How about we NOT make it a feat, you clown?

[Fwib]

Oh, and I love how at the end he explains that an open door on the other side of the building can determine whether you have LoE to the guy, even if neither of you have LoS to said open door. That means casting Invisibility on someone's Tower Shield lets you hit them with spells, because you have Line of Sight to them now, and the spell can just go around the back of the shield.

I glanced at the rules for line of effect, and I thought it said that the line had to be straight from you to them - no 'going around the back'...

[power_word_wedgie]

1168757212[/unixtime]]

Oddly I've found the skill system most in need of an overhaul, or possibly scrapping it entirely. It doesn't work at all.

My experience in the past has been issues with spot versus hide and listen versus trying to stay silent. Also factor in there wilderness survival, character appraising, trying to read languages/scripts without use of spells, and the such. Really, skills helps out on this confusion immensely. Now, there may be some skills that need overhaul, but that doesn't mean that skills in general are useless and are not needed in a game.

Feats have always been pretty nice ways to customize characters, though admittedly the "make it a feat" crap needs to go away.

Really you can customize characters with skills as well. As I said, feats are more of a "want" for the game; skills are more of a "need."

Feats are supposed to individualize character abilities, not replace any heroic actions or DM adjudication.

Yeah, but to a degree, this is already there and has been there for a long time when it comes to "if you don't have the feat, you can't do it." Think of metamagic feats.

Part of the problem with extremely codified rules is that it calls for stupid crap like this where the DM is taken totally out of the loop and all creativity is limited by "if it's not in the rules, you can't do it".

And this is pretty much arguing that everybody should just play the Holmes version of Basic D&D, or the B/X version of the game. The rules are not codified (in Holmes version, there are only fifty pages of text) so the DM has all sorts of room for creativity. Like the above says, without extremely codified rules, this problem goes away ...

[RandomCasualty]

1168786012[/unixtime]]
My experience in the past has been issues with spot versus hide and listen versus trying to stay silent. Also factor in there wilderness survival, character appraising, trying to read languages/scripts without use of spells, and the such. Really, skills helps out on this confusion immensely. Now, there may be some skills that need overhaul, but that doesn't mean that skills in general are useless and are not needed in a game.

Well, it isn't the concept of skills that I'm opposed to, so much as the skill system. The skill system is basically the worst of bonus accumulation, as it has no problem at all with handing out huge bonuses, like +20 or greater from a single magic item or spell.

To make matters worse, the gap between a character with the skill and without the skill constantly grows larger and larger to the point that people aren't even playing the same game.

[fbmf]

1168711151[/unixtime]]

The point is that, by the letter of the rules, the attack does not and cannot hit anyone on the inside of the window.

Well they just confirmed that chonj was totally right about the archer in the 4'11" by 4'11" box.

What was chonjurer saying? I don't remember the discussion.

Game On,
fbmf

[Fwib]

Archer-in-a-Box There you go!

[edit] its a bit old, so I think there have been some errata since that thread was new.

[fbmf]

Thanks.

I see I even participated in the thread, but that was like...3.5 years ago or something.

Game On,
fbmf

[Desdan_Mervolam]

1168794980[/unixtime]]

Well, it isn't the concept of skills that I'm opposed to, so much as the skill system. The skill system is basically the worst of bonus accumulation, as it has no problem at all with handing out huge bonuses, like +20 or greater from a single magic item or spell.

C'mon RC. You know damned well that that is a problem with the magic system, not the skill system. It's not terribly easy to get mad synergy bonuses out of the skill system itself and its very rare to find more than two feats that give a bonus to a particular skill (Though, this may be starting to change *grumble*).

-Desdan

[Zherog]

The damage does not carry through to the creature behind him, no matter how cinematic that might be (or how many times Legolas shot through multiple targets in the Helm's Deep battle in The Two Towers). The cleave feat lets you emulate this sort of effect in melee -- drop a foe and then slice on through and attack the guy next to him -- but that's still a new attack. You don't get to just apply the overage to the next guy in line. For good or bad, there is no analogous feat for missile weapons or spells.

*ahem*

Perhaps the writer should check the Penetrating Shot feat on page 81 of the PHB2.

