What if there were no cross-class skills? [Archive] - Wizards Community

What if there were no cross-class skills? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Degobah
11-10-04, 11:16 PM Just as an idea, what would happen if all skills were class skills for all character classes? I thought it would be a good idea since it would let a character diversify a bit and include skills from their pre-adventure background etc. Would this unbalance the character classes too much?
Xeviat-DM
11-11-04, 12:25 AM I'm not sure. When I compare the classes, I usually look more at their number of skill points, not class skills. The class skills simply define the class's role. Most classes (except for the fighter, cleric, and sorcerer) have the majority of the class skills that they may want.

In my games, I've gone a little toward this. A skill that you have a racial bonus or the skill focus feat in is a class skill at all times. When you multiclass, you can purchase the skills from your previous classes as class skills. One could easily do away with the class skill mechanic entirely, but then you blur the lines between what makes classes separate (and in my game, I only have 5 non-spellcasting classes and 5 spellcasting classes, I have a detailed advanced and PrC class system for further variation that can't be obtained by feats).
Lina_Inverse
11-11-04, 03:33 AM yes.hide,move silently,spot,listen,tumble and use magic device will be the only skills on everyones charecter sheet.these skills are far more powerfull than others and should be restricted.

besides,im wondering how a druid knows knowledge(nobility)
Sucineri
11-11-04, 03:49 AM I kinda like the idea of losing the cross-classiness of a skill once you get a level of another class.

Like you have the Ranger skill tree and you are all up and awesome with the hiding and the nature knowledge thing. Then you become a level of Fighter then all of a sudden you can't quite know how to do the hiding or nature thing as well? That just makes no sense.

So I like to go ahead and say when you take another class, you can have both classes skills and have ranks equal to TOTAL level +3 per skill (as normal for a single class).

BUT that is only if you put in the effort of getting into another class..I also will go with if you get skill focus that it is a class skill from that point on as well.
Greyman
11-11-04, 04:02 AM Like you have the Ranger skill tree and you are all up and awesome with the hiding and the nature knowledge thing. Then you become a level of Fighter then all of a sudden you can't quite know how to do the hiding or nature thing as well? That just makes no sense.Contrariwise, you are just as skilled at hiding and knowing what to hide from as before. It's just that while you focused on improving your fighting feats, you didn't have enough time to improve your ranging skills as much.
Sucineri
11-11-04, 04:31 AM Contrariwise, you are just as skilled at hiding and knowing what to hide from as before. It's just that while you focused on improving your fighting feats, you didn't have enough time to improve your ranging skills as much.

Wait..huh? We are talking about skills, not feats. Feats and skills are not the same thing so you can't really compare them to eachother.

You can keep getting better at hiding at the same time you are changing from ranged to melee..

I am really confused as to what you are talking about.
Lord_Anthrax
11-11-04, 05:31 AM It's supposed to mean that when you're putting time and effort into gaining a level in X class, you can only gain full ranks in X class's skills, because you don't have the time to focus on other class abilities(including skills another class has that X class doesn't).

I agree with you, though. IMC it's always been a house rule that once a skill is a class skill for you, it stays that way. Once you learn to do something skillfully like that, you can keep on improving despite whatever class level(s) you take.

That said, I do think that keeping cross-class skills is a good rule. I also soften it a bit and rule that if it ever becomes a class skill for you, then your cross-class ranks rise to what they would be had it been a class skill all along.
MadBlue
11-11-04, 08:10 AM Someone brought up an interesting house rule on Andy Collins' site: Cross-Class Skills only cost 1 point per Rank, but are still limited to 1/2 the maximum Ranks of Class Skills.

I think that would allow characters to have the kind of diversity Degobah is talking about, without stepping on the toes of those who have those skills as class skills.

Of course, you could still wind up with a Fighter 9/Rogue 1 with 13 Ranks in Spot and Listen (since the maximum is Lvl+3 as long as it's a Class Skill for one of your classes). Then again, you could wind up with a character like that as the rules stand, just that they'd have fewer points to spend on other skills.

MadBlue
Veomyr
11-11-04, 11:40 AM I agree with you, though. IMC it's always been a house rule that once a skill is a class skill for you, it stays that way. Once you learn to do something skillfully like that, you can keep on improving despite whatever class level(s) you take.

Isn't this how it is normally?
Lord_Anthrax
11-11-04, 12:36 PM No, as I understand it when you take a level in X Class, the SP you gain can only improve X Class's class skills at the 1-1 rate. Anything else is cross-class.

