Improved Skill List - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Improved Skill List

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
red_castle
Jun 19, 2009 20:12:04 Hi everyone, I would like some feedback on a little change I thought about to resolve one of the main complaint there is in my group against the 4th edition. A couple of my friends hate the fact that there is not many skills anymore and that with some skills being regrouped, you lose some ways to personalize your character, one of the best example is the thief skills being regrouped in 3-4 skills and this way, it lacks the specialization there was in 2nd or 3rd edition. Of course, you can always roleplay that your character can't pick a lock even if it has 15 in thievery but they prefer to have the numbers to support their roleplay. Anyway, here is the idea:

Skills work the same as before with this exception, each skills is broken in specialization field and when creating the character, the player can choose how to distribute his training point up to +7 and no less than +3 in each field. If he pick the skill focus feat, he distibute it the same way except that it's up to +4 and no less than +2. Basically, he start with +5 everywhere in the field he trained and if he choose to up one spec field to +6, he has to drop one to +4; if he drop one to +3, he can upgrade two to +6 or one to +7.

When one skill challenge involve two field at a time, like stealth, the player roll one d20 and modify it with each modifier so in this case, if he had +12 in move silently and +16 in hide and rolled 14, that would mean that he would have a total of 26 for his move and 30 for his hide check. Now the opponents would challenge him with their perception spec field of listen and notice respectively, again with only one roll modified independently for each.

The nice part with it is, I think, if a player doesn't feel like specializing he can just keep it as it is. But if a player want to had some colors to his character, it can help him do so and give him some numbers to back it.

I'm sorry if it's not really clear, I hardly speak english, but I tried to make it as clear as possible. I would like some feedback on it, maybe some more specialization field for each skills, or if there is something broken that I haven't seen, please make me aware of it. Personally, I'm fine with the skill system as it is, but it's true that it lacks some color. Here is the skill list, tell me what you think and thank you for your time!

• Acrobatic
1. Stunt
2. balance
3. Escape from grab
4. Reduce Falling

• Arcana
1. Arcana Knowledge
2. Monster Knowledge
3. Detect magic

• Athletics
1. Climb
2. Jump
3. Escape from grab
4. Swim

• Bluff
1. Fast-talk
2. Con
3. Gambling
4. Forgery
5. Disguise
6. Theatrics

• Diplomacy
1. Etiquette
2. Haggling
3. Interrogation
4. Leadership

• Dungeoneering
1. Dungeoneering knowledge
2. Forage
3. Monster knowlwdge

• Endurance

• Heal
1. First Aid
2. Treat disease

• History
1. Local history
2. Ancient History
3. Heraldry
4. Laws

• Insight
1. Human perception
2. Recognizing illusory effect

• Intimidate

• Nature
1. Forage
2. Handle Animal
3. Animal Care
4. Nature knowledge
5. Monster knowledge

• Perception
1. Listen
2. Find Traps
3. Notice
4. Find Tracks

• Religion
1. Religion knowledge
2. Monster knowledge

• Stealth
1. Move Silently
2. Hide

• Streetwise

• Thievery
1. Disable Trap
2. Open Lock
3. Pick Pocket
4. Sleight of Hand
#2
gregt_314
Jun 19, 2009 20:53:52 Sorry, what "training points" are you talking about? And doesn't this just make all characters worse at skills, across the board?
#3
herald108
Jun 20, 2009 6:04:14 I've considered the same thing.

I see what you're doing. If a PC trains in a skill, then the PC has a +5 bonus for that skill and a +5 bonus for each field. But the PC can also choose to redistribute those field bonuses (from +3 to +7).

I would do it a little differently. The +5 bonus for training drops to +3. Then, the PC can pick a field of specialization for an additional +2 (or, maybe two +1s).

The PC could 'train' in a skill multiple times. But each additional time, the PC distributes five points worth of bonuses among the skill's fields.

But as you can see it's imperfect. Your Perception and Stealth fields add complications. And you have no fields for Endurance, Intimidate or Streetwise.

I would also include more specific areas in the skill groups. It would look something like this:

Nature
-Animal Lore
-Survival (Forest)
-Survival (Desert)
-Survival (etc.)
-Knowledge (Forest)
-Knowledge (etc.)

Streetwise
-Waterdeep (Hometown)
-Cormyr
-Dalelands
-etc.
#4
red_castle
Jun 20, 2009 7:16:14 Well, I taught about adding field to every skills at first but some, like endurance, doesn't really need it. I also thought first to make them start at +3 and then adding points but that would be too hard to generate since not every skills have the same number of spec and some skill test might need the basic value.

