D&D 4E 4E had better have fewer skills & feats

[Crothian]

Spot. It the one skill I see nearly every PC take even if it is cross class.

Only one person in a group ever needs to make a spot check. I don't see players taking it that often. More do take it and take it as ccross class but not even close to "nearly every".

Hogwash. I'm not trying to limit the flexibility of the game but just seeing that if someone if really good at disabling devices or mountain climbing then that person will naturally be really good with locking mechanisms or using rope (show me one mountain climber who doesn't use rope?!).

The climb skill does not mean the person is a mountain climber. As a kid I climbed trees, I climbed barns, I climbed hill sides, but never mountains. For my climbing I never needed rope. So, while the skills can be related they don't have to be. But if a character were taking climb to climb mountains, then he should also be taking use rope.

And you can have a Wizard with a high move silently and hide skill. Wizards actually usually get plenty of skill points to spend. Plus they can multi class to get even more and make those skills a class skill.

 

[jmucchiello]

Quite frankly, in the Real World(tm), all skills do not have the same usefulness. The point is to have a number of skills that cover related areas, without reducing the skills to a point where there is no variation in characters.

And there are no skill points or levels in the real world so I don't see how that applies. If a limited resource is used to simulate one's ability at stuff, it behooves the designer of the system to make the "stuff" roughly similar across the spectrum of "stuffs".

Personally, I like the idea of a smaller skill list because it limits the times when you feel multiple skill rolls are needed. If you are sneaking past the guards do you roll move silently or hide? Usually you end up rolling both. Sneak/Awareness eliminates two rolls (one for the guard and one for the sneak). A person climbing a mountain has to roll both Climb and Use Rope checks? That's overly complicated to no useful effect. If someone wants to do something with rope you make a check based on the activity: Mooring a boat - profession (sailor), climbing a mountain (climb), tying someone up (escape artist), etc. Afterall, knowing the right way to moor a boat versus tying someone up is two different skills, IME. YMMV.

 

[MerakSpielman]

I'd prefer fewer - or no - PrCs and more feats to fill in the "customize/specialize your character" gap. I'd also increase the rate at which characters get new feats.

But we're all fooling ourselves. They'll include whatever they need to include so that they can sell lots of expansion rulebooks, regardless of whether said ideas make good sense rules-wise.

 

[RandomPrecision]

I really don't think there are too many skills to handle. Feats may be out of hand if you use every single sourcebook, but otherwise, they really aren't either. The Player's Handbook doesn't have an unmanageable number of feats, and it's a foundation to build on. If a campaign focuses on arcane magic, allow feats from Complete Arcane. If a campaign focuses on undead, allow feats from Libris Mortis. But if you're playing in a world with neither arcana nor undead, or where they are either diminished or irrelevant, don't let players dig through those books to establish feats. The only people who need to use every available published source to create feats should have already learned that ADD and AD&D don't mix.

As far as prestige classes go, if every prestige class is available, something is wrong. Prestige classes should represent developed groups of people. Many prestige classes force the player to contact someone who is already a member of that class to conduct some sort of training or initiation.

That being said, the thing that originally caught my eye in this thread was the merging of skills. It's obvious to me that this is a bad idea, but some people clearly don't see it. Some examples:

Bluff, Intimidate, Disguise, Forgery -> Persuade

This means that barbarians (who are illiterate) can increase their abilities of forgery as a class skill, unless they lose the ability to intimidate as a class skill. The high skill points given to a rogue are now almost useless, since three skills that they tend to buy have been combined into one. They only need 1/3 of their skill points to get the same results.

Climb, Jump, Swim --> Athletics

The world just doesn't work like this. There are long-distance jumpers who don't know how to swim. There are people with no legs that can still swim, but they certainly can't jump. Furthermore, beings with special feet or some like apparatus would receive a bonus to climbing. If it has to be specified that things like this give a bonus or penalty on athletic rolls to climb, athletic rolls to jump, and/or athletic rolls to swim, they should simply be different skills. Consider background - a person living in a desert society that builds their homes in excavations in the sides of a mesa would naturally have climbing ability, but not swimming. We'd have to rule that they have athletics for the purposes of climbing only, effectively creating one skill-category with different sub-skills. Why not just leave it as one skill?