Example: Snuffy the Rogue 1 takes a level of Fighter. He gets the Fighter's SP and can only improve the Fighter's class skills at a 1-1 rate. If he wanted to improve, say, his Hide skill he'd have to pay 2 SP for a rank, not 1.
JohnSnow
11-11-04, 05:30 PM I agree with you, though. IMC it's always been a house rule that once a skill is a class skill for you, it stays that way. Once you learn to do something skillfully like that, you can keep on improving despite whatever class level(s) you take.

Isn't this how it is normally?

Sorta.

Once a skill is a class skill for you it IS a class skill for purposes of determining maximum ranks in it. It is NOT a class skill for purposes of what those ranks cost you.

So while a Ftr8/Rog1 could have 12 ranks in tumble, most of the ranks would have cost him two skill points.

Unless he waited to take it until later, which is one of the ways you can (meta)game the system. And it's not at all realistic. Consider two scenarios:

Bob starts his career as a rogue. Bob takes tumble as a class skill. Bob's first 4 ranks in Tumble cost him 4 skill points. Bob then switches to fighter, He keeps improving his tumble skill and by 9th level, he has 12 ranks in tumble which cost him 20 skill points! (4 for the first 4 ranks, +16 for the next 8).

Joe starts his career as a fighter. Joe does not take any ranks in tumble through 6 levels of fighter. On achieving 7th level, Joe takes a level of rogue and dumps all his skill points (plus his +2 int bonus) into achieving 10 ranks in tumble. At 8th and 9th level, he takes two more fighter levels and gets 2 more ranks in tumble for 4 skill points.

Now we compare Bob and Joe. Both are Ftr8/Rog1. However, Bob has spent 20 skill points to have 12 ranks in tumble, whereas Joe has spent 14. Joe metagamed the crap out of this system and benefits egregiously from doing so. If Bob had taken his rogue level at 2, he would still have spent 5 more skill points for the same ability, without even getting the compensation of the extra skill points from having started as a rogue. This is fair?

And when does this REALLY come into play? Replacement PCs and DM NPCs. When you take skills matters matters more than it should. What level you take first should matter, beyond that, it shouldn't come into play as much.

The logical answer is to keep the cross class limit on ranks (waived for multiclassing as per the core rules) but allow characters to improve anything for 1 point/rank. Net result is better rounded (rather than overpowered) PCs.

You might get a characters taking one level of rogue to gain access to certain skills...but at least they'd be more likely to do it sooner in their careers (for the greater benefit), rather than just doing it later and suddenly becoming an expert. It's still metagaming, but at least it's more realistic metagaming. ;)
Bluebrush
11-11-04, 06:07 PM I once ran using "Cross class costs the same as class and has the same limit."
It worked out okay, sonce most people stuck with their class skills anyway.

Though the players weren't experienced, it was level 1-5 and the annoying "I steal the beggar's cup what do you mean that'e evil I'm chaotic good so it's okay" player was given a (lame) kobold knighthood and spontaneously gained 5 ranks in Knowledge: Nobility and tried to pass himself off as a noble.

I'm not too keen on the cross-class mechanic, since it gets in the way of character customisation, but abandoning it entirely underpowers skill users like Rogues and Bards.
JohnSnow
11-11-04, 06:36 PM I actually think the "cross class skills cost the same as class skills, but are limited to half the maximum ranks" is logical.

I like the distinction of class and cross-class skills (good for rogues, bards, etc.) but I think the double cost unduly penalizes characters who just want to "dabble" in things outside their area of expertise.

Imagine, a 1st level fighter with a 12 INT (hence, 3 skill points per level) who has a couple ranks in "Survival." He's never going to give a ranger a run for his money, but he might have SOME ability. But if he has to pay double for the skill, no sane player is ever going to take it.

I honestly think that dumping the double cost would simplify things for bookkeeping purposes, while promoting more well-rounded PCs. Leaving the rank caps on cross-class skills, on the other hand, prevents the latter change from unduly hosing the "skill users." For multiclass characters, class skills of any of their classes would be considered "class skills" just as they are now. Without the weirdness of double cost for buying ranks at the "wrong" level.

