Talk:Variant Skills (3.5e Variant Rule)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Well Done!

I think this is very well put together and makes a lot more sense than what is originally presented in the PHB. Playing a beguiler that uses feint in combat almost every round this system really helps no more special bluff checks for this versus a special sense motive check which most monsters do not have anyway. This system is definitely being adopted, thank you for presenting it. (Zak2000 16:21, 11 July 2010 (UTC))

I do agree with Zak2000, however I would also like to say that combining certain skills was a mistake. For example, hide and move silently are not the same thing and I often have my PC's make one without the other and convince combines to many different social abilities into one skill, unbalancing the game. Just my opinion, but I do think this could be changed. --Vrail 17:26, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
My group rarely ever does much in the way of mechanical roleplaying (that is, using things like diplomacy and sense motive), and I wrote this system with them in mind, to encourage more roleplaying. I find it's too common in my games to have no one in the party trained in any social skill, because it's one point they can't put into a more combat-focused skill. That is why I combined them all into one, to convince players to train it by saying "Come on, it's just one skill to help you do everything". I understand in a group where roleplaying is already a big part, this may break things. As for hide and move silently, I can think of instances where move silently is needed and hide is not (and vice versa), but it's been my experience that if you have maxed your ranks in move silently, you've also maxed your ranks in hide. The one thing I think needs changing to fix both of these issues is the skill point reallocation. I haven't crunched the numbers, or done much play-testing, yet, but I think if I cut down the number of skill points some more (from 8>6, 6>4, 4>2, 2>1) things should balance out. It won't fix having convince control all 3 social skills, but you will think twice about maxing ranks if you have fewer skill points to go around. --Badger 17:39, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
By giving classes less skill points because there are slightly fewer skills you are penalizing any class that doesn't use any of the skills you clumped together. Also, I am definitely with you on down playing actual mechanics in place of roleplaying, I often streamline actual mechanics. However I generally do this on a situational basis. By placing all of those things in one skill players who are in adventures that have more social interaction will be overpowered from this, whereas combative characters, in my opinion wouldn't take diplomatic skills anyways. Now then again, I may be completely wrong and just talking insane, but I like to think my thoughts have some merit. :D --Vrail 20:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
You're certainly right that many combat oriented classes still probably wouldn't take social skills, and honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that. As it stands, in my games at least, one person speaks for the party, and the rest stand around and look tough. That's what I was trying to change. I'll admit, I did think mainly from a rogue's perspective when combining skills. Perhaps merging other skills; like jump, swim, and climb to favor fighters more, and folding survival into Knowledge (Nature) would help rangers/druids, maybe even pushing Spellcraft into Knowledge (Arcana) for spellcasters. I was just cautious about merging too many skills, because I didn't want to end up with 4e skills. I really don't like how that system is done at all. I still want two dozen or so skills, because I like the variety you can create with so many options. Thinking in terms of rogues again (pretty much how I always think) you can have the charismatic rogue(bluff/diplomacy), the sneaky rogue(hide/M. Silently), the arcane-assisted rogue(UMD), and the acrobatic rogue (balance/tumble), and a half dozen other creations. I want to do my best to preserve that. However, I think if we considered other classes more when combining skills we could then cut down number of skills per level without hurting some classes or hurting variety among classes. And as for modifying things on a situational basis, the all-knowing hand of the DM can always grant bonuses and penalties to "Convince" to make things happen the way he wants. --Badger 22:35, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Personal tools
admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors