Post/Author/DateTime	Post
acvar 12-18-04, 12:04 PM	Well races of destiny is out and the only big thing that pops out is this feat. For those of you that have not seen it yet it makes all your cross class skills only cost 1. It should make quite a few builds easier/possible. So is it broke? It seems really good and quite abusable.
Garjon 12-18-04, 01:36 PM	This throws out the entire idea of class/cross-class skills! AT in a couple less lvls comes to mind first... Take that whisper gnome warlock, add this, and you get the uberstealth arcanist IMO!
Kingside_Bishop 12-18-04, 01:50 PM	I have to say I think this is totally broken. One level of rogue or bard, and suddenly you've essentially got a gigantic spell list for all of your classes! Totally removes most incentive for taking more than one level in either of those classes, because one of their largest strengths is their huge skill list -- which is now effectiveley nerfed! If the feat works as you say it does (you're not misreading anything, right?) this is extremely, extremely broken. As an ardent bard enthusiast, I'm perturbed. Shame on Wizards for perturbing me. Shame. I think a better feat would be: "You gain 4 extra skill points per level, but these points can only be spent on a cross-class skill." This would be a boon to classes who classically don't learn skills as fast (like the fighter), but less of a boon to those that do (like the bard). But that makes sense: law of diminishing returns. Bards already have good skills, spending more time developing skills wouldn't give them many better skills. I guess that argument could be made for Able Learner as it is, but right now it's way too good, and very unbalanced. Providing extra cross class skill points keeps the cross class skill power cap. Able Learner throws it right out the window.
Largegnome 12-18-04, 02:48 PM	I don't really know if it's broken... As I see it, the classes that would benefit the most from it are classes with a crappy skill list. Generally, these classes have few skill points/ level too. So, while this feat may help you creating a fighter with high tumble, for example, that fighter won't be able to keep up his other skills too. Conversely, if a rogue takes the feat, he won't gain as much as a fighter, since almost all skills are class skills for him. Certainly, if you compare it to the old Cosmopolitan feat, it sounds terribly overpowered. Anyway, forgetting Cosmopolitan( that might simply have been terribly underpowered, who knows :P) : 1) it requires a feat (it's not like they made cross class skills obsolete , you still need to use 1 feat) 2) most PrC that required both, say, a BaB and a skill as prereq's could be attained quite easily with some clever multiclassing. Despite the feat being quite useful, IMO, I don't think I' d use it if I was maxing a char, unless I was trying to build some kind of "triple" or "quadruple threat" character. After all, if you're a combatant, there are simply more advantageous combat related choices...you don't really need most of those skills in battle, and you wouldn't be able to invest in it due to the low skill points; if you're an arcane caster you suffer the same problem, and you also need to keep those Spellcraft and Concentration ranks high; if you're a rogue type, you can now multiclass more easily paying 1 feat... I generally consider "broken" something that: 1) Impacts the game very strongly 2) It is a feat that anyone will take whenever possible. Sure, this feat opens up new possibilities, but I think I'll decide if it is really broken or not when I see it in game. For now, I just think it's pretty powerful.
acvar 12-18-04, 03:26 PM	What worries me a bit is it now appears that there is very little reason to advance as a rogue. Just take 1 level of rogue and then switch to a barbarian so your trap-monkey/scout deals massive damage, or switch to a monk, or heaven forbid switch to druid and become the terror of all trap-monkies/scouts. Yes you could do this in the past, but it came at a very high cost since at the very least search was cross class. Now 1 feat and you don't look back. A human with a 12 int in barbarian/monk/druid gets 6 skill points per level. More then enough to make a trap-monkey/scout (search, spot, listen, move silently, hide).
Mommy was an Orc 12-20-04, 07:56 AM	There never was that much reason to advance as a Rogue unless you really, really wanted to do so. A Rogue 3/Ranger 3/14 levels of FullBAB can pretty much keep up the Rogue essentials across all 20 levels. It isn't as if +2d6 Sneak Attack is really going to hurt a character's melee expertise. And Rogue is one of the more balanced classes. 8 skill points makes a good Rogue because there's so many essential skills for the party Scout. What this feat does is make it a little less ugly at the cost of a feat. The two areas where it does seem potentially dangerous is where a character can take a large skill list class to get into a crappy skill list PrC that has a lot of skill points. Or the design of the PrC assumes that it would be borderline impossible to get into the class without taking at least a couple levels of essential classes. i.e. mechanical Wizard builds and certain high-powered Faerun PrCs. I've always favored using 1 level of Ranger to get into EK and simply ignoring Spellsword for the advantages that having a high Spot/Listen roll gets me. Now I can likely max out 5 or so Ranger skills while still pumping up Knowledge(Arcane), Concentration, and Spellcraft. A Mystic Theurge now has a lot of incentive to take this feat and the Trickery/Trade domains. None of this seems broken, but there's probably a PrC or two that can take advantage of it.
catharz 12-20-04, 12:16 PM	Um, am I missing something? I though the reasons to play a rogue were the 8 skill points per level, the sneak attack damage, and the special abilities. And as for the feat... It is a bit overpowered by the "FSBNBNN" point of view, but I don't think that it unbalances the game at all, and I almost think that it should be a rule change and not a feat.
ronyon 12-20-04, 01:39 PM	Could some one who knows more than little ol'e me comment on if this effects the pre Ur Preist progression? Thanks!
Riznar 12-20-04, 01:50 PM	The way you describe it, your cross class skills can still only be half your class skills...and no class gets as many skill points as a rogue. I'm in the camp that doesn't see what the big deal is.
zarlus 12-20-04, 02:05 PM	you know that's so not right my friend and I came up with this a long time ago. I posted it to see what people thought. We changed the rules left and right on it and the best we came up with is... It is a feat that helps you learn 1 skill at a time although you must -be able to see a person use the skill, -know that he/she is using it, - finally identify it at least three times b4 the skill is learned (could only be used 1 every other day). Even with all this the feat was still etchy and still need tweaking. But to hear that taking this knocks off 1 skill point to cross class skills is just outright madness I do care who or what you are. That rule needs some serious reworking!!! :mad:
Sabis 12-20-04, 03:11 PM	The way you describe it, your cross class skills can still only be half your class skills...and no class gets as many skill points as a rogue. I'm in the camp that doesn't see what the big deal is. But, if you take 1 level of rogue, you you forever can raise your rogue skills to level+3, but you normally have to pay 2/1. well, now you don't have to pay 2/1.