I really love the terrain specialization of the nature skill, I haven't thought about that.

Let's say that I created a Rogue: I trained in Stealth, thievery, acrobatics athletics, bluff and perception. Here's how I could have made it, and then picked the feat skill focus for thievery:

• Acrobatic +5
1. Stunt +5
2. balance +6
3. Escape from grab +3
4. Reduce Falling +6

• Athletics +5
1. Climb +7
2. Jump +5
3. Escape from grab +4
4. Swim +4

• Bluff +5
1. Fast-talk +6
2. Con +5
3. Gambling +7
4. Forgery +5
5. Disguise +3
6. Theatrics +4

• Perception +5
1. Listen +6
2. Find Traps +6
3. Notice +5
4. Find Tracks +3

• Stealth +5
1. Move Silently +5
2. Hide +5

• Thievery +5 (+3)
1. Disable Trap +5 (+3)
2. Open Lock +7 (+4)
3. Pick Pocket +4 (+2)
4. Sleight of Hand +4 (+3)
#5
pluisjen
Jun 21, 2009 5:00:50 You could draw from the way World of Darkness handled specialisation. You still have your base score of +5 for each skill; but you describe one situation which you happen to specialize in, and you get an additional +2 in that situation.

Simple; easy; very broad and it allows for a lot more without breaking up every skill.

So a Thief could say that he's good at Lockpicking for Thievery, Bluffing for Diplomacy, Hiding for Stealth and Finding Traps for Perception. In any of those cases, he'd get an additional +2 for the skill; in all other cases he just uses the +5.

Of couse; he could also state that he's specialized in 'Hiding from the law' in his Stealth; which would give the +2 bonus against officials trying to arrest him, but not against monsters in a dungeon.
Or in 'Sensing the Arcane' in Perception, which would give him +2 on finding Arcane traps or noticing magic items, but not against mechanical traps, or divine ones.

The DM will have to make a rule on each specialization to rule out abuse, but beyond that it's very roleplaying friendly while at the same time being very easy.
#6
Einlanzer
Jun 25, 2009 9:07:53 I think feats that give bonuses to 3 or 4 related sub-skills based on occupation or character archetype is the way to go, personally. I'll try to think of a few and post them.
#7
Neutronium_Dragon
Jun 25, 2009 16:10:54 I would take one of the above two suggestions by Pluisjen or Einlanzer. While I can see that you've put a lot of work into the list, it's going to increase the complexity/overhead of the skill system much more than it increases its nuance.
#8
red_castle
Jun 25, 2009 19:55:22 Those two propositions are nice but doesn't really solve the problem my group is facing, but I'm speaking only from our perspective, we might be the only one thinking like that.

I don't think adding feats would resolve the problem: there is already so many choice of feats out there that I don't think someone would burn one just for that. And giving a bonus without taking anything just seems weird to me.

As for the complexity it brings, I don't know, I come from the 2nd edition where there was a lot of skills and same goes for the 3rd edition. 4th ed just grouped them in few skill choices, I just unbroke them and gave the possibility to the players to put some more colors to their characters. For now, they really like it. I'll just keep a list close and instead of asking for a bluff check, I'll ask for a gambling one.

By the way, if someone is interested, I changed haggling in diplomacy for negociation (for a formal one, like political agreement) and put haggling in streetwise with gather information. I also included Read Scroll in Arcana and will decide for a skill check needed to be able to read one by the level. I'll then put some scrolls with wizard dailies written on it.

Thanks for the replies guys, I'll continue to work this way since that's the way my players like it, but I like to have different ideas and see what other DMs around the world come with. Thanks again.
#9
bone_naga
Jun 26, 2009 18:35:10 Personally, I think the simpler solution is to treat trained skills as is, and if the player feels his character should be worse in one area, he takes a -2 penalty in that area, and gains a +2 bonus to another use of that skill. Really, this is mechanically the same as what you're doing, but allows for some more player freedom as the sub-skills are not already broken down, and the default is assumed that the characters still have the standard +5, so you don't have to pour over your character sheet distributing points and whatnot. Like I said, mechanically the same, I just like explaining it that way better.
#10
red_castle
Jun 26, 2009 21:06:10
Personally, I think the simpler solution is to treat trained skills as is, and if the player feels his character should be worse in one area, he takes a -2 penalty in that area, and gains a +2 bonus to another use of that skill. Really, this is mechanically the same as what you're doing, but allows for some more player freedom as the sub-skills are not already broken down, and the default is assumed that the characters still have the standard +5, so you don't have to pour over your character sheet distributing points and whatnot. Like I said, mechanically the same, I just like explaining it that way better.