Another funny quirk comes up when you think about area-effect attacks. Sure, I can see a glass window intercepting an acid orb -- the window is destroyed, but the acid orb is blocked. I can even see it screening out magic missiles -- the missiles can't get through, and because they can't affect objects, they can't break the window. But what about fireball? Maybe it's the curse of being raised on too many Hollywood action pictures with a million explosions and shattering windows (and yes, I know fireball isn't really an explosion in the rules, no matter how much it looks like one). The rules are explicit that the line of effect for a ranged spell such as fireball has to go to the point of origin of the spell. OK, so the fireball explodes on impact rather than going through the window and exploding inside -- fair enough. But page 175 states that bursts can't affect creatures with total cover, and a glass window provides its 1 hardness, 1 hit point total cover to anyone beyond it. The window will get incinerated, but the spell is instantaneous. It affects everyone in the area of effect at the moment it goes off. At that instant, people behind the window are not in the area of effect. As soon as the window is blasted, they are fair game, but by then the instant is over and so is the spell. The building might be on fire, but no fire damage from the spell goes through the window. That's the rule. If you wanted to rule that blowing up a barrier allowed the burst to continue through, with the stipulation that people behind the barrier get improved cover (see p. 152 in the Player's Handbook), I think that's a pretty reasonable house rule.

*ahem*

Except fireball isn't really a good example, since, ya know, it has a built in exception:

The fireball sets fire to combustibles and damages objects in the area. It can melt metals with low melting points, such as lead, gold, copper, silver, and bronze. If the damage caused to an interposing barrier shatters or breaks through it, the fireball may continue beyond the barrier if the area permits; otherwise it stops at the barrier just as any other spell effect does.

Lightning bolt has the same exception.

[User3]

Don't forget, this is the same Jason Nelson-Brown who wrote most of the "advice" in Complete Mage.

[Leress]

1168834734[/unixtime]]Don't forget, this is the same Jason Nelson-Brown who wrote most of the "advice" in Complete Mage.

I thought Kolja Raven Liquette wrote that god awful chapter.

http://www.wakinglands.com/htm_files/th ... age.htm[br]

[Nihlin]

Kolja posted in a thread here
regarding the advice in that chapter. Some salient bits:

• I have to take complete responsibility for limited wish. I never realized the full potential of that spell (until recently).
• Every one of my archetype suggestions that included the polymorph spell were removed.
• My warrior archetype included Power Attack as a good feat choice. Not sure why it was flipped into the "feats to avoid" section.
• I'm a fan of the geomancer with Divine Metamagic and Persistent Spell, or the booster bard with Metamagic Song and Persistent Spell. It seems both suggestions were removed.
• There's little pieces of advice here and there that appear to be different, but I'd have to comb through both documents to nail them all down. To be honest, I don't plan on doing that.

• Based on the finished illustrations, my art orders seem pretty accurate.

I already revealed elsewhere that I was asked to help work on this chapter at the last minute (due to a genuine emergency suffered by another writer). I didn't write everything so I'm not qualified to answer all your questions. What I can say is that my writing was edited in places, which is expected (despite the last minute deadline). Some of my advice was kept, some was not. The individual school descriptions read the way I remember them, but those aren't geared towards advice.

So, it seems that the horrific advice was actually the amalgamation of bad advice from many people, including the original author, Kolja, and editors aplenty. Not that this excuses the matter - quite the opposite, since it seems every individual managed to make the piece worse before passing it along the chain.

[RandomCasualty]

1168820369[/unixtime]]
C'mon RC. You know damned well that that is a problem with the magic system, not the skill system. It's not terribly easy to get mad synergy bonuses out of the skill system itself and its very rare to find more than two feats that give a bonus to a particular skill (Though, this may be starting to change *grumble*).

Well actually no, the skill system itself is problematic. Mainly with opposed skills, like hide, bluff, etc. At low levels, basically everybody's got a shot. You can spot a hiding rogue if you're untrained in spot. If you crossclassed it, then your chances are better still. As levels go up, the guy who was untrained and the crossclasser get boned continually more and more. A 4 point gap becomes a 6 point, then an 8 point, then a 10 point and so on, until you're pushed off of the d20 and can't succeed at all.