Grim Sage 12-20-04, 03:13 PM	Whoops... nevermind...
Riznar 12-20-04, 03:38 PM	But, if you take 1 level of rogue, you you forever can raise your rogue skills to level+3, but you normally have to pay 2/1. well, now you don't have to pay 2/1. That might be helpful if you were a bard or ranger; but I seem to remember a comment about even rogues always needing more skill points. If you think about it, it is a more expensive way to get UMD or Tumble than the old way of taking the feat; since you have to take a level in another class as well. And if you want to be a skill monkey as well as something else, you'll have to be in a class that grants at least 6+int skills, and most of those classes have large skill lists anyway.
Mommy was an Orc 12-20-04, 04:25 PM	That's not quite true. The Human Ranger 1/Wizard 6/Eldritch Knight 10/Loremaster 3 as an example is going to have, assuming a 16 INT to start and levelling it up... 40 Ranger skills 36 Wizard skills 64 Eldritch Knight skills for levels 1-8 18 for EK 9-10 33 for Loremaster for a total of 191 skill points, or an average of 8.3 per level. i.e. more skill points than the equivalent human Ranger 20 with a 12 Int. I'm not even counting the possibility of reading an inherent bonus to Int book. If you think about it, it is a more expensive way to get UMD or Tumble than the old way of taking the feat; since you have to take a level in another class as well. And if you want to be a skill monkey as well as something else, you'll have to be in a class that grants at least 6+int skills, and most of those classes have large skill lists anyway.
catharz 12-20-04, 04:31 PM	That's not quite true. The Human Ranger 1/Wizard 6/Eldritch Knight 10/Loremaster 3 as an example is going to have, assuming a 16 INT to start and levelling it up... 40 Ranger skills 36 Wizard skills 64 Eldritch Knight skills for levels 1-8 18 for EK 9-10 33 for Loremaster for a total of 191 skill points, or an average of 8.3 per level. i.e. more skill points than the equivalent human Ranger 20 with a 12 Int. I'm not even counting the possibility of reading an inherent bonus to Int book. But a 20th level ranger with a 16 int (not including level-ups) has 230 skill points, and hasn't spent feats on Skill focus.
Mommy was an Orc 12-20-04, 04:51 PM	An EK build needs Int as the prime stat, a Ranger is at best going to want it to be 3rd or 4th. And a Ranger levelling up INT? :eek: By taking 3 levels of Loremaster and having a final Int of 21 before Inherent bonuses, you can get the free feat to pay for the Skill Focus. But a 20th level ranger with a 16 int (not including level-ups) has 230 skill points, and hasn't spent feats on Skill focus.
Battousai 12-20-04, 04:55 PM	Ardent Dilletante gets ALL skills as class skills. Can you foresee the next step? :D Oh , and Human Paragon let's you choose class skills , another good way to get a custom skillset.
JRedGiant 12-20-04, 04:58 PM	For the party in need of a trapspringer this feat is golden. Rogue 1/Barbarian 19, Rogue 1/Wizard 19, Rogue 1/Warlock 19, Rogue 1/Druid 19...just spend two points per level on Search and Disable Device. Everything else a rogue can do is nice, but it's not essential. And the 1d6 sneak attack and +2 Ref saves don't hurt either. Note that the above are hardly optimized builds (Rogue 1/Druid 19 notwithstanding...btw, can a druid wildshaped into a dire bear disarm a trap? I think a shape with opposable thumbs should be mandatory, but that doesn't seem to be RAW.) A second level of Rogue for evasion is an option.
Rundor The Mighty 12-20-04, 05:24 PM	Does the feat make cross class skills regular class skills or does it just change the cost of a cross class skill to 1, in which case you still can't go over the cross-class limit? If you can't go over the regular cross-class limit then what's the problem?
Evadker 12-20-04, 05:41 PM	The feat does not make skills class skills, it only allows you to get one rank in any skill with one point. Your max cross-class number remains. Dak
JRedGiant 12-20-04, 05:48 PM	True. However, once you have a level in a class or PrC that treats a skill as a class skill, your max skill ranks are (Character Level +3). So one level of Rogue and the Able Learner feat gives you all Rogue Skills for 1 point each to a maximum of Character Level +3.
catharz 12-20-04, 06:06 PM	An EK build needs Int as the prime stat, a Ranger is at best going to want it to be 3rd or 4th. And a Ranger levelling up INT? :eek: By taking 3 levels of Loremaster and having a final Int of 21 before Inherent bonuses, you can get the free feat to pay for the Skill Focus. Rangers have 2-5 important stats, and the order of importance varies based on the number of ability points and the availability of certain magic. Wisdom must be 14 by level 14, but there is little reason to raise it any higher. Dexterity, Constitution, and Strength are important only if polymorphing magic isn't available. Charisma is a lost cause. Which makes Int the most important stat for a maxed ranger, to take advantage of all those skills. A ranger without polymorph obviously has more MAD, but no more than a Ranger 1/Wizard 6/Eldritch Knight 10/Loremaster 3 without polymorph. Which they can both cast, thanks to Complete Arcane. And ultimately, it is difficult to compare skill points alone. A human rogue with a 16 Int (and rogues have Int as their first or second stat, generally) has the same BAB as your gish, and winds up with 276 skill points with no stat increases.