The only thing that might be troubled is Prestige Class qualifications, but since PrCs are optional anyway, I don't think that's a reason not to do this.
Dunelord
11-13-04, 02:50 AM I was thinking about allowing PCs to pick one nonclass skill to have as a class skill, to kind of represent their backstory/background.
Krynus Ogrebane
11-13-04, 01:12 PM My group doesn't use cross-class skills in our games, and I like it. It allows some diversifying, and helps when playing an unconventional character.

Except for Use Magic Device, that is. We've made this a skill that can't be taken at all, unless you are a rogue and have a (house-made) feat first.
MaverickWolf
11-13-04, 06:23 PM My group doesn't use cross-class skills in our games, and I like it. It allows some diversifying, and helps when playing an unconventional character.

Except for Use Magic Device, that is. We've made this a skill that can't be taken at all, unless you are a rogue and have a (house-made) feat first.Why only rogue? Bards get it too, by core rules.
Krynus Ogrebane
11-14-04, 11:28 AM Why only rogue? Bards get it too, by core rules.

Nobody in my group would ever play a bard. :D

Actually, I'm trying to move our gaming group to a core-four arrangement. "Druids" would be Priests with the appropriate domains, "Barbarians" would be Fighters with the feat Rage and certain outdoorsy skills, etc.
Xeviat-DM
11-14-04, 09:29 PM Nobody in my group would ever play a bard. :D

Actually, I'm trying to move our gaming group to a core-four arrangement. "Druids" would be Priests with the appropriate domains, "Barbarians" would be Fighters with the feat Rage and certain outdoorsy skills, etc.

I have a core 5, and 5 spellcasters. There are 5 additional classes, but you can't enter them until you meet certain requirements (and your first level in them should be level 6). Due to this, I require a bit more skill ability as well.

I like the cross class max rank, but all class skills are pooled arangement. That way, someone who diversifies will actually have more skills with ranks than someone who specializes, which is a much more fair trade off than it currently is. Bravo.
[GSV] Kirstar
11-15-04, 04:20 AM we allow a few skills that would be cross class to be class for each character based on their backround and general roleplaying.

for example.

a wizard spends his time as a diplomat, we allow those diplomat type skills as class.

the fighter before deciding to hack things up with a sword, spent a few months training as a wizard school. even though he doesnt have the aptitude for casting, he still retains knowledge arcana and spell craft as class skills.

or the character who grew up around horses. has animal handling and ride as class skills etc etc.

however i do like the ide you guys mentioned above.
Degobah
11-16-04, 09:58 PM I'm not sure about the "all skills are 1:1 but your max rank is less if its not a class skill" idea. It seems that it would make it almost compulsory for every character to start as a rogue at 1st level, so they can keep maxing out skills.
With my original idea, I guess its a good point about Move Silently, Hide, Spot, Listen, Use Magic Device and Tumble being too useful so everyone takes them...maybe Use Magic Device and Tumble could be changed to class features?
Xeviat-DM
11-17-04, 12:46 AM Tumble has an armor check penalty and Use Magic Device is based on Charisma. I don't think you'll have too much use and abuse.
Annaylli
11-17-04, 11:10 AM We've been doing all skills are 1:1 since 3.0 came out and it hasn't resulted in any kind of cherrypicking classes for skills. The classes still don't have enough skill points to max everything.

They still usually take skills compatable with their class roles but do occasionally drop some points into crossclass skills for variety and flavor.

Through at least 5 campaigns since 3.0 it is one house rule that has never come up as something we would drop as a house rule.
Ricky
11-17-04, 01:32 PM I'm not sure about the "all skills are 1:1 but your max rank is less if its not a class skill" idea. It seems that it would make it almost compulsory for every character to start as a rogue at 1st level, so they can keep maxing out skills.

The easy solution is to modify how to calculate max skill ranks for multiclass characters. The current system is:

A) If the skill is a class skill for AT LEAST ONE of your classes, max rank = 3 + character level.
B) If the skill is a class skill for NONE of your classes, max rank = 1.5 + (0.5*character level).

Change this to:
A) If the skill is a class skill for ALL of your classes, max rank = 3 + character level.
B) If the skill is a class skill for NONE of your classes, max rank = 1.5 + (0.5*character level).
C) If the skill is a class skill for SOME of your classes, max rank = 3 + (levels in classes where the skill is a class skill) + 0.5*(levels in classes where the skill is cross-class).

Under this alternate system:
a) Fighter10 would have 6.5 max ranks in Tumble.
b) Rogue10 would have 13 max ranks in Tumble.
c) Fighter9/Rogue1 would have 8.5 max ranks in Tumble.