The idea of skill versus skill for mandatory things like resisting bluffs and spotting hiding people is just a bad idea from the start. And I don't even want to talk about replacing saves with skill rolls and other weird mechanics that the Tome of battle brings up, or the untrippable mounted character who replaces trip checks with ride checks to avoid tripping.

[Desdan_Mervolam]

Do you really want the first level mudfarmer able to pick out the 20th level rogue?

There are problematic bits, like Diplomacy being way too undefined. But that has nothing to do with what we're talking about here. You aren't going to get insane +20 bonuses to your rolls without magic.

And really, I don't like the idea that people who spend alot of time and resources to be really smooth or really stealthy should be kicked in the balls for that investment just because there are people in the world who haven't. If I've got a high-level rogue pimped out to be a stealth character, I don't want him to be caught by every mudfarmer and nosepicker who comes within a 100-foot radius of him, I want him to -- and I realize this is going to be a shocking revelation to you -- actually be able to not be seen by people. And if I've instead got a high-level Charisma rogue with maxed ranks in bluff and diplomacy, then I want him to be Kaiser-fucking-Soze. I want to be able to feed the captain of the town guard a high-pressure-hose of bullshit until he's so confused he thinks my crew couldn't have possibly done what we're in for, no matter how good the evidence is, because that's my fucking character.

I don't care that they decided to make magic to make mediocre characters good, and wound up making magic that makes good characters untouchable. That's the magic systems fault, and it's something that needs to be fixed. But don't go kicking my character in the balls because I can outmanuver some dumbshit NPC. This game isn't about NPCs.

And yeah, the idea of skills replacing saves and stuff is pretty stupid.

-Desdan

[RandomCasualty]

1168857119[/unixtime]]Do you really want the first level mudfarmer able to pick out the 20th level rogue?

No, but I do want the 20th level fighter to be able to pick out the rogue sometimes.

And that just isn't going to happen in the current system. The fighter may not even have spot at all and the rogue's hide is getting +1 per rogue level, not to mention being better because the rogue's dex is practically maxed and the fighter's wisdom is weak. And every level the gap increases by at least +1.

And really, I don't like the idea that people who spend alot of time and resources to be really smooth or really stealthy should be kicked in the balls for that investment just because there are people in the world who haven't. If I've got a high-level rogue pimped out to be a stealth character, I don't want him to be caught by every mudfarmer and nosepicker who comes within a 100-foot radius of him, I want him to -- and I realize this is going to be a shocking revelation to you -- actually be able to not be seen by people. And if I've instead got a high-level Charisma rogue with maxed ranks in bluff and diplomacy, then I want him to be Kaiser-fvcking-Soze. I want to be able to feed the captain of the town guard a high-pressure-hose of bullshit until he's so confused he thinks my crew couldn't have possibly done what we're in for, no matter how good the evidence is, because that's my fvcking character.

The problem isn't being good at confusing low level guys. The problem is that high level guys don't have default levels of skill. You can be a 20th level fucking fighter and not be able to see batshit because you only get 2 skill points per level and couldn't invest in spot. If you didn't take any sense motive you are as gullible as can be. Even if you took it crossclass, you're still going to get rolled over easily at high levels, because the bluffer advances at +1/level and you only advance at one half that. So at level 20, he has a +10 bonus you don't have.

This isn't some epic character bullying a commoner, these are two equal level characters. That's the problem with the skill system right now. The difference between two high level characters is far too great. The idea should be that a character who is deemed "good" at something should have the same chance if doing it at 1st level that he has at 20th level. So a 20th level rogue versus 20th level fighter should be the same hide probability as a 1st level rogue versus a 1st level fighter.

The current skill system doesn't do that and that's before you even factor in magic items.

And it all comes down to the constant spending of skill points. I'd rather see skills as binary abilities like feats. So you would have "good at hiding" or "good at bluffing" and you could balance it based on character level, as opposed to the current system where some people are advancing at +1/level, others at at +0.5 per level and others not advancing at all. That just can't work over 20 levels. It's not a flaw with magic, it's a flaw with the base system of spending skill points and getting +X per point you spent.

The result is simply not consistent with what you want in a level based system.