Mommy was an Orc 12-20-04, 08:28 PM	Rangers have about 6 must have skills(Search, Spot, Listen, Hide, Move Silently, and Survival). There's a few others that are nice to have, but after those 6, their skill list falls off quite quickly. A Human Ranger with a 16 Int has 10 points - sure, you can pick up some cross-class skills, Concentration, Handle Animal, a couple of Knowledge skills and Use Rope have their uses, but...not having them won't kill your ability to function as a Scout. And there's the problem - the EK goes from being completely incapable of pulling off those skills to being able to max them out and have skill points left over for Wizard necessities. I'm also very dubious about any pure Ranger in a game less than 15th level who can get away with having a poor Strength, Dexterity or Constitution. Polymorph lasts 1 minute per level. That's just not long enough to really mean all that much and someone who sacrifices both to hit and damage in such a fashion isn't going to contribute that much - except when the Wizard has time to spend on him. Also, I'm not comparing him against the Rogue - there simply aren't that many Rogue 1/Wizard 6/PrC X builds out there, which makes it more difficult to create a proper comparison. Wisdom must be 14 by level 14, but there is little reason to raise it any higher. Dexterity, Constitution, and Strength are important only if polymorphing magic isn't available. Charisma is a lost cause. Which makes Int the most important stat for a maxed ranger, to take advantage of all those skills. A ranger without polymorph obviously has more MAD, but no more than a Ranger 1/Wizard 6/Eldritch Knight 10/Loremaster 3 without polymorph. Which they can both cast, thanks to Complete Arcane. And ultimately, it is difficult to compare skill points alone. A human rogue with a 16 Int (and rogues have Int as their first or second stat, generally) has the same BAB as your gish, and winds up with 276 skill points with no stat increases.
Bestopheles 12-20-04, 11:51 PM	Ardent Dilletante gets ALL skills as class skills. Can you foresee the next step? :D Oh , and Human Paragon let's you choose class skills , another good way to get a custom skillset. Hmm. What book is Ardent Dilletante from again? I'm making a chameleon build, and this could be useful. Jason
Snicker-Snack 12-21-04, 12:08 AM	Hmm. What book is Ardent Dilletante from again? I'm making a chameleon build, and this could be useful. Planar handbook. It's the PrC for the Society of Sensation.
Gerdreg 12-21-04, 07:53 AM	Also don't forget the feat is Human and Doppleganger only.
The Lone Drow 12-21-04, 08:29 AM	Also don't forget the feat is Human and Doppleganger only. Meaning the race that gets more skills can have 'em all cost only 1 skill point. If this feat was presented as a bonus for other races that don't get the bonus points like humans AND helped humans I'd accept it as being "alrightly broken". But this way you just make humans even more worth it than other races. Use this feat with the Human Paragon and you're set.
TigerDawn 12-21-04, 08:42 AM	True. However, once you have a level in a class or PrC that treats a skill as a class skill, your max skill ranks are (Character Level +3). So one level of Rogue and the Able Learner feat gives you all Rogue Skills for 1 point each to a maximum of Character Level +3. Actually it is not character level it is class level, so a rogue 1, would have a max of 1+3 for rogue skills. You could not keep advancing as class skills unless it was a class skill for another class you have. Page 60 PHB, so as this is still limited to cross class skill max, but makes it cheaper, it would provide more robustness for character development, tumbling warlock for instance, it is cute at best. DM's make sure your players know it is limited by cross class skill max, most people seem to glare over that part.
scrollreader 12-21-04, 10:21 AM	... If a skill is a class skill for any of a multiclass character's class, then character level determines a skills maximum rank. ... Emphasis Mine.
acvar 12-21-04, 10:23 AM	Actually it is not character level it is class level, so a rogue 1, would have a max of 1+3 for rogue skills. You could not keep advancing as class skills unless it was a class skill for another class you have. Page 60 PHB, so as this is still limited to cross class skill max, but makes it cheaper, it would provide more robustness for character development, tumbling warlock for instance, it is cute at best. DM's make sure your players know it is limited by cross class skill max, most people seem to glare over that part. You are simple wrong. Page 62 of the players handbook. Last line under the heading skills at higher levels. "Regardles of whether a skill is purchased as a class skill or a cross-class skill, if it is a class skill for any of your classes, your maximum rank equals your total character level + 3".
catharz 12-21-04, 11:00 AM	MWAO: You have a good point, but I don't see how it makes Able learner overpowered. A character with a high Int should always have enough class skills available to occupy all of his skill points. Anything else simply destroys some of the benefit of having a high int. Oh, and Battousai: Nice catch on the Dilletante :D
Mommy was an Orc 12-21-04, 12:58 PM	I don't think able-learner is overpowered, I think it is unbalancing in favor of wizards. Right now, most wizards have way too many skill points and not really enough areas to put them in. With a 18 Int, Human, and 2+Int skill points, they get 7 points per level. The only thing stopping them from being a skill-based character compared to the average is the crappy skill list. As wizards aren't exactly hurting in the overall scheme of things power-wise, things that allow them to easily encroach on skill based characters isn't a good idea from my perspective. (edit: changed the Int) MWAO: You have a good point, but I don't see how it makes Able learner overpowered.
Aufenshauft 12-21-04, 01:40 PM	:confused: Wow. I am so surprised at this reaction to the feat. I effectively made this a house rule in my game and have had no problems with it for years. In my opinion, if you don't have some points in diplomacy or some rounding skills like spot, you shouldn't leave home. If you don't have sense motive at all, you just don't talk to anyone, ever. But the way the game is made with some classes (cleric, fighter, etc.), you really don't have a choice as to where your skills go because you have 4-5 possibilities that don't eat all your points. This is reflected in the 'fighters should have spot since they are always on watch' and and 'why doesn't my cleric know diplomacy?' arguments going on somewhere on the boards. Since your cross class skills are still capped at half your class skills, you are never going to excel in that skill, and that is the real limitation that matters. The feat allows a character to have diplomacy on their own and not rely on the party 'mouth' to talk to all NPCs he encounters, or rely on the bluff-maxed rogue to get prices for all shiny objects you find. Has someone actually come across a situation where this feat would make all that much of a difference? So far all I have heard is complaints that it breaks the rules. Please, I have seen way too much on this board that is perfectly legal that breaks what I would call realism (destroy-the-planet-hulking-hurlers... ugh!). This is nothing but a way to actually round out characters that would otherwise be so specialized they don't work in actual gameplay outside the arena.