Hehehe, works for me!;)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 red_castle Jun 19, 2009 20:12:04	Hi everyone, I would like some feedback on a little change I thought about to resolve one of the main complaint there is in my group against the 4th edition. A couple of my friends hate the fact that there is not many skills anymore and that with some skills being regrouped, you lose some ways to personalize your character, one of the best example is the thief skills being regrouped in 3-4 skills and this way, it lacks the specialization there was in 2nd or 3rd edition. Of course, you can always roleplay that your character can't pick a lock even if it has 15 in thievery but they prefer to have the numbers to support their roleplay. Anyway, here is the idea: Skills work the same as before with this exception, each skills is broken in specialization field and when creating the character, the player can choose how to distribute his training point up to +7 and no less than +3 in each field. If he pick the skill focus feat, he distibute it the same way except that it's up to +4 and no less than +2. Basically, he start with +5 everywhere in the field he trained and if he choose to up one spec field to +6, he has to drop one to +4; if he drop one to +3, he can upgrade two to +6 or one to +7. When one skill challenge involve two field at a time, like stealth, the player roll one d20 and modify it with each modifier so in this case, if he had +12 in move silently and +16 in hide and rolled 14, that would mean that he would have a total of 26 for his move and 30 for his hide check. Now the opponents would challenge him with their perception spec field of listen and notice respectively, again with only one roll modified independently for each. The nice part with it is, I think, if a player doesn't feel like specializing he can just keep it as it is. But if a player want to had some colors to his character, it can help him do so and give him some numbers to back it. I'm sorry if it's not really clear, I hardly speak english, but I tried to make it as clear as possible. I would like some feedback on it, maybe some more specialization field for each skills, or if there is something broken that I haven't seen, please make me aware of it. Personally, I'm fine with the skill system as it is, but it's true that it lacks some color. Here is the skill list, tell me what you think and thank you for your time! • Acrobatic 1. Stunt 2. balance 3. Escape from grab 4. Reduce Falling • Arcana 1. Arcana Knowledge 2. Monster Knowledge 3. Detect magic • Athletics 1. Climb 2. Jump 3. Escape from grab 4. Swim • Bluff 1. Fast-talk 2. Con 3. Gambling 4. Forgery 5. Disguise 6. Theatrics • Diplomacy 1. Etiquette 2. Haggling 3. Interrogation 4. Leadership • Dungeoneering 1. Dungeoneering knowledge 2. Forage 3. Monster knowlwdge • Endurance • Heal 1. First Aid 2. Treat disease • History 1. Local history 2. Ancient History 3. Heraldry 4. Laws • Insight 1. Human perception 2. Recognizing illusory effect • Intimidate • Nature 1. Forage 2. Handle Animal 3. Animal Care 4. Nature knowledge 5. Monster knowledge • Perception 1. Listen 2. Find Traps 3. Notice 4. Find Tracks • Religion 1. Religion knowledge 2. Monster knowledge • Stealth 1. Move Silently 2. Hide • Streetwise • Thievery 1. Disable Trap 2. Open Lock 3. Pick Pocket 4. Sleight of Hand
#2 gregt_314 Jun 19, 2009 20:53:52	Sorry, what "training points" are you talking about? And doesn't this just make all characters worse at skills, across the board?
#3 herald108 Jun 20, 2009 6:04:14	I've considered the same thing. I see what you're doing. If a PC trains in a skill, then the PC has a +5 bonus for that skill and a +5 bonus for each field. But the PC can also choose to redistribute those field bonuses (from +3 to +7). I would do it a little differently. The +5 bonus for training drops to +3. Then, the PC can pick a field of specialization for an additional +2 (or, maybe two +1s). The PC could 'train' in a skill multiple times. But each additional time, the PC distributes five points worth of bonuses among the skill's fields. But as you can see it's imperfect. Your Perception and Stealth fields add complications. And you have no fields for Endurance, Intimidate or Streetwise. I would also include more specific areas in the skill groups. It would look something like this: Nature -Animal Lore -Survival (Forest) -Survival (Desert) -Survival (etc.) -Knowledge (Forest) -Knowledge (etc.) Streetwise -Waterdeep (Hometown) -Cormyr -Dalelands -etc.
