Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Morwen 09-04-05, 04:58 AM	Hi :) I was wondering if anyone's put some thought into allowing characters to purchase feats by spending skill points? My initial thought was to have each feat cost 6 skill points or thereabouts (mimicing how items cost double what you can sell them for compared to how certain feats give you 3 skill points). Would it be way overpowered, and/or too unbalanced in favor of the skill-based classes?
Gilean 09-04-05, 05:06 AM	You would have to make it a skill to limit abuse. Say, a skill that grants bonus feat for every 5 to 7 ranks in it. It would, still, benefit skilled classes more, depending on who it is a class skill to. Or, you can divide the skill into Fighter feats, mage feats, divine feats, wild feats, etc...
Fargren 09-04-05, 09:55 AM	Just for balanace: this feats should not count when you are seing if you have the prerequisites for a PrC or a feat, unless that feat is also being bought by expending skill points.
tharivol266 09-04-05, 11:12 AM	i think this is a great rule and i think the bought feats should qualify for regularly gained feats too
Lord Schpungus 09-04-05, 11:25 AM	I suggest 10 skill points per feat. Even then the Rogue will mop up terribly.
Gilean 09-04-05, 11:32 AM	I suggest 10 skill points per feat. Even then the Rogue will mop up terribly.That is why it needs to be a skill, or several skills. To put a limit that is not arbitrary. Too arbitrary.
LCD2YOU 09-04-05, 11:48 AM	As Lord Schpungus and Gilean point out, but I'd make it a "sliding scale". The cost of a Feat is double what the character class gets in points/level. Then there is pain spread evenly across the character types. However, there are some classes that get feats far more often. A fighter gains a new feat essentially every level, when you include the 1 feat per 3 level for all characters. A Wizard gets about 1 feat for every 2 levels. Almost all the rest gain 1 feat per 3 levels. You could make it then that a fighter could trade in 3 Skill points for a Feat, a Wizard 4 for a feat and the rest 3 times the base skill points/level. That makes the rogue having to spend 24, but thems the breaks. None of them are fair however. A human fighter with a 16 intelligence can gain an extra two feats each level while a 11 int Rogue has no skills to speak of and only gets a new feat every 3rd level. Which then leads me to the third idea, where a fighter uses all of his skill points each level to gain one feat, a Wizard needs to use up all skill points they recieve for 2 levels for 1 feat and the rest need to use up all skill points gained for 3 levels for a single feat. I don't know if you can make it fair at all, depending on all POV.
neilthrun 09-04-05, 02:38 PM	I could see granting skill focus as a bonus feat once you have 10 ranks in a skill. But id stay away from allowing feats to be bought with skill points.
Koga:The ninja trick 09-04-05, 03:08 PM	The Koga doesn't know, though it sounds rightouss, wouldn't this completely make fighters obselete? Rogues could burn skills to obtain more feats, and heck, even the npc aristocrat could make a substaintial fighter. The fighter would be even less useful then he is now..
Tyler Do'Urden 09-04-05, 05:35 PM	Somebody a while ago posted some webpage that had guidelines for spending XP to get more bonus feats. That might be more to your liking. Can't for the life of me remember where it went though.
Tuneless Bard 09-04-05, 05:52 PM	My concept of partitional magic works similar to this... except they need to unlock the ability by finding a tomb or meditating in the right fashion...then the virtual feat or ability lasts for only a short duration dependant upon a skill check (which varies depending on the ability)... You can check it out here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=7157617#post7157617)
Salla 09-04-05, 07:34 PM	If I did this (and I seriously doubt I ever would), I'd just invert the Open Minded feat. You take Open-Minded, you get 5 skill points, subject to normal expenditures (maximum Level+3 in class skills, etc). So, at least semi-logically, 5 skill points would get you a feat.
CryoSilver 09-04-05, 08:46 PM	I'll have to idssent there: things in D&D don't always work both ways; it isn't physics, you know. In the same way that a Str penlaty justifies a Dex boost, but a Str boost is not compensated adequately for by a Dex penalty, 5 skill points should not be able to buy a feat, even if the reverse is true. Another example: selling thnigs. You sell for half value, so you get 50 gp for an item worth 100, but you can't then buy it back for 50. Buying feats with skills would be quite dangerous unless you set a cap (eg: making it a skill, with a normal skill's cap of level+3) and made it expensive (at least 7 skill points per feat). Otherwise, the fighter becomes, as they've said, obselete.
ticattack 09-04-05, 09:46 PM	Here's what I'd be doing: You do not get a feat every three levels. Bonus feats, like those from a fighter, still apply. Every character gets an additional 2 skill points per level, added after Intelligence modifiers. (So, a fighter, with 2 skill points /level, and an Int of 4 (-3 mod), would get 3 skill points (2 - 3 = -1 = 1 = 3))). Feats can be bought for 8 skill points. Feats relating to skills require a minimum of 8 ranks in that skill.I don't think that this would make rogues too powerful. One of the advantages of a rogue is their skill points. A rogue could get two feats a level, sure. But then he'd be left with no skills. What's a rogue who can't Move Silently, Hide, Disable Devices, Search, etc.? Just a thought.
CryoSilver 09-04-05, 09:58 PM	A rogue with twice as many feats as the fighter, sneak attack and the extra hp and attack bonuses from feats to compensate for a lower HD and attack bonus? TWFing, and using his remaining skill on UMD still buffing himself through the roof and using a wand of Wraithstrike?
Gilean 09-05-05, 08:30 AM	A new skill: talented For every 7 ranks in this skill, a character gains bonus feat. Any feat the character could normally take is available. A skill focus improves the virtual ranks of this skill by 3, if anyone were dumb enough to take it. Levels at which feats would be gained (assuming maxed skill): 4, 11, 18 If the ratio was 5 ranks for a feat: 2, 7, 12, 17 If it were 6: 3, 9, 15 If it were 8: 5, 13 Optionally, divide the skill into following categories, each can be learned separately. Fighter feats Wizardry (item creation, metamagic, spell mastery, skill focus [arcane knowledge, spellcraft]) Magic affinity (eschew materials, spell penetration/focus, magic affinity, skill focus [use magic device]) Skilled (skill focus [any], others that only grant boni to skills) Hardy (save-boosting, HP-granting) Others can be developed. If these more specialised categories are used, some should be assigned as class skills.
Morwen 09-05-05, 01:12 PM	I definitely like the idea of making it a skill, and basing it off ranks in the skill. Thanks for all effort and ideas :)
Kursk 09-05-05, 09:43 PM	There would unforseen balance issues with this plan. It would have to be playtested in the extreme.
Skojar 09-06-05, 04:58 PM	My idea was along the lines of Gilean's: three new skills, and then the skill rules take care of most of the balance issues. New Skills: Heroics (None) Your experience as an adventurer grants you abilities beyond those of others. For every five ranks in this skill, you are granted a bonus feat. Prowess (None) Your experience in combat grants you combat abilities beyond those of others. For every five ranks in this skill, you gain a bonus feat. This feat must be a Tactical Feat, a Racial feat, or a feat that can be taken as a Fighter bonus feat. Mysticism (None) Your experience with the supernatural, psionic, or magical grants you abilities beyond those of others. For every five ranks in this skill, you gain a bonus feat. This feat must be of one of the following types: Metamagic, Item Creation, Bardic, Psionic, Initiate, or Wild. Then the limitations come in when only some of these are class skills: Barbarians and Fighters have Prowess and Heroics as class skills. Sorcerers, Wizards, Clerics, and Druids have Mysticism and Heroics as class skills. Bards, Rangers, and Paladins have all three as class skills. Rogues have only Heroics as a class skill. (I would also rule that the Able Learner feat does not work on these skills [as with Speak Language].) We can see how the skill ranks rules come into play by comparing Int 10 charactes of different classes: A straight Fighter who put all skill points in these skills would have 1 Prowess feat and 1 Heroics feat at 6th level, 3 Prowess feats and 2 Heroics feats at 12th level. That fighter would have no skill points left over to spend of skills (no big loss). A straight Wizard or Cleric would have the same progression, but replace all instances of Prowess with Mysticism. A straight Rogue who put all skill points in these skills would only have a single Heroics feat at 6th level, but would end up with 1 Prowess feat, 1 Mysticism feat (not sure which would be useful) and 3 Heroics feats at 12th level. He would still be able to spend 61 skill points total. The real winners are Bard, Ranger, and Paladin (I don't feel bad that they make out on the deal) A Bard will have one of each type of feat at 6th level, and 2 Prowess, 2 Mysticism, and 3 Heroics at 12th, with plenty of skill points left for maybe 2 skills. Of course this system can be tweaked a little if the Rogue cross-classes to bring up their max skill ranks, but he must still spend points as cross-class, and has to sacrifice all those valuable Rogue skills. ... I'm not sure if it's the best idea in the world, but if you allow it for everyone it basically just adds more options...and makes the weaker classes that much more competative.
Fargren 09-06-05, 09:30 PM	My idea was along the lines of Gilean's: three new skills, and then the skill rules take care of most of the balance issues. New Skills: Heroics (None) Your experience as an adventurer grants you abilities beyond those of others. For every five ranks in this skill, you are granted a bonus feat. Prowess (None) Your experience in combat grants you combat abilities beyond those of others. For every five ranks in this skill, you gain a bonus feat. This feat must be a Tactical Feat, a Racial feat, or a feat that can be taken as a Fighter bonus feat. Mysticism (None) Your experience with the supernatural, psionic, or magical grants you abilities beyond those of others. For every five ranks in this skill, you gain a bonus feat. This feat must be of one of the following types: Metamagic, Item Creation, Bardic, Psionic, Initiate, or Wild. Then the limitations come in when only some of these are class skills: Barbarians and Fighters have Prowess and Heroics as class skills. Sorcerers, Wizards, Clerics, and Druids have Mysticism and Heroics as class skills. Bards, Rangers, and Paladins have all three as class skills. Rogues have only Heroics as a class skill. (I would also rule that the Able Learner feat does not work on these skills [as with Speak Language].) We can see how the skill ranks rules come into play by comparing Int 10 charactes of different classes: A straight Fighter who put all skill points in these skills would have 1 Prowess feat and 1 Heroics feat at 6th level, 3 Prowess feats and 2 Heroics feats at 12th level. That fighter would have no skill points left over to spend of skills (no big loss). A straight Wizard or Cleric would have the same progression, but replace all instances of Prowess with Mysticism. A straight Rogue who put all skill points in these skills would only have a single Heroics feat at 6th level, but would end up with 1 Prowess feat, 1 Mysticism feat (not sure which would be useful) and 3 Heroics feats at 12th level. He would still be able to spend 61 skill points total. The real winners are Bard, Ranger, and Paladin (I don't feel bad that they make out on the deal) A Bard will have one of each type of feat at 6th level, and 2 Prowess, 2 Mysticism, and 3 Heroics at 12th, with plenty of skill points left for maybe 2 skills. Of course this system can be tweaked a little if the Rogue cross-classes to bring up their max skill ranks, but he must still spend points as cross-class, and has to sacrifice all those valuable Rogue skills. ... I'm not sure if it's the best idea in the world, but if you allow it for everyone it basically just adds more options...and makes the weaker classes that much more competative. Shouldn't you add that heroics cna only give genral feats? And add metapsionics to mysticism
Skojar 09-06-05, 10:31 PM	Shouldn't you add that heroics cna only give genral feats? And add metapsionics to mysticism The text of course would need some attention, to include things like metapsionics and others I forgot about. I had consciously intended Heroics to be useable for ANY feats...I'm not sure what effect it would have to limit it to General, which would mean that some feats (Vile, Exalted, for example) would not be gainable using any skill. The idea is that the Heroics skill is the core skill, but the others exist to give additional options to non-Rogue classes, since since the max. skill ranks is strictly limited based on level. A Rogue could boost up his Int, but can never get more feats that he could with a Int 10. A fighter or Wizard on the other hand, can gain off-class feats with an Int higher than 10.
spectralphoenix 09-07-05, 05:30 AM	I can't see this working very effectively. A rogue could dump skill points into feats, and with a moderate INT bonus, still get the Stealth skills and possibly mechanical skills, and become a combat rogue drastically more powerful than a generic, RAW rogue. Lastly, it makes Intelligence more powerful. Granted, it probably would not be game-breaking, but this would give an advantage to classes like the wizard that already have high INT scores. After all, beyond spellcraft and concentration, most wizards don't have a use for 3 or 4 extra skill points. Most feats affect your combat abilities, while most skills affect noncombat situations. While there are exceptions (crafting feats, tumble) a party with a bard for social situations and a rogue for locks and traps would spend almost all of their skills on feats. I agree that using it as a skill (or several skill) is more balanced than simply allowing players to trade skills for feats. The question here is, can you see a player in such a game not spending at least some skill points on feats? I know my rogue would use it.
Gilean 09-07-05, 11:51 AM	The question here is, can you see a player in such a game not spending at least some skill points on feats? I know my rogue would use it.Then increase the cost, until it is a considerable trade-off, or even too large. Can't go wrong with too high costs. If nobody is taking it, decrease the cost a bit. With a few games the balance is found.
CaoSlayer 09-07-05, 12:37 PM	ummm... creating a flaw (inverting nimph kiss and the human´s feature), I would say about the character getting -2 skill points per level from the moment where you get the extra feat. if it is too bad, get -1, the first feat and -2 the second -4 the third. so characters with 2 + 0 int could get one feat, characters with 4 + int could get two and rogues would be able to get the three ones (with the sacrifice of being totally unrogueish)
spectralphoenix 09-07-05, 01:22 PM	That might be a decent compromise. Keep in mind, however, that a player can only select up to two flaws. I would set the penalty to -2 and only allow a player to take that particular flaw once. If you let them take it three times, a 1st level human rogue with 14 INT would have 20 skill points + 5/level and 5 feats. He could take Search, Hide, Move Silently, Disable Device, and Open lock. He would make a much better combat rogue, but he would still be able to sneak around and deal with dungeon tricks and traps.
GoofsterStud 09-07-05, 02:13 PM	YOU JUST GAVE BARBARIANS MORE FEAT!!! You bastard! Fighters now just can't compete... :-P
Gilean 09-08-05, 12:27 PM	YOU JUST GAVE BARBARIANS MORE FEAT!!! You bastard! Fighters now just can't compete... :-PThat was...constructive.
Klytus 09-08-05, 01:40 PM	I just give out feats at every odd level, instead of every third level (yes, to the monsters, too). I also allow characters to get up to five "extra" feats by such means as wishes, quest rewards, and what-have-you.
s4uc3m4n 09-08-05, 04:37 PM	I don't know how long this post will be, but I do know it will use a lot of math.... Compare two classes that are near the same.... Fighter vs. Rogue Fighter 1...2...3 Attack Advancement (Equal to 20 Feats) 1 Feat per 2 Levels (11 Feats) 2 SP Per Level (Equal to 1/4 Feat or 5 Feats) Proficiency With all Martial Weapons and Armor and Shields (Equal to 4 Feats) 40 Feats Rogue 0..1...2...3...3... Attack advancement (Equal to 15 Feats) Sneak Attack Bonus Every 2 Levels (2 Feat equivalent for every 3 bonuses) Special Abilities (1 Feat / 5 Levels) Evasion (All Levels = 3 Feats) 8 SP Per Level (Equal to 1 Feat) Proficiency with Random Crap (Equal to 1 Feat) 54 Feats This is math people, we know the Rogue is stronger than the Fighter, not until higher, however the facts are there. Most of you are probably thinking I measured the feats unfairly, but let's think of it this way. For similar feats I can get two of them at a +2 Bonus or 4 SP or I can get one at a +3 or 3 SP. That means that using a Feat is Equal to at least 3 SP, however I cannot divide those SP and as we know, 1 SP in 3 different skills is usually better than 3 in one. Therefore we figure that a SP must have at least double the value of the maximum gained, which is 4. Meaning that a Feat is worth 8 SPs. Using this math the fighter would gain a sad 40 Feats, while the Rogue would gain a tremendous 54 Feats. This also does not include the extra 36 SP that the rogue gets for being first level nor does it include the fact that INT becomes a Rogue's most important stat (as if it wasn't already important to begin with). This is why a Feats for Skills system would be tremendously unbalanced. If you really wanted to make it fair, you can create generic classes and assign a value to your feats and abilities and Spell Points vs. Spell Level Advancement. However, creating a reverse enginereed system would totally destroy the fickle thread of balance that Wizards fought so hard to maintain and just give the whole world yet another reason to play a Rogue. I won't even discuss the god awful amazing things you would do for the Bard. The fighter is already bordering on worthless, let's not shove him into the tank to drown.
Skojar 09-08-05, 05:08 PM	That's why I was trying to build a system that put a cap on what a Rogue could gain. Using the system I outlined above, a straight Rogue doesn't benefit from a high Int score. A Fighter spending all of his skill points on feats (they can afford it), however, will outpace a Rogue at 10 Int, and will be even farther ahead with more Int. The whole idea was to allow for the process that the Original Poster was asking about without letting the Rogue go completel nutso. Now The major problem I see is that Bard, Ranger, and Paladin can go nutso, and if a Rogue multiclasses then she can take advantage of herr Int, but simply having a few issues to work out is no reason to give up on the project altogether. Using Speak Language-like skills to buy feats sure looks to me like it could be a workable approach, it just needs some tweaking.
Gilean 09-09-05, 01:35 PM	This is math peopleand flawed one, at that. For example, rogue gets feats for special abilities and evasion, including the improved one. Also, hit points, better base save for fighters, underpriced starting proficiencies, etc. Did you read the thread? It would certainly be imbalanced to allow one to change N skill points for a feat. That is why it should be made into a skill. For example, see Skojar's idea.
Avihs 09-09-05, 03:57 PM	Time is short on my end, so I just want to throw in my 2 coppers on this... What about combining Gilean's and Skojar's idea... by making use of a more encompasing skill (much like craft, knowledge etc.). (Will post more later when I get back from work.)
Avihs 09-10-05, 04:53 AM	Okie-Dokie... Back from Work... Now where was I? :D Oh yeah... Combining ideas... So far, Skojar seems to have come closest to a vialble option, and I will be using his build as a basis for this idea along with some of the points suggested by Gilean. Things I would suggest: 1) Combine all three under a single heading, Talented. Why put it under a single skill heading? It would help to bring about a cohesive rule-set under which this option would be governed , as further deatailed below. 2) (optional) Expand the sub-skills, to create more specialized fields. For anyone familiar with the book from Mongoose Publishers; Ulitmate Feats, they broke down their feat catagories down further than the three initially suggested. Feats of the Arcane, Arms(fighter), Blood (racial), Crafting (item creation), Divine, Mind (psionic/meta-psionic), Monstrous (racial-monster), Power (meta-magic), Skill (general) and, Song & Stealth. 3) Allow a character to select a single sub-skill available to be treated as a class skill (according to the breakdown given in Skojar's build). Once chosen, the others remain as cross class skills. With this option, especially with an expanded sub-skill catagories, it would limit the number of feats gained. 4) The character may ony recieve a single, skill earned, Feat per level. The main reason for this one would be to prevent to big of a power jump from gaining multiple feats by working multiple sub-skills at the same time. As well as to further limit the number of feats that a character may gain over a 20 level progression.
s4uc3m4n 09-13-05, 12:21 PM	and flawed one, at that. For example, rogue gets feats for special abilities and evasion, including the improved one. Also, hit points, better base save for fighters, underpriced starting proficiencies, etc. Did you read the thread? It would certainly be imbalanced to allow one to change N skill points for a feat. That is why it should be made into a skill. For example, see Skojar's idea. Yes, I read the rest of the thread, however all we are doing is making a class with too much power even more powerful. Who is it in this campaign that doesn't want to play a Rogue. I get more damage than god simply for having a team mate stand on the other side of me while in combat. Half of the best Magical Spells are only ever going to hurt me for half damage if I manage to roll a 1. I can use the long sword minor (rapier). Giving a Rogue the ability to have 5 more fighter equivalent feats still isn't fair. Part of forcing him to have skill points is so that he doesn't have access to feats which will make him break the branch. If your players really want feats, fine, talk to the kids about multiclassing, don't offer to pump up something that is already brutis beefcake to begin with. Oh yeah... better base save for fighters What are you smoking? Rogue gets high Reflex and Evasion... the only person that is going to get poisoned is the Fighter because he walks over the trap like an idiot. I will give you credit though because I did overlook hitpoints, but Proficiencies are broken down properly. That gives the fighter 2 More Feats (Assuming we use the toughness/average rule).