Mommy was an Orc 12-21-04, 04:26 PM	Because that's not quite how it works...cross-class skills are capped out at half your class skills only if you never had it as a class skill. But if you've had it once as a class skill, then you can raise it to the normal max ranks. The major reason most Wizards don't take a level of Mindbender(Complete Arcane) is that it requires a lot of cross-classing and then require a lot of cross-classing to keep the abilities up. Now it wouldn't and a Wizard can easily afford to be the party face - as he can max out Bluff, Intimidate, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, and still max out Concentration, Spellcraft, and Knowledge(Arcane). (Edit: and without losing a caster level...) :confused: Since your cross class skills are still capped at half your class skills, you are never going to excel in that skill, and that is the real limitation that matters. The feat allows a character to have diplomacy on their own and not rely on the party 'mouth' to talk to all NPCs he encounters, or rely on the bluff-maxed rogue to get prices for all shiny objects you find.
TigerDawn 12-21-04, 04:55 PM	You are simple wrong. Page 62 of the players handbook. Last line under the heading skills at higher levels. "Regardles of whether a skill is purchased as a class skill or a cross-class skill, if it is a class skill for any of your classes, your maximum rank equals your total character level + 3". Page 60 example clearly says, that it is class level... the part you are getting confused with is the situation where you have 2 classes/prcs that have the same skill eg. rogue and ranger both have search, so thus in this case the character level would be used in this scenario, which is more or less the character level. Situation: Rogue 1: Ranger 1: Search: 1 rogue + 1 ranger + 3 or basically 2 character level + 3 Now how this actually works, if you spend the time to read the book. Highly recommended, especially around page 60 ish. Situation: Rogue 1: Ranger 1: Wizard 1: Your search skill would be 1 rogue + 1 ranger + 3. Total 5 Not +1 from wizard as wizard does not have that skill. course if you have this cross class situation you would have: Situation: Rogue 1: Ranger 1: Wizard 2: Your search skill would be 1 rogue + 1 ranger + 1 wizard (2 point cross class skill) + 3. Total 6, but character level is 4.
scrollreader 12-21-04, 05:06 PM	Now how this actually works, if you spend the time to read the book. Highly recommended, especially around page 60 ish. :heehee :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Mommy was an Orc 12-21-04, 05:19 PM	You need to re-read page 62 as acvar said. You can do as you stated there. But you can also raise your search skill in the following way: Rogue 1: Raises it to 4 Ranger 1: Raises it to 5 Wizard 1: Raises it to 6 via spending 2 points Wizard 2: Raises it to 7 via spending another 2 points. There is no limit on spending cross-class points other than max ranks. And as page 62 establishes, the max ranks for search here is 7 due to both Rogue and Ranger having Search as a class skill. Situation: Rogue 1: Ranger 1: Wizard 2: Your search skill would be 1 rogue + 1 ranger + 1 wizard (2 point cross class skill) + 3. Total 6, but character level is 4.
Aufenshauft 12-21-04, 05:40 PM	The major reason most Wizards don't take a level of Mindbender(Complete Arcane) is that it requires a lot of cross-classing and then require a lot of cross-classing to keep the abilities up. Now it wouldn't and a Wizard can easily afford to be the party face - as he can max out Bluff, Intimidate, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, and still max out Concentration, Spellcraft, and Knowledge(Arcane). Okay, so you suddenly face the danger of a wizard who can talk his way out of a paper bag :eek: . That really is scary :rolleyes: . Forgive me, but I like the idea of a wizard conjurer who has heavy dialogue with demons (currently impossible without some serious cross-classing), or an enchantress (which fits the mindbender idea great) who doesn't require still-silent spells and saving throws to catch your eye. Sorry, not enough of a good argument for me yet. How is this so dangerous to the game?
Mommy was an Orc 12-21-04, 06:04 PM	Two reasons: There are numerous Faerun PrCs that can advance spellcasting for either divine or arcane casters, but use social skills or Survival to make it difficult for arcane casters to get in - usually forcing them to cross-class heavily to the point where they're simply not that effective. Harper Paragon(uses up 23 skill points) as an example. We're talking about roles in both combat and non-combat. A diplomatic wizard can be dominant in both combat and non-combat situations. Overpowering, no. Destructive to game play? Yes. Okay, so you suddenly face the danger of a wizard who can talk his way out of a paper bag :eek: . That really is scary :rolleyes: . Forgive me, but I like the idea of a wizard conjurer who has heavy dialogue with demons (currently impossible without some serious cross-classing), or an enchantress (which fits the mindbender idea great) who doesn't require still-silent spells and saving throws to catch your eye. Sorry, not enough of a good argument for me yet. How is this so dangerous to the game?
acvar 12-21-04, 11:20 PM	TigerDawn: Here is a little pearl of wisdom for you. It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool then to open your mouth and confirm it. You may have noted that in my post I gave a page number, section and where in the section you could find the text that I quoted. It is very clear. It says that you are wrong. Before you tell me you know how it works based on what is on page 60 you should read the rest of the rules concering the topic which continue on past page 60. Perhaps then you will actually know how it all works.
Rundor The Mighty 12-22-04, 01:10 AM	Wait wait, so once you take rogue from that point on no matter what class you take for the next levels, your ranks in that skill are level +3? If so I never knew that, in neverwinter nights it doesn't work like that either. Jot me down for the feat being overpowered then.
catharz 12-22-04, 02:01 AM	Two reasons: We're talking about roles in both combat and non-combat. A diplomatic wizard can be dominant in both combat and non-combat situations. Overpowering, no. Destructive to game play? Yes. Yes, one of the most important things in balancing D&D is to make the diplomatic characters suck in combat :rolleyes:
acvar 12-22-04, 08:29 AM	Yes, one of the most important things in balancing D&D is to make the diplomatic characters suck in combat :rolleyes: A. Perhaps you shold roleplay a bit more if you think that diplomatic skills are not impressive (if that is not what you menat then I appologize). B. The point is not to make diplomatic characters suck in combat, but to keep a class that allready is a powerhouse in so many aspects of the game from becomeing a dominate class in even others. There should be some kind of balance between characters. We do not want D&D to turn into Warhammer Quest where everybody fights over who gets to be the elf because it is clearly without a doubt better then anything else in the game. Wizards get a very big boost with this feat in both qualifying for certain PrCs and in opening up new roles that they could not do effectively in the past. Rogues take a big hit as other classes with just a 1 level dip can now do things that formally only they and rangers could do. The feat really does not add all that much to the game, and the Min/Maxers are praising its usefullness. That alone should put up red flags.