[power_word_wedgie]

But the thing is that what your argument is focusing on isn't the skill system but that certin classes just don't shine more than others when it comes to skills. Just make it so that the fighter gets more skills - like maybe 4 skill points per level.

The thing is that characters get to dedicate themselves skill points to what they want to favor. If the fighter wants skills to spot and listen, he can dedicate their skills points to that. After all, they do get other things (more armor proficiency, better BAB, more feats), and still we're complaring on the low end. Let's put it this way: are all of these skills so unbalanced such that the rogue is outshining the druid, cleric, and wizards? No way.

At the end of the day, the overall concept of skills are already balanced: if I'm being the hiding and move silently expert, then chances are you're not the bluffing or decipher script expert. Maybe it is just me, but every time I play a rogue, I don't have enough skill points to do everything and be a master (at the maximum skill points for that level) of them all. (Which is another point - there is already scaling with the maximum skill points that you can budget for each skill per level)

Now I agree with Desdan that there are some skills (Diplomacy is an excellent example) that need to be tweaked. However, in general, for me skills have been a godsend. In earlier editions I'd have players argue that due to their "excellent" description (ie. "I'm always looking around so there's no way anything can surprise me") that they should be immune to surprise. Skills really fix this problem.

[RandomCasualty]

1168863781[/unixtime]]But the thing is that what your argument is focusing on isn't the skill system but that certin classes just don't shine more than others when it comes to skills. Just make it so that the fighter gets more skills - like maybe 4 skill points per level.

Nah, it's not that. The point isn't that fighters don't have the points to spend on listen, spot and sense motive. The point is that they really shouldn't have to at all. Asking every PC to spend points to detect sneaking people at a power level equivalent to their character level is asking people to spend points to buy hit points or saving throws. We don't want the guy capable of casting 9th level wizard spells that has +0 on all his saves and 8 hit points.

In a level based system, you don't pay for basic defenses, you get them as part of your basic package for free. Fighters may not be as great at seeing stuff as rangers, but they should still get something for free, after all you don't see people saying "a 20th level wizard is fragile so his fort save never improves unless he wants to spend feats on great fortitude".

And that's what the skill system does. It doesn't stay level appropriate and it kicks you in the balls if you don't specifically spend points to improve your defenses. A lot of 20th level characters have the same sense motive or spot scores as a 1st level commoner. It's not about shining, it's about being at least halfway decent at defending yourself against skill uses. A 20th level fighter may not be as alert as a 20th level ranger, but he shouldn't be blind as a bat either.

That's just not how level based systems should work.

[bitnine]

'

1168867046[/unixtime]]That's just not how level based systems should work.

I do think that a generic 1/2, 3/4, full sort of progression might be nice to see for skills. Something that largely differentiates instead on the particular application of the skills instead of raw bonuses. And skilled classes increase mastery not just through a higher skill progression but also the acquisition of more powerful uses. That is, our 20th fighter has a crappy (1/2) skill progression and isn't trained in sense motive. So he's only got like a +10, and can only use the skill defensive and the basic/untrained use to get a sense of general attitude. Whereas our 20th level rogue has a full skill progression and has a +20 to the use of the bluff skill, but he also can do more powerful and useful things with the bluff skill. Like tricking people into thinking their pets are dead and giving them sadness penalties or whatever.

Now the fighter still has a little rough, but at least he isn't going to be flimflammed by a 2nd level rogue quite so often. And as a bonus, he might actually get a sense of a whopper from the rogue once in a while. And it doesn't stop the rogue from being awesome at what he wants to be awesome at.

Might even make the acquisition part cleaner than ranks and class/cross-class whoserwhattery.

[shau]

Nah, it's not that. The point isn't that fighters don't have the points to spend on listen, spot and sense motive. The point is that they really shouldn't have to at all. Asking every PC to spend points to detect sneaking people at a power level equivalent to their character level is asking people to spend points to buy hit points or saving throws. We don't want the guy capable of casting 9th level wizard spells that has +0 on all his saves and 8 hit points.

But we already do that, don't we? A person who becomes a dwarven barbarian with high Con is buying more Hp. One of the big selling points of the monk is that they have all good saves. The reason your character puts a decent stat is Wis is that you do not want to be dominated. Almost every character I make invests in a cloak or something of resistance.