Decipher Script --> approriate Lore skill (below)

This doesn't follow. I know French history, but I cannot understand a word of French.

Hide, Move Silently --> Sneak

It's very conceivable that a person has different competences in hiding and moving silently. Suppose you have an ankle that loudly cracks every time it is moved. That wouldn't make for good silent moving, but one could still hide. Hiding can be used by an entire party to set an ambush, although it's doubtable that the entire party would move silently. These are completely different skills.

Knowledge (arcana), Use Magic Device, Spellcraft, Knowlege (psionics), Knowledge (the planes), Psicraft --> Arcane Lore

This means that learned wizards, crafty thieves, and nefarious psychic warriors all use the same skill for their primary abilities. I must admit, that seems very much like the previous sarcastic comment about merging all skills into one skill called Skill.

Listen, Spot, Sense Motive --> Awareness

Again, these skills really can't be combined. Despite the fact that some people think there are too many skills, I think we should be allowed to role-play a character who doesn't necessarily have the ability to see hidden monsters, but who can understand people and their motives, or a keen elf whose sense are sharp as a rapier, although his exact nature fails to save him from his own naïvete.

 

[drothgery]

As far as prestige classes go, if every prestige class is available, something is wrong. Prestige classes should represent developed groups of people. Many prestige classes force the player to contact someone who is already a member of that class to conduct some sort of training or initiation.

That being said, the thing that originally caught my eye in this thread was the merging of skills.

>> long list of arguments against all of my proposed skill consolidations cut <<

This was a first crack at doing a very agressive consolidation of the skill list. It sacrifices a great deal of percision, I'll grant. And obviously you'd have to make other changes throughout the system to deal with the changes (the number of skill points, class skills available to certain classes, and some class abilities and magic items would change). But the advantages are pretty clear, too.

• rarely-used skills can be combined into something players will actually take ranks in
• similar skills can be combined so that it's clear which skill applies
• related skills that are almost always used together can be combined to cut the number of dice rolls in half
• no more synergy bonuses to worry about

 

[A'koss]

Drothgery again makes some good points and the benefits in-game outweigh the generalization that's happening. Personally I might slice the groupings a little differently in places - Forgery turns into a Profession, Jump gets rolled into Acrobatics, Climb and Use Rope might be good together... I'm actually inclined to just take Use Rope out as a skill and it just gets folded into any other skill that uses ropes.

I've been toying with the idea of also "bundling" related skills further under a single banner. A character could choose a particular adventuring bundle and pay out fewer skill points to advance them. It would be an option, not a requirement, but the benefits would encourage it's use over cherry-picking.

Dungeon Delver
- Initial Skill Point Cost: 5
- Advancement Cost: 3
Awareness, Climb, Survival, Knowledge: Dungeoneering, 1 skill of Player's Choice
Bonus: Gain 1 Language of a dungeon-dwelling race.

Basically, you pay 5 Skill Points up front (1 rank in each) and then pay 3 Skill Points to raise them all up by 1 rank. As a bonus, you also get a free language or something similar (as in not too good)...

This is just really rough right now and probably more trouble than it's worth. Perhaps if you're *only* thinking in terms of bundles, then I think it would be more worthwhile...

Just a thought...

 

[RandomPrecision]

>> long list of arguments against all of my proposed skill consolidations cut <<

It wasn't anything specifically against your list, but you were the first to actually have a list. Everyone before you only made a few suggestions. I apologize for the appearance of specifically attacking your arguments, if you perceived it.

rarely-used skills can be combined into something players will actually take ranks in

Rarely used skills are completely subjective. If a skill doesn't get much use, it's because the DM isn't allowing it to be used by either not presenting situations for it to be used, or allowing actions that should be part of that skill to be done with other skills. Someone claimed that Use Rope is useless - but since it's used for all rope-related actions, I beg to differ. Of course, some campaigns have very little ropes or use for ropes, but I feel that one person's DM style doesn't necessitate the removal of skills that other people frequently use.