Neofish 12-22-04, 09:57 AM	A. Perhaps you shold roleplay a bit more if you think that diplomatic skills are not impressive (if that is not what you menat then I appologize). B. The point is not to make diplomatic characters suck in combat, but to keep a class that allready is a powerhouse in so many aspects of the game from becomeing a dominate class in even others. There should be some kind of balance between characters. We do not want D&D to turn into Warhammer Quest where everybody fights over who gets to be the elf because it is clearly without a doubt better then anything else in the game. Wizards get a very big boost with this feat in both qualifying for certain PrCs and in opening up new roles that they could not do effectively in the past. Rogues take a big hit as other classes with just a 1 level dip can now do things that formally only they and rangers could do. The feat really does not add all that much to the game, and the Min/Maxers are praising its usefullness. That alone should put up red flags. Wouldn't this class encourage the Rogue class, anybody with this feat will most certainly take a level or 2 in it, thus making more rogues, thus promoting the class. I like it, now, not all fighters are just combat monkeys, no longer will sorcerers lack people skills, it's a great feat because it tears down the bariers (sp?) of class levels. The game is about characters, not character levels....
Aufenshauft 12-22-04, 10:22 AM	Wouldn't this class encourage the Rogue class, anybody with this feat will most certainly take a level or 2 in it, thus making more rogues, thus promoting the class. I like it, now, not all fighters are just combat monkeys, no longer will sorcerers lack people skills, it's a great feat because it tears down the bariers (sp?) of class levels. The game is about characters, not character levels.... I think the fear here is that it changes a more fundamental aspect of the game, which is used by many supposedly to control some prestige classes as this is the main argument I have heard about so far. Then again, the person who made the argument used the Harper Paragon as an example. However, in the same paragraph he said that it's use is [nerfed] because it requires so many cross-class skills that you can't be a primary spellcaster due to all the classes needed to qualify. This feat allows virsatility. Take another FR class- Purple Dragon Knight. This is obviously a paladin or fighter class. You have to get diplomacy, for it though. Now, if I am a standard fighter with Int 10, then I have to spend a full 2 levels of skill points just to become competent enough to qualify. That blows. Assuming I am a smart fighter and have an intelligence of 14, that takes only one full level of skill points, which still blows. Not to mention that 2 ranks of diplomacy doesn't help all that much, so it is really a waste. With this feat, my smart fighter can spend half a level of skills on that skill and still be able to work on his riding, or on his calligraphy (craft skill), or something else. If you are trying to become dominant in a different area of game play, you have to use resources that would otherwise go to another of your specialized areas that your main class could do. In other words, the diplomatic wizard doesn't know planar lore and the knowledgeable rogue can't bluff others easily. You are always limited by the cross-class barrier, and even if you dip to get a class skill (ie. Use Magic), you just used up a level in another class instead of the one you would have gotten (thus loosing a BAB if a fighter, or casting level for a wizard). This balances better than you think, especially for players who want to get to that one class that makes their optimization work faster.
catharz 12-22-04, 10:42 AM	A. Perhaps you shold roleplay a bit more if you think that diplomatic skills are not impressive (if that is not what you menat then I appologize). Actually, I find that (in a game where the DM uses rolls and role-play), diplomacy (/bluff/etc) are the most powerful skills in the game, because they don't have the same limits that other skills and abilities do.
carnivore 12-22-04, 10:50 AM	Actually, I find that (in a game where the DM uses rolls and role-play), diplomacy (/bluff/etc) are the most powerful skills in the game, because they don't have the same limits that other skills and abilities do. i agree completely :D
Kingside_Bishop 12-22-04, 12:08 PM	Here's why I think it's overpowered. Can we all agree that the Rogue is the single class that can act as a trap disarmer? In order to be a decent trap disarmer, you need at least one level of rogue, and even then you restrict yourself to classes that have Search as a class skill, right? This feat removes that restriction. Watch. 1st Level: Rogue: 4 ranks in Search, Disable Device, Hide, Move Silently 2nd Level: Wizard: 1 rank in Search, Disable Device, Hide, Move Silently 2nd Level: Wizard: 1 rank in Search, Disable Device, Hide, Move Silently 3rd Level: Wizard: 1 ranks in Search, Disable Device, Hide, Move Silently ...and so on. Now, we've got a character with spellcasting just a level behind the wizard that can sneak and disarm traps with the same ability as the rogue. How is this going to make the rogue feel? All he's got that the wizard doesn't is sneak attack. But the wizards will be casting 9th levels spells -- powerwise, there's no contest there. How is this going to make the sorcerer feel? He's casting the same spells as the wizard at the same levels, just a few more, but the wizards sneaking around and disarming traps -- powerwise, there's no contest there either.
carnivore 12-22-04, 12:28 PM	IMO, this feat is fine. it is not overpowered or underpowered. it simply makes it more efficient to spend skill points: exa: rogue 1 / wiz 3 without this feat ,ranks in search 7(rogue 4+ wiz 3(bought as cross class) skill points spent 10 rogue 1 / wiz 3 with able learner feat, ranks in search 7(rogue 4+ wiz 3) skill points spent 7 the drawback is you have spent a feat in exchange for skill points, but all in all it balances itself out. :D
JRedGiant 12-22-04, 12:35 PM	In a standard iconic party, is the arcane caster (assume wizard) going to slow his caster level progression down by a level (and spend a feat on able learner) to pick up a level of rogue for a bunch of cool skills? I mean, it's nice and all, but is it really worth waiting a level to get to Timestop? Particularly if you've already got a rogue in the party? I think not.
acvar 12-22-04, 12:36 PM	lets see a feat is generally equal to about 3-4 skill points. Feats like negotiator, and athletic are +2 to two skills and skill focus is +3 to 1. This feat can literally be worth hundereds of skill points over the course of a 20 lvl build. Yeah that seems balanced. ;-)
acvar 12-22-04, 12:39 PM	In a standard iconic party, is the arcane caster (assume wizard) going to slow his caster level progression down by a level (and spend a feat on able learner) to pick up a level of rogue for a bunch of cool skills? I mean, it's nice and all, but is it really worth waiting a level to get to Timestop? Particularly if you've already got a rogue in the party? I think not. And if you do not have a rogue allready and you are looking to start a trap-monky/scout character which would you rather star. Rogue X or rogue 1/wizard X-1, or perhaps rogue 1/druid X-1? Again there is no need to play rogue more then a couple levels anymore. You will be able to do all the important things that a rogue does and have alot of other things as a wizard or druid with just a dip of rogue. No the wizard is not going to take this feat and a level of rogue to be the trap-monkey, but a trap-monkey will take this feat so he can advance as a wizard or druid. See the problem?
