Why do skill points only come in even numbers?

[Terath Ninir]

No, this isn't in the Rules forum, because there's no possible rules basis for this question. This is purely about the psychology of game designers.

Every WotC class (base or prestige) and every third party class I've ever seen has an even number of skill points per level -- 2, 4, 6, or 8. Never 3, 5, or 7. Why? Why do game designers reduce their possible choices?

The only thing I can think of is that it's supposed to be some sort of parity with hit dice. Dice are, by their nature, even. But that doesn't seem like a *good* reason to limit the choices on skill points...

 

[TheLe]

No, this isn't in the Rules forum, because there's no possible rules basis for this question. This is purely about the psychology of game designers.

Every WotC class (base or prestige) and every third party class I've ever seen has an even number of skill points per level -- 2, 4, 6, or 8. Never 3, 5, or 7. Why? Why do game designers reduce their possible choices?

The only thing I can think of is that it's supposed to be some sort of parity with hit dice. Dice are, by their nature, even. But that doesn't seem like a *good* reason to limit the choices on skill points...

It might be simpler than that. It could just be that "even numbers" are easier to remember than odd ones. Seriously.

`Le

 

[Terath Ninir]

Well, I suppose, but adding in the odd numbers wouldn't *really* make things more complex...

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Of course, the same question could be reversed. Why do skill points only come in odd numbers for humans?

I don't think there is really any logic that has to do with even or odd. After all, humans get an extra one, so that throws it off. Plus, based on INT you can have a final result of an odd or even number.

Another possible answer may be that the seperation is more noticeable when there are jumps. 2, 4, 6, 8 can seem to be a bigger difference than 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. The difference is more noticeable when the list is shorter and the gaps are larger.

Honestly, I don't really see a balance issue or anything. 1 skill point in addition or subtraction is likely not going to make or break a class. Sounds like a good house rule area to me.

 

[Crothian]

There is also no reason that BAB has to have three different progressions, and saves only get two. My guess is it sounded good at the time.

 

[megamania]

Six or half a dozen I guess. In truth I never thought about it.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

There is also no reason that BAB has to have three different progressions, and saves only get two. My guess is it sounded good at the time.

Well, there is a bit of logic. This one boils down to the question: How many different levels of expertise can there be without the disparity being too great?

With BAB I can see why there are three: Those who are skilled in battle, those who are familiar in battle, and those who are better off letting others do battle. To add a fourth level of progression (+1 every third level) would make the disparity between the extremes so great that the fourth progression would be useless in combat. For example, it would look just like the poor BAB progression:

[Sblock=Really poor BAB example]

0
0
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
6

Who whould want to play a character with a +6 BAB at 20th level unless it was a combat free campaign?
[/Sblock]

With saves I think that the rationale was that people are either good at it or they aren't. That suggests two levels of variety. However, it would be easy to use the rationale for BAB and say that there are experts at a certain save, people who are decent but not experts, and those who really should think twice before encountering something requiring that specific save. You could do something like this for a 10 level progression:

[Sblock=Possible Save table]

Good Avg. Poor
2    1    0
3    1    0
3    2    1
4    2    1
4    3    1
5    3    2
5    3    2
6    4    2
6    4    3
7    5    3
7    5    3
8    6    4
8    6    4
9    6    4
9    7    5
10   7    5
10   8    5
11   8    6
11   9    6 
12   9    6

[/Sblock]

It's not perfect, of course, but it holds the balance fairly well.

 

[Aaron L]

Yeah, I think it's just an arbitrary decision.

 

[Thanee]

It's because of cross-class skills costing 2 skill points per rank.

And because odd numbers are odd.

Bye
Thanee

 

[GeorgeFields]

It's because of cross-class skills costing 2 skill points per rank.

My thought exactly.