similar skills can be combined so that it's clear which skill applies

While I feel that it's fairly clear what skill applies in a situation, consider that arguments can be made for multiple skills to be relelvant. Say that you tell an orc that you are a half-celestial being, and you're going to smite him unless he leads you to his warlord. Convincing the orc that you are a half-celestial capable of smiting him could be considered a bluff, but it is a threat, intimidation. Either skill could apply here, and the DM may rule one over the other, or allow either one to be used. However, this certainly doesn't mean these skills should be combined either. Barbarians can intimidate, but they can't bluff. A fast-talking rogue might be able to bluff, but not intimidate.

related skills that are almost always used together can be combined to cut the number of dice rolls in half

Like I've stated before, Hide and Move Silently are two very different skills, despite common usage in tandem. Either one can be adeptly used without the other. Additionally, Search and Disable Device are different skills - finding a trap and dealing with a trap require greatly different skills, and these skills don't even use the same ability score for a modifier.

no more synergy bonuses to worry about

Firstly, why is that a good thing? Secondly, are you sure? If skills were combined such that all synergies were removed, we'd be rather close to the singular Skill so often used in satire.

And concerning the union of Use Rope and Climb, why would you need the ability to climb to bind a prisoner?

 

[drothgery]

Like I've stated before, Hide and Move Silently are two very different skills, despite common usage in tandem. Either one can be adeptly used without the other.

Except that once you start figuring in creatures with unusual senses (or spells that duplicate unusual senses), then it's not clear whether you're trying to avoid sight or sound (or detect someone that way). Merging Open Lock into Disable Device, and combining Hide and Move Silently into Stealth or Sneak are very common adjustments in non-D&D d20 games; I'm hardly the first to propose doing this.

Additionally, Search and Disable Device are different skills - finding a trap and dealing with a trap require greatly different skills, and these skills don't even use the same ability score for a modifier.

You'll note that I usually didn't consolidate opposed skills.

And concerning the union of Use Rope and Climb, why would you need the ability to climb to bind a prisoner?

Ask whoever proposed it. I consolidated Use Rope with Escape Artist and Slight of Hand.

 

[RandomPrecision]

Except that once you start figuring in creatures with unusual senses (or spells that duplicate unusual senses), then it's not clear whether you're trying to avoid sight or sound (or detect someone that way).

I've never had that difficultly. Hide lets you avoid being seen, Move Silently lets you move around without being perceived. I assume a Cloak of Elvenkind would give a bonus to Sneak, since it previously gave a bonus to Hide. But to move across a group of sleeping orcs wouldn't require hiding, it would require silent movement. Padded boots would help here, but padded boots shouldn't also give a bonus to Hide.

Merging Open Lock into Disable Device, and combining Hide and Move Silently into Stealth or Sneak are very common adjustments in non-D&D d20 games; I'm hardly the first to propose doing this.

I'm sure you aren't the first to propose it, and it really doesn't bother me if other people choose to play with generalized skills. I merely don't want to have to rewrite my 4E rules to be more realistic. It's not easier to move silently in a dark room, and I don't think we should request that the rules are officially changed so that it is, unless house rules break the skill into its 3E precursors.

You'll note that I usually didn't consolidate opposed skills.

True enough, but I don't really agree with the idea of charisma-based riding, and class skills would be effectively obliterated. Barbarians can't have forgery for a class skill. For the decipher script and appraise skills, it seems that the rogue would have to have all three knowledge skills, which is probably more than wizards and other spellcasters will have. Spellcraft is listed as part of arcane lore, so wizards and sorcerers will only need that skill while clerics need cultural and arcane lore to be effective spellcasters. Furthermore, if skills are generalized to ambiguous forms, there will be a vast amount of skills from house rules and supplements that allow more specific skills to be developed, and before long, a flood of specific skills will cause exactly what people are complaining about now.

Ask whoever proposed it. I consolidated Use Rope with Escape Artist and Slight of Hand.

I know; that's why I asked it.

 

[Saeviomagy]

But 4th edition doesn't even HAVE feats!