JRedGiant 12-22-04, 01:23 PM	And if you do not have a rogue allready and you are looking to start a trap-monky/scout character which would you rather star. Rogue X or rogue 1/wizard X-1, or perhaps rogue 1/druid X-1? Again there is no need to play rogue more then a couple levels anymore. You will be able to do all the important things that a rogue does and have alot of other things as a wizard or druid with just a dip of rogue. No the wizard is not going to take this feat and a level of rogue to be the trap-monkey, but a trap-monkey will take this feat so he can advance as a wizard or druid. See the problem? No, I don't see the problem, and here's why. Let me quote Yekoj's excellent Rogue's Handbook, published July 2003...LONG before the Able Learner feat came out. Trapfinders are characters that start out with one level of Rogue and then “build a fighter or spellcaster on top of it.” For example, consider a Rogue 1st / Wizard 15th / Archmage 4th or a Rogue 1st / Barbarian 9th / Frenzied Berserker 10th. As long as the Wizard and Barbarian are willing to spend 4 skill points per level improving their cross-class skills of Search & Disable Device they can both serve as a completely successful Trapfinder. They are JUST AS GOOD AT TRAPFINDING as a 20th level Rogue. In other words, a year and a half ago, we were already looking at doing this exact thing for rogues. What Able Learner does is save you two skill points a level on the old trapfinder build...which you might compound by taking two other cross class skills, say Open Lock, UMD or Tumble. At the cost of a feat and a racial restriction. The reason you continue to advance in rogue is for sneak attack dice, lots more skill points and a few special abilities...same as always.
acvar 12-22-04, 02:05 PM	So something that in the past was unatractive because of cross class skill cost is now very attractive since the cross class skills only cost 1, and it only costs you being human (oh darn), and a feat. Now not only can you be the wizard trap-monkey, but also the stealth guy. Now you are the wizard/trap-monkey/stealth-guy/scout. Yeah that all seems reasonable? This feat removes one of the basic balances in the game end of story. I guarentee that within a month you will see countless builds on these boards using and even abusing this feat.
Galamdring 12-22-04, 03:12 PM	Just my small opinion here... Don't you all thing that the problem is the rule in the PHB that states that once you have a skill as a class skill, it is forever treated as max rank = Character level +3 ??? Even without this feat it allows for some crazy skill monkeys, as JRedGiant said. I don't think NWN is a great D&D game, rules-wise, but i like the way they handle cross class skils... In that case, this feat would just allow characters to use their skill points more effectively.
JRedGiant 12-22-04, 03:25 PM	I think the real problem is that Rogue is a very frontloaded class, and that the Able Learner feat just throws gas on that fire. What we need is some reason to stay in rogue. Hopefully (let me translate that: probably not) we'll see some really cool feats or PrC's in Complete Adventurer that have multiple feats as a prereq. OTOH, how many Fighter 2 splashes for two bonus feats or Bbn 1 splashes for rage and fast movement or Swashbuckler 3 splashes for Int to damage do we see? Quite a lot. I think Warlock 2 for a few invocations and detect magic at will is going to see a lot of builds as well. Face it, splashing happens on the CO board. This is nothing new.
Kingside_Bishop 12-22-04, 03:44 PM	OK, you guys have convinced me. It's not horribly overpowered, but I think it is unbalanced. One of the costs of playing a "trap disarmer" is spending of most of your skill points to do that. I think that this feat removes that cost, which is unbalancing.
Balthanon 12-22-04, 05:07 PM	When I heard that Able Learner was going to make cross class skills cheaper I was expecting it to increase the amount they increased a skill to 3/4th of a skill point per rank at most. Dropping cross-class down to the cost of class skills seems excessive and I think will have at least a slightly negative effect on prestige classes. Regardless of whether the feat itself is overpowered or not, prestige classes prior to this were built with the current system in mind as a means of balancing their (generally) greater powers. You pay a different cost in picking up this feat, but prestige classes with skill requirements weren't built with the intention that you could substitute class levels or cross class skill ranks with feats frankly. Plus, feats like this take half the fun out of optimizing. :)
Elgonn 12-22-04, 05:31 PM	I was expecting it to increase the amount they increased a skill to 3/4th of a skill point per rank at most. I was expecting it to be 1:1 ratio until you passed the max cross class ranks amount.
Hesparex 12-22-04, 08:17 PM	Lol my poor paired dagger wielding Rogue/Fighter/ Invisible Blade is getting screwed as we know that free action feints will be less effective since Bob the wizard knows Sense Motive now much easier... Shame he was flat footed the first round and was able to sense motive that he died from the horrid damage he was just dealt..... yeah rogues are just horrible would never want to be one :-)
Falgund 12-22-04, 08:42 PM	lets see a feat is generally equal to about 3-4 skill points. Feats like negotiator, and athletic are +2 to two skills and skill focus is +3 to 1. That's not completly true, as those feats can be taken in addition to the skill ranks, and thus allow you to go beyond the level+3 limit (which Able Learner does not). This feat can literally be worth hundereds of skill points over the course of a 20 lvl build. Yeah that seems balanced. ;-) So does Education (Rogue 20 putting all skill points in Knowledge), and it even didn't force you to multiclass, and give a bonus to two Knowledge skills. But it's true few Knowledge skills are worth as much as many other skills. So: Powerful? Yes Better than similar feats in some cases? Yes Worse than similar feats in some cases? Yes Overpowered? Maybe Broken? I think not I think the real question is how often it is better than similar feats/class capacity (Human Paragon) for real builds. (The Rog 1/Wiz 19 gain a lot by using it, but if you play it from level 1-20, is it really worth the caster level loss ?).
