I do when I make characters. In hindsight, should've split the ranks in farmer and herbalist, but, as Cor would say... meh.
Just for a little more in-depth background, he was a farmer for about 35 years (ages 5-40), so 4 ranks sounds about riight. He's also not core gnome - as he was raised by humans, he doesn't have any of the training bonusus they get, such as +4 dodge vsgiants. He did get a bonus feat, however.
I don't feel he needs more situations where farming is appropriate, I just wonder if the point wouldn't have been better spent somewhere else. True he only has 2 ranks on cencentration, but until we convert to 3.5 he has a 22 con (and the most hp's in the party, not bad for a straight-class wizard).
Beyond that, was just wondering if people do what I do when I make characters. In hindsight, should've split the ranks in farmer and herbalist, but, as Cor would say... meh.
Last edited:
krunchyfrogg
Explorer
2 skill points on a background-type skill is enough for me.
I'm really impressed when a player thinks of doing this.
I'm really impressed when a player thinks of doing this.