This minimizes the impact of cherry-picking.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Degobah 11-10-04, 11:16 PM	Just as an idea, what would happen if all skills were class skills for all character classes? I thought it would be a good idea since it would let a character diversify a bit and include skills from their pre-adventure background etc. Would this unbalance the character classes too much?
Xeviat-DM 11-11-04, 12:25 AM	I'm not sure. When I compare the classes, I usually look more at their number of skill points, not class skills. The class skills simply define the class's role. Most classes (except for the fighter, cleric, and sorcerer) have the majority of the class skills that they may want. In my games, I've gone a little toward this. A skill that you have a racial bonus or the skill focus feat in is a class skill at all times. When you multiclass, you can purchase the skills from your previous classes as class skills. One could easily do away with the class skill mechanic entirely, but then you blur the lines between what makes classes separate (and in my game, I only have 5 non-spellcasting classes and 5 spellcasting classes, I have a detailed advanced and PrC class system for further variation that can't be obtained by feats).
Lina_Inverse 11-11-04, 03:33 AM	yes.hide,move silently,spot,listen,tumble and use magic device will be the only skills on everyones charecter sheet.these skills are far more powerfull than others and should be restricted. besides,im wondering how a druid knows knowledge(nobility)
Sucineri 11-11-04, 03:49 AM	I kinda like the idea of losing the cross-classiness of a skill once you get a level of another class. Like you have the Ranger skill tree and you are all up and awesome with the hiding and the nature knowledge thing. Then you become a level of Fighter then all of a sudden you can't quite know how to do the hiding or nature thing as well? That just makes no sense. So I like to go ahead and say when you take another class, you can have both classes skills and have ranks equal to TOTAL level +3 per skill (as normal for a single class). BUT that is only if you put in the effort of getting into another class..I also will go with if you get skill focus that it is a class skill from that point on as well.
Greyman 11-11-04, 04:02 AM	Like you have the Ranger skill tree and you are all up and awesome with the hiding and the nature knowledge thing. Then you become a level of Fighter then all of a sudden you can't quite know how to do the hiding or nature thing as well? That just makes no sense.Contrariwise, you are just as skilled at hiding and knowing what to hide from as before. It's just that while you focused on improving your fighting feats, you didn't have enough time to improve your ranging skills as much.
Sucineri 11-11-04, 04:31 AM	Contrariwise, you are just as skilled at hiding and knowing what to hide from as before. It's just that while you focused on improving your fighting feats, you didn't have enough time to improve your ranging skills as much. Wait..huh? We are talking about skills, not feats. Feats and skills are not the same thing so you can't really compare them to eachother. You can keep getting better at hiding at the same time you are changing from ranged to melee.. I am really confused as to what you are talking about.
Lord_Anthrax 11-11-04, 05:31 AM	It's supposed to mean that when you're putting time and effort into gaining a level in X class, you can only gain full ranks in X class's skills, because you don't have the time to focus on other class abilities(including skills another class has that X class doesn't). I agree with you, though. IMC it's always been a house rule that once a skill is a class skill for you, it stays that way. Once you learn to do something skillfully like that, you can keep on improving despite whatever class level(s) you take. That said, I do think that keeping cross-class skills is a good rule. I also soften it a bit and rule that if it ever becomes a class skill for you, then your cross-class ranks rise to what they would be had it been a class skill all along.
MadBlue 11-11-04, 08:10 AM	Someone brought up an interesting house rule on Andy Collins' site: Cross-Class Skills only cost 1 point per Rank, but are still limited to 1/2 the maximum Ranks of Class Skills. I think that would allow characters to have the kind of diversity Degobah is talking about, without stepping on the toes of those who have those skills as class skills. Of course, you could still wind up with a Fighter 9/Rogue 1 with 13 Ranks in Spot and Listen (since the maximum is Lvl+3 as long as it's a Class Skill for one of your classes). Then again, you could wind up with a character like that as the rules stand, just that they'd have fewer points to spend on other skills. MadBlue
Veomyr 11-11-04, 11:40 AM	I agree with you, though. IMC it's always been a house rule that once a skill is a class skill for you, it stays that way. Once you learn to do something skillfully like that, you can keep on improving despite whatever class level(s) you take. Isn't this how it is normally?
Lord_Anthrax 11-11-04, 12:36 PM	No, as I understand it when you take a level in X Class, the SP you gain can only improve X Class's class skills at the 1-1 rate. Anything else is cross-class. Example: Snuffy the Rogue 1 takes a level of Fighter. He gets the Fighter's SP and can only improve the Fighter's class skills at a 1-1 rate. If he wanted to improve, say, his Hide skill he'd have to pay 2 SP for a rank, not 1.
JohnSnow 11-11-04, 05:30 PM	I agree with you, though. IMC it's always been a house rule that once a skill is a class skill for you, it stays that way. Once you learn to do something skillfully like that, you can keep on improving despite whatever class level(s) you take. Isn't this how it is normally? Sorta. Once a skill is a class skill for you it IS a class skill for purposes of determining maximum ranks in it. It is NOT a class skill for purposes of what those ranks cost you. So while a Ftr8/Rog1 could have 12 ranks in tumble, most of the ranks would have cost him two skill points. Unless he waited to take it until later, which is one of the ways you can (meta)game the system. And it's not at all realistic. Consider two scenarios: Bob starts his career as a rogue. Bob takes tumble as a class skill. Bob's first 4 ranks in Tumble cost him 4 skill points. Bob then switches to fighter, He keeps improving his tumble skill and by 9th level, he has 12 ranks in tumble which cost him 20 skill points! (4 for the first 4 ranks, +16 for the next 8). Joe starts his career as a fighter. Joe does not take any ranks in tumble through 6 levels of fighter. On achieving 7th level, Joe takes a level of rogue and dumps all his skill points (plus his +2 int bonus) into achieving 10 ranks in tumble. At 8th and 9th level, he takes two more fighter levels and gets 2 more ranks in tumble for 4 skill points. Now we compare Bob and Joe. Both are Ftr8/Rog1. However, Bob has spent 20 skill points to have 12 ranks in tumble, whereas Joe has spent 14. Joe metagamed the crap out of this system and benefits egregiously from doing so. If Bob had taken his rogue level at 2, he would still have spent 5 more skill points for the same ability, without even getting the compensation of the extra skill points from having started as a rogue. This is fair? And when does this REALLY come into play? Replacement PCs and DM NPCs. When you take skills matters matters more than it should. What level you take first should matter, beyond that, it shouldn't come into play as much. The logical answer is to keep the cross class limit on ranks (waived for multiclassing as per the core rules) but allow characters to improve anything for 1 point/rank. Net result is better rounded (rather than overpowered) PCs. You might get a characters taking one level of rogue to gain access to certain skills...but at least they'd be more likely to do it sooner in their careers (for the greater benefit), rather than just doing it later and suddenly becoming an expert. It's still metagaming, but at least it's more realistic metagaming. ;)
Bluebrush 11-11-04, 06:07 PM	I once ran using "Cross class costs the same as class and has the same limit." It worked out okay, sonce most people stuck with their class skills anyway. Though the players weren't experienced, it was level 1-5 and the annoying "I steal the beggar's cup what do you mean that'e evil I'm chaotic good so it's okay" player was given a (lame) kobold knighthood and spontaneously gained 5 ranks in Knowledge: Nobility and tried to pass himself off as a noble. I'm not too keen on the cross-class mechanic, since it gets in the way of character customisation, but abandoning it entirely underpowers skill users like Rogues and Bards.
JohnSnow 11-11-04, 06:36 PM	I actually think the "cross class skills cost the same as class skills, but are limited to half the maximum ranks" is logical. I like the distinction of class and cross-class skills (good for rogues, bards, etc.) but I think the double cost unduly penalizes characters who just want to "dabble" in things outside their area of expertise. Imagine, a 1st level fighter with a 12 INT (hence, 3 skill points per level) who has a couple ranks in "Survival." He's never going to give a ranger a run for his money, but he might have SOME ability. But if he has to pay double for the skill, no sane player is ever going to take it. I honestly think that dumping the double cost would simplify things for bookkeeping purposes, while promoting more well-rounded PCs. Leaving the rank caps on cross-class skills, on the other hand, prevents the latter change from unduly hosing the "skill users." For multiclass characters, class skills of any of their classes would be considered "class skills" just as they are now. Without the weirdness of double cost for buying ranks at the "wrong" level. The only thing that might be troubled is Prestige Class qualifications, but since PrCs are optional anyway, I don't think that's a reason not to do this.
Dunelord 11-13-04, 02:50 AM	I was thinking about allowing PCs to pick one nonclass skill to have as a class skill, to kind of represent their backstory/background.
Krynus Ogrebane 11-13-04, 01:12 PM	My group doesn't use cross-class skills in our games, and I like it. It allows some diversifying, and helps when playing an unconventional character. Except for Use Magic Device, that is. We've made this a skill that can't be taken at all, unless you are a rogue and have a (house-made) feat first.
MaverickWolf 11-13-04, 06:23 PM	My group doesn't use cross-class skills in our games, and I like it. It allows some diversifying, and helps when playing an unconventional character. Except for Use Magic Device, that is. We've made this a skill that can't be taken at all, unless you are a rogue and have a (house-made) feat first.Why only rogue? Bards get it too, by core rules.
Krynus Ogrebane 11-14-04, 11:28 AM	Why only rogue? Bards get it too, by core rules. Nobody in my group would ever play a bard. :D Actually, I'm trying to move our gaming group to a core-four arrangement. "Druids" would be Priests with the appropriate domains, "Barbarians" would be Fighters with the feat Rage and certain outdoorsy skills, etc.
Xeviat-DM 11-14-04, 09:29 PM	Nobody in my group would ever play a bard. :D Actually, I'm trying to move our gaming group to a core-four arrangement. "Druids" would be Priests with the appropriate domains, "Barbarians" would be Fighters with the feat Rage and certain outdoorsy skills, etc. I have a core 5, and 5 spellcasters. There are 5 additional classes, but you can't enter them until you meet certain requirements (and your first level in them should be level 6). Due to this, I require a bit more skill ability as well. I like the cross class max rank, but all class skills are pooled arangement. That way, someone who diversifies will actually have more skills with ranks than someone who specializes, which is a much more fair trade off than it currently is. Bravo.
[GSV] Kirstar 11-15-04, 04:20 AM	we allow a few skills that would be cross class to be class for each character based on their backround and general roleplaying. for example. a wizard spends his time as a diplomat, we allow those diplomat type skills as class. the fighter before deciding to hack things up with a sword, spent a few months training as a wizard school. even though he doesnt have the aptitude for casting, he still retains knowledge arcana and spell craft as class skills. or the character who grew up around horses. has animal handling and ride as class skills etc etc. however i do like the ide you guys mentioned above.
Degobah 11-16-04, 09:58 PM	I'm not sure about the "all skills are 1:1 but your max rank is less if its not a class skill" idea. It seems that it would make it almost compulsory for every character to start as a rogue at 1st level, so they can keep maxing out skills. With my original idea, I guess its a good point about Move Silently, Hide, Spot, Listen, Use Magic Device and Tumble being too useful so everyone takes them...maybe Use Magic Device and Tumble could be changed to class features?
Xeviat-DM 11-17-04, 12:46 AM	Tumble has an armor check penalty and Use Magic Device is based on Charisma. I don't think you'll have too much use and abuse.
Annaylli 11-17-04, 11:10 AM	We've been doing all skills are 1:1 since 3.0 came out and it hasn't resulted in any kind of cherrypicking classes for skills. The classes still don't have enough skill points to max everything. They still usually take skills compatable with their class roles but do occasionally drop some points into crossclass skills for variety and flavor. Through at least 5 campaigns since 3.0 it is one house rule that has never come up as something we would drop as a house rule.
Ricky 11-17-04, 01:32 PM	I'm not sure about the "all skills are 1:1 but your max rank is less if its not a class skill" idea. It seems that it would make it almost compulsory for every character to start as a rogue at 1st level, so they can keep maxing out skills. The easy solution is to modify how to calculate max skill ranks for multiclass characters. The current system is: A) If the skill is a class skill for AT LEAST ONE of your classes, max rank = 3 + character level. B) If the skill is a class skill for NONE of your classes, max rank = 1.5 + (0.5character level). Change this to: A) If the skill is a class skill for ALL of your classes, max rank = 3 + character level. B) If the skill is a class skill for NONE of your classes, max rank = 1.5 + (0.5character level). C) If the skill is a class skill for SOME of your classes, max rank = 3 + (levels in classes where the skill is a class skill) + 0.5*(levels in classes where the skill is cross-class). Under this alternate system: a) Fighter10 would have 6.5 max ranks in Tumble. b) Rogue10 would have 13 max ranks in Tumble. c) Fighter9/Rogue1 would have 8.5 max ranks in Tumble. This minimizes the impact of cherry-picking.