Mommy was an Orc 12-22-04, 09:04 PM	I know what you mean. Look at these builds... Bard 4/Fighter 1/Spellsword 5/Sublime Chord 2/Eldritch Knight 8 - 9th level spells, +18 BAB, able to channel spells. Rogue 4/Bard 1/Assassin 5/Sublime Chord 2/Arcane Trickster 8 - 20 levels of skill monkey, 9th level spells and +9d6 Sneak. Wizard 6/Mindbender 1/Harper Paragon 10/Archmage 3 - can max out all social skills and suffers no caster loss. 23 points of value. Wizard 5/Mindbender 1/Geometer 3/Initiate of the Seven Veils 7/Archmage 4. 24 points of value. All extremely difficult, but possible to pull off without this feat. Now pretty easy. Plus, feats like this take half the fun out of optimizing. :)
catharz 12-23-04, 12:38 PM	OK, you guys have convinced me. It's not horribly overpowered, but I think it is unbalanced. One of the costs of playing a "trap disarmer" is spending of most of your skill points to do that. I think that this feat removes that cost, which is unbalancing. Wait a second. You still have to spend skill points when using Able learner, right? It just uses 1/1 rather than 1/2? If it really lets you be, say, a trap disarmer without spending skill points, it is definately overpowered.
Zubon 12-23-04, 01:57 PM	Wait a second. You still have to spend skill points when using Able learner, right? It just uses 1/1 rather than 1/2? If it really lets you be, say, a trap disarmer without spending skill points, it is definately overpowered. Yes, you still need to spend the skill points, just fewer. What he said is that it lets you do so without spending MOST of your skill points on it. It will now cost (23*2=)46 skill points at level 20 for any character to have 23 ranks in Search and Disable Device, assuming 1 level in Rogue and Able Learner. It used to cost ((4+19*2)*2=)84 skill points. It used to cost all of an Int 14 Fighter's skill points or half of an Int 20 Wizard's skill points.
catharz 12-23-04, 02:08 PM	Yes, you still need to spend the skill points, just fewer. What he said is that it lets you do so without spending MOST of your skill points on it. It will now cost (23*2=)46 skill points at level 20 for any character to have 23 ranks in Search and Disable Device, assuming 1 level in Rogue and Able Learner. It used to cost ((4+19*2)*2=)84 skill points. It used to cost all of an Int 14 Fighter's skill points or half of an Int 20 Wizard's skill points. Since when has anyone but a Rogue or Artificer even tried to be a trap disarmer with skill ranks alone?
carnivore 12-23-04, 02:13 PM	how about the famous "TIMBER ROGUE", the log who feared no traps :D
Zubon 12-23-04, 02:17 PM	Since when has anyone but a Rogue or Artificer even tried to be a trap disarmer with skill ranks alone? I don't know, but most comments have been specifically in reference to the line from the CO Rogue's guide, that if you just want a trapfinder, 1 level of Rogue then max cross-class ranks will make you just as good as a Rogue. So a Wizard 19/Rogue 1 finds traps just as well as Rogue 20, maybe better with some spell help. He can now do that a lot cheaper. For some reason, I had not thought of trying that with Artificer...interesting. That has possibilities. Anyway, anyone can be a top-level trapfinder at the cost of 1 Rogue level (not a bad thing), 1 feat, and 2 skill points/level. It used to cost an extra 2 skill points/level, but no feat. So for the limited subset of people who were interested in doing that, it has become cheaper. I actually have a build that might find that handy. (There are other implications to the feat, just addressing that one point.)
PhoenixInferno 12-23-04, 11:22 PM	What do you guys think about this fix for the feat - if it turned 2 formerly cross-classed skills into class skills, sort of like Versatile in the Rokugan Campaign Setting or Cosmopolitan in v3.0 Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting? Still pretty darn useful, but doesn't completely eradicate the usefulness of a Rogue.
Hesparex 12-24-04, 10:25 AM	The skill is fine where it is. I like the idea of spell casters trading in 1 level for rogue and burning a feat to be able to sense for traps. Makes them weaker and the rogue that hits PRCs stronger (point in fact it helps a rogue PrC into to some roguelike PrCs that dont have Search or disable device as a skill)
acvar 12-24-04, 12:11 PM	And people are still looking at this backwards. If some moron wants to take a level of rogue and this feat so his wizard can find traps then sure its a bad feat, but when somebody wants to take this feat and 19 levels of druid so his "rogue" can cast 9th level spells and wildshape into a big elemental whenever anything gets dicey then it becomes a problem. When the iconic party goes from fighter/cleric/wizard/rogue to fighter/cleric/wizard/druid with such ease it is a bad thing. In the past this was just not possible because there were just too many cross class skills needed to pull it off. Now it is easy.
Fedifensor 12-24-04, 12:12 PM	I have no problems with the skill. Of course, I always thought D&D was too stingy with skill points compared to Star Wars. Even Soldiers in Star Wars d20 get 4 skill points per level.
Snicker-Snack 12-24-04, 12:32 PM	I don't think that the feat is as overpowered as some of the posters think, but i do agree with balthanon that it will take a large portion of the fun of optimizing... Those Sublime Chord builds will be a lot easier to make now...
catharz 12-24-04, 12:33 PM	I don't think that the feat is as overpowered as some of the posters think, but i do agree with balthanon that it will take a large portion of the fun of optimizing... Those Sublime Chord builds will be a lot easier to make now... Oh no, less absurd multiclassting to get the characters you want :eek!:
Snicker-Snack 12-24-04, 12:59 PM	Oh no, less absurd multiclassting to get the characters you want :eek!: I'm not really complaining, it's just that it was really fun to keep looking in the books for Prc's with high skills and trying to squeeze in 2 or + levels of theses classes to try to get those missing skill ponts. It takes some of the fun of optimizing, by making it easier. Of course, all of those new character options will wipe away my tears.
evilgenius 12-24-04, 01:00 PM	I think one other issue here is that it's for Humans only - I don't see why other races should not be able to take it. Normally, I play only Humans because of the feat and skills (the only exception is fighters - their number of feats nerf the human feat bonus). If other races could take Able Learner, I would actually consider playing other races - as it is, this is even LESS of a reason to play ANYTHING other than human. WotC had a good chance to resurrect the popularity of non-human races, and they missed it. L8er evilgenius
catharz 12-24-04, 01:41 PM	I think one other issue here is that it's for Humans only - I don't see why other races should not be able to take it. Normally, I play only Humans because of the feat and skills (the only exception is fighters - their number of feats nerf the human feat bonus). If other races could take Able Learner, I would actually consider playing other races - as it is, this is even LESS of a reason to play ANYTHING other than human. WotC had a good chance to resurrect the popularity of non-human races, and they missed it. L8er evilgenius I did not know that, that does seem a bit harsh. If you want to get around that limitation within the rules, there is a feat in Dragon 32-something called 'Human heritage,' which grants +1 skill point per level and the ability to be treated as a human for basically everything.
