Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sylrae" data-source="post: 5002622" data-attributes="member: 48520">Depends on playstyle, but assuming lots of combat, yep. I wasn't saying that designing the Bard and rogue as skill characters worked out, i was just saying that is how they were designed. I'd argue that it didn't work out. Great, they're awesome skill monkeys, but skill monkeying doesn't affect gameplay as much as it should.Yep.Well, the tumble ranks give you an AC bonus eventually. lol. Some of the skills might be good at helping you run away from said ghouls. But I agree, skills are not as good as they should be.&nbsp;Quite true. I'd argue that they should. they should be considerably more useful in combat scenarios. They should let you do crazy stunts, and let you act like a ninja. Or a swashbuckler. You should be able to use your skills to make combat work out more in your favor. &nbsp;Depends how much more towards skills it is. And not every skill check will be &quot;check or die&quot;, som will be &quot;check or damage&quot;.I agree with this one wholeheartedly. Ok, most-heartedly. Skills can make a difference in combat, but you're right, its not a very big difference. If your games are about a 50/50 blend of combat/noncombat(mine are around there), the skills ae useful, but still dont seem to be quite useful enough (though definitely more useful than your posts seem to indicate in your playstyle).So, I'd say yeah. Make the Rogue and Bard have other abilities instead, but I'd still drop the skills around the level of other characters, because a full caster with 6+int skills is better than a full caster without. Albeit, not by a large margin, but still better. (Unless they lose most of the interesting class abilities, and thats no fun.)Another fix, would be to work on the skill system.If skills were more generally useful, a skillbased character could be good in combat if he chose, or he could spend his skills elsewhere. Personally I think that would be a better fix, but the other one will still work.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sylrae, post: 5002622, member: 48520"] Depends on playstyle, but assuming lots of combat, yep. I wasn't saying that designing the Bard and rogue as skill characters worked out, i was just saying that is how they were designed. I'd argue that it didn't work out. Great, they're awesome skill monkeys, but skill monkeying doesn't affect gameplay as much as it should. Yep. Well, the tumble ranks give you an AC bonus eventually. lol. Some of the skills might be good at helping you run away from said ghouls. But I agree, skills are not as good as they should be. Quite true. I'd argue that they should. they should be considerably more useful in combat scenarios. They should let you do crazy stunts, and let you act like a ninja. Or a swashbuckler. You should be able to use your skills to make combat work out more in your favor. Depends how much more towards skills it is. And not every skill check will be "check or die", som will be "check or damage". I agree with this one wholeheartedly. Ok, most-heartedly. Skills can make a difference in combat, but you're right, its not a very big difference. If your games are about a 50/50 blend of combat/noncombat(mine are around there), the skills ae useful, but still dont seem to be quite useful enough (though definitely more useful than your posts seem to indicate in your playstyle). So, I'd say yeah. Make the Rogue and Bard have other abilities instead, but I'd still drop the skills around the level of other characters, because a full caster with 6+int skills is better than a full caster without. Albeit, not by a large margin, but still better. (Unless they lose most of the interesting class abilities, and thats no fun.) Another fix, would be to work on the skill system. If skills were more generally useful, a skillbased character could be good in combat if he chose, or he could spend his skills elsewhere. Personally I think that would be a better fix, but the other one will still work. [/QUOTE]

Verification