#4 red_castle Jun 20, 2009 7:16:14	Well, I taught about adding field to every skills at first but some, like endurance, doesn't really need it. I also thought first to make them start at +3 and then adding points but that would be too hard to generate since not every skills have the same number of spec and some skill test might need the basic value. I really love the terrain specialization of the nature skill, I haven't thought about that. Let's say that I created a Rogue: I trained in Stealth, thievery, acrobatics athletics, bluff and perception. Here's how I could have made it, and then picked the feat skill focus for thievery: • Acrobatic +5 1. Stunt +5 2. balance +6 3. Escape from grab +3 4. Reduce Falling +6 • Athletics +5 1. Climb +7 2. Jump +5 3. Escape from grab +4 4. Swim +4 • Bluff +5 1. Fast-talk +6 2. Con +5 3. Gambling +7 4. Forgery +5 5. Disguise +3 6. Theatrics +4 • Perception +5 1. Listen +6 2. Find Traps +6 3. Notice +5 4. Find Tracks +3 • Stealth +5 1. Move Silently +5 2. Hide +5 • Thievery +5 (+3) 1. Disable Trap +5 (+3) 2. Open Lock +7 (+4) 3. Pick Pocket +4 (+2) 4. Sleight of Hand +4 (+3)
#5 pluisjen Jun 21, 2009 5:00:50	You could draw from the way World of Darkness handled specialisation. You still have your base score of +5 for each skill; but you describe one situation which you happen to specialize in, and you get an additional +2 in that situation. Simple; easy; very broad and it allows for a lot more without breaking up every skill. So a Thief could say that he's good at Lockpicking for Thievery, Bluffing for Diplomacy, Hiding for Stealth and Finding Traps for Perception. In any of those cases, he'd get an additional +2 for the skill; in all other cases he just uses the +5. Of couse; he could also state that he's specialized in 'Hiding from the law' in his Stealth; which would give the +2 bonus against officials trying to arrest him, but not against monsters in a dungeon. Or in 'Sensing the Arcane' in Perception, which would give him +2 on finding Arcane traps or noticing magic items, but not against mechanical traps, or divine ones. The DM will have to make a rule on each specialization to rule out abuse, but beyond that it's very roleplaying friendly while at the same time being very easy.
#6 Einlanzer Jun 25, 2009 9:07:53	I think feats that give bonuses to 3 or 4 related sub-skills based on occupation or character archetype is the way to go, personally. I'll try to think of a few and post them.
#7 Neutronium_Dragon Jun 25, 2009 16:10:54	I would take one of the above two suggestions by Pluisjen or Einlanzer. While I can see that you've put a lot of work into the list, it's going to increase the complexity/overhead of the skill system much more than it increases its nuance.
#8 red_castle Jun 25, 2009 19:55:22	Those two propositions are nice but doesn't really solve the problem my group is facing, but I'm speaking only from our perspective, we might be the only one thinking like that. I don't think adding feats would resolve the problem: there is already so many choice of feats out there that I don't think someone would burn one just for that. And giving a bonus without taking anything just seems weird to me. As for the complexity it brings, I don't know, I come from the 2nd edition where there was a lot of skills and same goes for the 3rd edition. 4th ed just grouped them in few skill choices, I just unbroke them and gave the possibility to the players to put some more colors to their characters. For now, they really like it. I'll just keep a list close and instead of asking for a bluff check, I'll ask for a gambling one. By the way, if someone is interested, I changed haggling in diplomacy for negociation (for a formal one, like political agreement) and put haggling in streetwise with gather information. I also included Read Scroll in Arcana and will decide for a skill check needed to be able to read one by the level. I'll then put some scrolls with wizard dailies written on it. Thanks for the replies guys, I'll continue to work this way since that's the way my players like it, but I like to have different ideas and see what other DMs around the world come with. Thanks again.
#9 bone_naga Jun 26, 2009 18:35:10	Personally, I think the simpler solution is to treat trained skills as is, and if the player feels his character should be worse in one area, he takes a -2 penalty in that area, and gains a +2 bonus to another use of that skill. Really, this is mechanically the same as what you're doing, but allows for some more player freedom as the sub-skills are not already broken down, and the default is assumed that the characters still have the standard +5, so you don't have to pour over your character sheet distributing points and whatnot. Like I said, mechanically the same, I just like explaining it that way better.
#10 red_castle Jun 26, 2009 21:06:10	Personally, I think the simpler solution is to treat trained skills as is, and if the player feels his character should be worse in one area, he takes a -2 penalty in that area, and gains a +2 bonus to another use of that skill. Really, this is mechanically the same as what you're doing, but allows for some more player freedom as the sub-skills are not already broken down, and the default is assumed that the characters still have the standard +5, so you don't have to pour over your character sheet distributing points and whatnot. Like I said, mechanically the same, I just like explaining it that way better. Hehehe, works for me!;)