I don't like a lot of things about the skill system, but I do not think giving out spot and listen really helps. When you do that, you wind up kicking the rogue, ranger, and monk in the teeth two ways. First of all, their skills of hiding and moving silently are worse off, because more opponents can effectively resist it, making them less valuable. Secondly, their skills of spot and listen are less valuable, because everyone else can do that. One of the cool parts about being one of the scout archtypes is the ability to spot an ambush and deny the enemy a surprise round. If everyone can do that, it is not your chance to save the day anymore.

Meanwhile, the fighter still is not playing the same game everyone else is. He can challenge rogues, but odds are that the wizard with invisibility can still go past him, unless he has picked up something with see invisible or gets the ability to counter that as he levels up as well. If invisible does not work, the druid can probably surprise him by wildshaping into something small and innocuous, like a mouse. So the fighter can still be ambushed, and we end up sending spell casters to do the scouting, just like we have them do everything else.

[bitnine]

1168889470[/unixtime]]
When you do that, you wind up kicking the rogue, ranger, and monk in the teeth two ways.

Wow, is schadenfreude really one of their essential class features?

[RandomCasualty]

1168889470[/unixtime]]
But we already do that, don't we? A person who becomes a dwarven barbarian with high Con is buying more Hp. One of the big selling points of the monk is that they have all good saves. The reason your character puts a decent stat is Wis is that you do not want to be dominated. Almost every character I make invests in a cloak or something of resistance.

Well, I'm not saying everyone should have equal abilities, but I am saying that everyone gets better at defenses as they gain levels. The barbarian will have a better fort save than the wizard, but the wizard still improves his fortitude saving throws so his saves are better than that of a low level commoner.

I don't like a lot of things about the skill system, but I do not think giving out spot and listen really helps. When you do that, you wind up kicking the rogue, ranger, and monk in the teeth two ways. First of all, their skills of hiding and moving silently are worse off, because more opponents can effectively resist it, making them less valuable. Secondly, their skills of spot and listen are less valuable, because everyone else can do that. One of the cool parts about being one of the scout archtypes is the ability to spot an ambush and deny the enemy a surprise round. If everyone can do that, it is not your chance to save the day anymore.

Well first, we can set the rogues ability to hide to whatever we want, so if we want rogues to hide easier we just give them an equivalent bonus on the opposed check. This just makes everyone else somewhat of a chance to find a rogue. It'd still be like attacking a guy's weak save when going against a class that isn't particularly observant, but those classes are no longer helpless against a massive hide score.

Basically what we want to happen is that a 10th level fighter has the same chance to spot a 10th level rogue as a 1st level fighter does of a 1st level rogue. That's it. What we want that detection chance to be so we make rogues good enough to play, I don't know. But that chance shouldn't change because you've got two level 20 characters instead of two level 5s. It just doesn't make much sense.

As far as recon specialists, they just do spotting and listening better than normal people, the same way a barbarian has a better fort save than a wizard.

Meanwhile, the fighter still is not playing the same game everyone else is. He can challenge rogues, but odds are that the wizard with invisibility can still go past him, unless he has picked up something with see invisible or gets the ability to counter that as he levels up as well. If invisible does not work, the druid can probably surprise him by wildshaping into something small and innocuous, like a mouse. So the fighter can still be ambushed, and we end up sending spell casters to do the scouting, just like we have them do everything else.

Can't argue there, but caster domination is an entirely separate problem that requires other fixes. Still, the fact that casters are broken shouldn't stop us from trying to balance the rest of the game.

[Username17]

Something akin to the feat system would be at first pass a better approximation of whatpeople want done. Level dependent activities such as hiding and spotting could have a bas value and feats and class features could give people bonuses on those rolls. Rogues, for example, would get an improved ability to hide and move silently that would make them likely to sneak past enemies of their level. Rangers would get a bonus to Spotting that would make them likely to spot enemies of their level. And so on.

The problem of course, is that it becomes degenerate when people collect all the spot or bluff bonuses. Just as you can quite easily push an attack roll or a saving throw off the RNG, such a system could easily be pushed so that the stealth monkeys were essentially invisible to everything.

