Li Shenron
Legend
VirgilCaine said:
Mah, our 1st level PCs never provoke AoOs when standing up. We're all 3.0
What's the point with Skill Tricks?
- Thread starter Dark Psion
- Start date
Mah, our 1st level PCs never provoke AoOs when standing up. We're all 3.0
frankthedm
First Post
To sell the book. Wotc knows most 'skillfull' characters don't have enough feats for those players who want those cool powers. Rather than make more high DC uses for skills and more feats, which some of them should be due to potency, they introduce the skill trick mechanic to make the book desirable to those who want to do those maneuvers without paying a feat to do them.
If someone wants to be able to tap a lock and have it pop like they are the Fonz so they can think “I’m so kewl!”, damn right they should be paying a feat for the privilege!
In all seriousness, several of the stunts do sound like they should be rolled into the skill as high DC options.
frankthedm
First Post
Somehow i bet a lot of DMs used to let folks do this without paying skill points.Skill Trick said:
BryonD
Hero
In the strictest sense they would be wrong.frankthedm said:
HOWEVER, I'd certainly agree with your premise and I'd bet that the great majority of good DMs, as well as the great majority of people who helped design 3E as it is today, would allow any character that fit the "type" to do just that. And most every character with EWP:Whip is probably the "type".
I like the concept they are reaching for here. There are certainly feats out there that just are not good enough to be feats. And, at least to me, the "group of options" feats that have been tried don't really work because you get a group that may not all fit the character. So, the idea that weaker "feats" need a home is valid. (Not that the game is badly hurting for it, but just that it is an area of potential growth) So I'm glad to see some exploring there.
But, there is danger of screwing it up on either side with some being as good as feats and thus to cheap and some breaking the rule (its a rule AFAIAC) that no new rule should limit the ability of a character today to do something they could have done yesterday (as frankthedm points otu here). Add in that this area is highly subjective and that there is probably less than zero middle ground where everyone would agree, and you have a tough task.
To much of 3E may already be established to really have room left to work on this type idea. Perhaps a 4E could have the idea along this line built in from the beginning. I don't know.....
I'm still glad they tried this. It just seems really hard to pull off.
I think the idea of using the options as an action point guideline os a very good thought.
I think the skill tricks are a great idea.
To those who want to see these ideas as higher DC skills I don't agree. Sure, with a DC 35 tumble check I can kip up. But what if I don't want to be the world's greatest tumbler, I just want to be able to kip up?
What if I don't want to be able to pick any lock in existance, but I want to be able to pick locks fast?
To me this is right where tricks hit the spot. They allow me to burn skill points to do new things with the skill I already have, at the cost of not pushing those skills as high as they can go.
Now I do agree about the danger in assuming if there's not a skill trick to do something it can't be done. That is another reason why I like the emulation of a high DC model:
A DM doesn't have to say, "Oh you don't have the kip up skill trick, you can't kip up." He says, "Well you don't have teh skill trick, so it will be a DC 35." Or, "Well you don't have the swing on chadeler trick, so it will be a DC 15". I'm fine with that, it allows players to still do the tricks they want, but allows certain tricks to be easier for players who specifically invest in those ideas.
As for making these feats, please, I don't need more feats. At least once a week in the house rule forum people are talking about giving more feats to their players. Feats have been done to death. Meanwhile, the skill system is still relatively virgin ground for new ideas. For the most part it hasn't been touched since 3.0 came out while there have been tons of new kinds of feats. I think its time to tweak the skill system a bit. It allows skillful characters to do something with their skills in the face of all that magic, and takes some of the pressure off feats to do things that are better emulated with skills in the first place.
To those who want to see these ideas as higher DC skills I don't agree. Sure, with a DC 35 tumble check I can kip up. But what if I don't want to be the world's greatest tumbler, I just want to be able to kip up?
What if I don't want to be able to pick any lock in existance, but I want to be able to pick locks fast?
To me this is right where tricks hit the spot. They allow me to burn skill points to do new things with the skill I already have, at the cost of not pushing those skills as high as they can go.
Now I do agree about the danger in assuming if there's not a skill trick to do something it can't be done. That is another reason why I like the emulation of a high DC model:
A DM doesn't have to say, "Oh you don't have the kip up skill trick, you can't kip up." He says, "Well you don't have teh skill trick, so it will be a DC 35." Or, "Well you don't have the swing on chadeler trick, so it will be a DC 15". I'm fine with that, it allows players to still do the tricks they want, but allows certain tricks to be easier for players who specifically invest in those ideas.
As for making these feats, please, I don't need more feats. At least once a week in the house rule forum people are talking about giving more feats to their players. Feats have been done to death. Meanwhile, the skill system is still relatively virgin ground for new ideas. For the most part it hasn't been touched since 3.0 came out while there have been tons of new kinds of feats. I think its time to tweak the skill system a bit. It allows skillful characters to do something with their skills in the face of all that magic, and takes some of the pressure off feats to do things that are better emulated with skills in the first place.
I totally agree Stalker. I love the new trick system. But then again I love new complexity added to the game. I love that I will have a new thing to consider when I build my rogue other than just maxing out the same skills every level. My wife on the other hand couldn't be more different and she hates added complexity. In the end, I think its a solid mechanic that gives more flexability and customization to the game. Seeing as Tricks are completely optional, I think they are a nice addition to the game.
Ohh and Wolff96 perhaps kip'ing up is a DC 35 but you can do it not because you are an amazing tumbler but because you spent the two pts to buy the trick
Ohh and Wolff96 perhaps kip'ing up is a DC 35 but you can do it not because you are an amazing tumbler but because you spent the two pts to buy the trick
Quasqueton
First Post
In my experience, when people want to kip up, swing from a chandelier, jump up on a table, etc., they don’t like to hear, “Roll for it.” They want to *do* it. I’ve had Players argue with me over “Roll for it,” in much the same way as:
I don’t know this skill trick thing from anything, but I do see where the concept would make some Players happy to be able to do something automatically.
Quasqueton
I’ve seen Players with +20 modifier spend time arguing over having to roll rather than just rolling and being done with it.
I don’t know this skill trick thing from anything, but I do see where the concept would make some Players happy to be able to do something automatically.
Quasqueton
Similar Threads
D&D 3E/3.5
Homebrew Content