Neofish 12-24-04, 01:53 PM	I did not know that, that does seem a bit harsh. If you want to get around that limitation within the rules, there is a feat in Dragon 32-something called 'Human heritage,' which grants +1 skill point per level and the ability to be treated as a human for basically everything. Yeah but only half-breeds can take that feat, which only opens it up for half-elves and orcs.
catharz 12-24-04, 03:03 PM	Yeah but only half-breeds can take that feat, which only opens it up for half-elves and orcs. No, you just need to be able to claim some sort of human heritage. Which means that it will work for most humanoids, and even things like Elan and Illithids.
Mommy was an Orc 12-25-04, 01:56 AM	I don't think that the ability to disarm traps is necessarily a big deal. The point of disarming traps is that you're doing good for the party as a whole, not necessarily yourself. Not every party should have to have a full-blown rogue to survive. On the other hand, there's a few problems with Able Learner that I think are really unbalancing: Feat turns Speak Languages into a class skill for everyone. This might not seem like a problem, but with the exception of Bard, no other Core Class gets it as a class skill. Certain builds get a real upgrade with the addition of this feat. Wizards, most mechanical wizard builds(Gish, Arcane Tricksters, Mystic Theurges), Spiked Chain Trip Fighters, and Druids who use Wildshape as an excuse to get poor physical/great mental stats. Synergy skills get far too cheap - 5 ranks of Bluff and Tumble are well worth the investment if you get this feat. It isn't too hard to even get enough ranks in Tumble to get an autosuccess DC 15 by 20th level. Even some of the ones that just give a +2 bonus can be worthwhile. In most cases, a character tends to have them maxxed out or not at all because 5 ranks is too expensive to cross-class. Bluff as an example, might give +8 to various skills, but very few classes both have the points to cross-class Bluff to boost social skills and don't get it as a class skill(aka Diplomatic Druids and Intimidating Spiked Chain trip fighters). The whole human thing. That gives me a much worse opinion of the feat. Honestly, I don't know why anyone would make a non-human wizard anymore in a game which at least marginally values skill use out of combat. And finally, that PrCs aren't taken into account by it. Mindbender just came out again - they could have put a feat requirement in to make it a little less accessible to the human wizard who wants access to Diplomacy and then gets Telepathy and +4 to saves on top of it. I really wonder what would have happened if someone had said, "Why don't we make a feat that adds +2 Unnamed Bonus to all skills that have less than max ranks?"
Sarlax 12-25-04, 02:40 AM	In a skill-heavy game, taking a level of the Expert class can be extremely strong with this feat because of that class selects any 10 skills to be class skills, which is excellent for rounding out formerly inaccessible skills. Of course, the Aristocrat has a great selection as well: Appraise (Int), Bluff (Cha), Diplomacy (Cha), Disguise (Cha), Forgery (Int), Gather Information (Cha), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (all skills taken individually) (Int), Listen (Wis), Perform (Cha), Ride (Dex), Sense Motive (Wis), Speak Language, Spot (Wis), Swim (Str), and Survival (Wis). For those with Arcana Unearthed, the Human Paragon is quite excellent. While it's first level ability is less helpful (select one skill as a permanent class skill), it has several great things going for an Able Learner human: at levels 2 and 3, it gets +1 caster level, it has the 3/4 BAB, good will, a bonus feat, +2 to an ability score of one's choice, and the choice of any 10 skills as class skills (like the expert). The obvious thing to start in wizard, dip into human paragon for three levels, pick up the bonus feat and +2 Intelligence, then go wherever you like from their, probably further in wizard until an attractive prestige class opens up. Those 10 skills can be the choice picks that any wizard wishes he had.
aleko 01-12-05, 04:26 PM	which book is the able learner feat in???
incubus 01-12-05, 10:45 PM	And people are still looking at this backwards. If some moron wants to take a level of rogue and this feat so his wizard can find traps then sure its a bad feat, but when somebody wants to take this feat and 19 levels of druid so his "rogue" can cast 9th level spells and wildshape into a big elemental whenever anything gets dicey then it becomes a problem. When the iconic party goes from fighter/cleric/wizard/rogue to fighter/cleric/wizard/druid with such ease it is a bad thing. In the past this was just not possible because there were just too many cross class skills needed to pull it off. Now it is easy. Because being the guy who gets to have his name in the 'door macro' is just SOOOooooOOO prestigious. Face it - most of the time trap finding and disabling is just something the rogue HAS to do. It's almost never something he WANTS to do. It's like saying that if other characters could heal, it would make the cleric redundant and pointless - all it really does is free up his resources and make him more powerful, as has been demonstrated on these boards time and time again. When the only reason you want to be a rogue is so you can find and disable traps, you really should reconsider the fun that's going to afford you...
Neofish 01-13-05, 01:14 AM	No, you just need to be able to claim some sort of human heritage. Which means that it will work for most humanoids, and even things like Elan and Illithids. No, the one in the magazine said you needed to be a half-breed, only half-elves and half-orcs. Your thinking of the one from RoD, which lets you take it if you have some sort of human ancestry. (which I think is kinda dumb, I give half-elves and half-orcs the human subtype already.)
GrolubFranco 01-13-05, 03:53 AM	I believe Rogue 2 will always have a place because of evasion. Alas, I donīt think the featīs broken, it letīs you play more with some PC that otherwise were useless. Just that.
aleko 01-13-05, 03:36 PM	so the able learner feat is in which book?
GrolubFranco 01-13-05, 03:53 PM	Races of Destiny
carnivore 11-30-05, 08:00 PM	:bump: to save :D