But that's not really different from what we have now. In fact, as things currently stand there are people pushed off the Random Number Generator at like 2nd level. You have your basic Halfling Rogue with an 18 Dex and masterwork studded leather on the one side (Hide Bonus +11) and you've got your Dex 8 Paladin in Fullplate and Large Shield on the other (Hide Bonus -9). That's a 20 point shift a 2nd level without using anything outside the Player's Handbook.

That's too far. But rewriting it requires dumping the skill system altogether.

-Username17

[power_word_wedgie]

The thing is that making it as a normal part of the class, you're actually taking away from the customization feature of the class and in essence you're making it so that everyone is nearly the same. Hey, as a fighter, I might intentionally focus on other things knowing that I plan on being around other characters that have better alertness skills. (spot and listen) I already do it with other items - as a fighter, I'm not going to try to supplement magic by learning it myself or healing by supplementing it myself, and I don't think that scaling the class so that I get arcane magic abilities and healing abilities is going to fix anything as well.

The whole game is predicated on the fact that you're going to spend resources on certain defenses and not on others. Yeah, I can buy that cloak of resistance, but that may mean that I might be able to only afford a +1 shield instead of a +2 shield. And characters can already spend resources that I don't really have defenses for - if a monster has Power Attack and a high enough BAB, it isn't "fair" that I'm going to take additional damage even when I've got my AC as pumped as it can be.

Heck, let's even take into account Diplomacy. Yeah, the king might be tricked out of his socks by somebody that has a high diplomacy, but the last time I checked, most kings have advisors that, chances are, have pumped up Sense Motive and Diplomacy skills themselves. So, yeah you can sell Long Island for worthless beads, but the thing is that before the transaction goes through, his advisor is going to see though the charade and convince him that he's being conned. The king never pumped up his defenses for something - he hired somebody that will do it for him. And the king is not alone - if I get in serious legal trouble, I think I'm going to hire a lawyer.

And as others have mentioned, in order to enact this new skill system, in short you're actually taking away ability from the rogue, bard, and monk unless you're going to scale an automatic bonus for these classes with the automatic bonuses for defenses. In short, this is all that saving throws and hit dice does: yeah, there's bonuses for defenses, but spells casters get free bonus advances and monster usually cause more damage. And, at the end of the day, all you're trade is a sitauation of "+20 for hide/+0 to spot" for "+40 for hide/+20 to spot": unless you really want to nerf the heck out of rogues, monks, and bards - hardly a band of overpowering classes when compared to other classes.

[Draco_Argentum]

pww are you deliberately missing the point? Currently people are either able to spot or not. That just isn't how a classed system works. I don't even have any arguements that RC hasn't made.

We're already forcing a minimum save and hp (in theory since there are ways to bugger that up too) defense skills need to be the same.

[Neeek]

I've got one.

A 8th level rogue who is trying has no chance of being seen by the average 20th level fighter mentioned by RC. It's not even about keeping pace with your level peers so much as it is being a credible threat to someone who you are theoretically 64 times more powerful than.

[shau]

The way I figure it, a halfling rogue with 20 dex and 11 ranks in hide will have a 21 if he rolls a one. The fighter, if he has absolutely nothing in spot at all and no wisdom bonus, can have a 20 at the highest, which is lower than the rogues minimum roll. However, the rogue also has to be the fighter's listen check. The lowest the rogue can roll would be a 19, so the fighter can detect him.

Of course, we are also assuming that the rogue has some sort of concealment up. The easiest way I can think to do that would be to buy a ring of blinking, which the rogue can afford at this point if he wants to spend 100 percent of his wealth on it. Actually, a cheaper option is the ring of invisibility, but that sort of defeats the purpose of being a rogue. If the fighter spent 25gp of his wealth on a guard dog, he would have a companion that has a plus 6 on spot and listen, so the rogue is detectable again. Plus the dog can trace by smell if the rogue gets too close. Even if the rogue can sneak by the fighter, I do not think he can outfight the fighter.

The level 3 wizard, meanwhile, can still go invisible and have no problems. The level 8 wizard can also dimension door right by.