Gilean 09-14-05, 01:50 PM	Yes, I read the rest of the thread, however all we are doing is making a class with too much power even more powerful. Who is it in this campaign that doesn't want to play a Rogue. I get more damage than god simply for having a team mate stand on the other side of me while in combat. Half of the best Magical Spells are only ever going to hurt me for half damage if I manage to roll a 1. I can use the long sword minor (rapier). Giving a Rogue the ability to have 5 more fighter equivalent feats still isn't fair. Part of forcing him to have skill points is so that he doesn't have access to feats which will make him break the branch. If your players really want feats, fine, talk to the kids about multiclassing, don't offer to pump up something that is already brutis beefcake to begin with. Oh yeah...First, in the end, rogues do not do that much damage. SA is needed to keep them effective. Let us not get an argument about class balance here... About the feats, the fighter can also get them. If the game is core, it would favour rogues, as there is a limited number of useful fighter feats. But with noncore game the fighter would truly become the master of battle. Also, rogues have many good uses for skill points, fighters almost none.What are you smoking? Rogue gets high Reflex and Evasion... the only person that is going to get poisoned is the Fighter because he walks over the trap like an idiot. I will give you credit though because I did overlook hitpoints, but Proficiencies are broken down properly. That gives the fighter 2 More Feats (Assuming we use the toughness/average rule).Reflex is the weakest save. Most thigns resisted by it do only damage. With a failed fortitude save you might end up instantly slain; a failed will and you are fighting your frineds, not enemies. Fighter has hp to stand through blasts; rogue does not.
CryoSilver 09-16-05, 07:04 PM	If you make this skill point thing just a single skill, at 7 points per feat, that means no class can ever gain more than three feats from it, at levels 4, 11 and 18. That's hardly overpowering, I think, and benfits no class more than any other, since any can spare the skill points.
Parrex 10-03-05, 01:29 PM	Hey, I wanted to bring this thread up to the foreground, because it's important to me, and I want to get as many opinions as possible. I didn't find this thread until after I posted my original thread, sorry. In reference to combining ideas: I simply vetoed the ability of the rogue to trade skills for feats. You cannot trade skills for feats unless your class recieves only (2+INT mod.) skills per level. I went with 4 skills can be sacrificed for 1 feat, and feats purchased this way cannot be used on the Open-Minded feat of the Complete Adventurer. Perhaps, if I set up a set of custom skills to obtain feats things would even out. It would still be 1 feat for every 4 points, however I would apply a synergy bonus with the knowledge and craft skills, make the ability modifier depend on the type of feats that can be obtained with the skill, and create new feats which allow you to gain skills in the skills that give you feats. I would still have a set of (as in more than one) skills Avihs, as that would allow them to gain sufficiently more feats, which is good for reasons explained below. In reference to play-testing: I've been using the skills for feats system for roughly five years now, and it only recently has become a problem as my players give up on skills entirely, my campaigns tend to be highly kick-in-the-door-and-rush-all-the-monsters-in-glorious-combat oriented, so switching this rule on and off based on the campaign might work. In the style I use, it tends to allow light fighters to become more rogueish not vice-versa. It cuts down on the number of party members needed, and allows other characters to branch to more prestige classes. It also tends to increase the survival rate of my players, so I did a bit of modification to CR of Encounters, and dished out quest experience where needed. The final and most important play testing point I should bring up is that it makes the game more interesting for the players, and the DM throughout: When a wizard maximize/quickens/silences a scorching ray to snipe out the leader of a giant camp, signaling a barbarian to come leading out of a tree 40 feet then tumbling perfectly to the ground instantaneously/extended/greater raging cowing all the monsters in the area, as a psychic warrior (Expanded Psionics Handbook)/warrior (Unearthed Arcana) races in at 200 ft per round, sneak attacking eight of the little beasties, and a Favored Soul (Complete Divine) mops up the rest with a set of spontaneous wounding spells and Divine Charges (Complete Warrior), I can give my players no experience and no treasure from the fight and they'll still have enjoyed the whole thing. From low to high levels extra feats make the game extra interesting. It's a little unbalanced sure, but it only requires a little tweaking in experience and challenge ratings to rebalance it. It could never be used in tournaments for sure, but that's why it's a house rule.