Ch. 5 Key Skills for Domain Actions

[The Jew]

I recognize it would make it more complex, but I think it would be useful. I don't mean a full skill list for each culture or race, just a line detailing a few changes.
for example.
Vos: lose disguise and forgery. gain climb and profession oratory.
Dwarves: lose disguise and forgery. gain climb and craft
Brecht: lose survival. gain profession merchant

While off the top of my head those seem like reasonable skills for each group to lose and gain, i'm not making an argument for the particular skills, just the formula.

[irdeggman]

Vos hate bards (or at least have almost disrespect for them as do the Khinasi) - so profession (oratory) wouldn't work there either. The Vos are people of action, barbarians/rangers primarily with a few fighters. IMO most of their great leaders in history were actually fighters vice barbarians but their domains quickly fell apart because of their inherent lack of structure in their society. Somethng about leaning towrds the chaotic and definitil awar from the lawful side.

I am absolutely against having a separate noble class for every culture, which is the way things are going here. It makes the process and product far too complicated. Heck we are already adding a variant for separate paladin classes - this book will end up being 500+ pages just trying to account for what everyone wants in there.

[Osprey]

I am absolutely against having a separate noble class for every culture, which is the way things are going here. It makes the process and product far too complicated. Heck we are already adding a variant for separate paladin classes - this book will end up being 500+ pages just trying to account for what everyone wants in there.

Which is why I favored multiclassing for paladins and left it at that. Generally, I'm more in favor of tweaking and fine-tuning than trying to redesign everything from the ground-up. So in this we can definitely agree. Keep it simple.

Same goes here for the noble: I'm opting for a slightly more freeform version than is in the revised Chapter 1, something of a combination of the BRCS noble and the new 3.5 proposed noble, which I think is mostly dead cool but I really miss a few bonus feats now and again for some character individualization and fine tuning reflected in character abilities. There are more cool feats than ever, I personally enjoy the flavor they add, and thus I'm generally against being stingy with bonus feats. I also like the flexibility of bonus feats you can choose vs. bonus feats that are ascribed by class descriptions, especially if balanced with some unique class abilities.


I read through the Noble postings, but found that the discussion isn't as applicable now as perhaps it once was since much of the discussion focused around balancing a classs for 3.0 rather than 3.5. It is apparent to me that all of the primary magical classes were powered down in 3.5, while the others were cranked up a notch (with the sad exception of the fighter, who got...Intimidate...woohoo! One little consolation prize for the 3.5 fighter).

There is an obvious comparison between the 3.5 Noble and Ranger, and this is the basis I have been using, except that I consider the Ranger to still be higher-powered overall than my proposed Noble - the only advantage for the Noble is the broader range of feat choices for the Noble, while the Ranger is quite narrowly consigned as far as class abilities go. But he gots a lot of goodies and 2 strong saves to boot, so there no slouches overall. If there were "point values" for characters I bet the Ranger and high-level Rogues (who get special abilities or bonus feats at 10th level and every 3 levels thereafter) in 3.5 would be the highest point characters around.

************************************************** **************

Personally, I wouldn't care if Disguise was stripped off the noble list entirely. It seems far more a rogue than noble skill, I think it was added simply because it is Charisma-based and socially oriented.

I think Survival in some ways very appropriate to the Brecht, as part of what they do is Exploration - a big part of what they do, in fact. There seems to be this notion that since the Brecht are fast and fencers, they must be skinny and frail and have poor fortitude. I find this a silly steroetype. A race from a place as harsh as the Great Bay, and who spends a lot of time at sea and exploring the wilds, will be a hardy lot for certain.

For easy reference, here are the listed racial background skills for humans in the rev. Chapter 1:

Anuirean Background skills: Bluff, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Knowledge (Nobility).

Brecht Background skills: Balance, Craft (Any one), Diplomacy, Profession (Any one), Sleight of Hand.

Khinasi Background skills: Diplomacy, Knowledge (Any), Ride, Spellcraft.

Rjurik Background skills: Hide, Move Silently, Spot, Survival.

Vos Background skills: Handle Animal, Intimidate, Spot, Survival.


I think this covers the human ones aptly: P/Merchant is covered for Brechts if they choose it, Noble or otherwise; Oratory is actually a Perform skill, which is a Noble class skill anyways; and Climb hardly seems like a "noble endeavor." That's what scouts and rangers are for. heck, even Fighters have climb, but nobles rarely live on high mountain peaks and have to climb there. They are the privelaged ones after all.

Dwarves are stickier: I definitely agree with the idea of dropping Disguise and Forgery from their lists, i just don't think it's worthwhile to tweak the noble for each race. It is enough to allow Craft as a class skill for dwarves, I think. Few if any PC's are going to give their dwarven nobles Disguise and Forgery anyways, wouldn't you agree?

Osprey

[The Jew]

I must cave to Ospreys argument. The cultural background skills do seem a good enough list as far as additional skills for each cultures nobles. It won't provide any additional benefit to Anuireans or Vos, but the Noble class is really built for Anuireans anyway and Vos are the least likely to take the class. As long as dwarves get Craft and since the Khinasi are getting spellcraft it seems only fair that elven nobles get spellcraft, though I guess its not really that big of a deal.

[tcharazazel]

Just a small point here, yall mean perform (oratory) not profession (oratory), heheh. Technically someone who practices oratory (the art of public speaking) is called an orator or public speaker. If you mean what the PBH calls oratory (epic, ode, storytelling) then prob the best equivalent is profession (storyteller or poet).

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by tcharazazel@May 13 2004, 05:44 PM
Just a small point here, yall mean perform (oratory) not profession (oratory), heheh. Technically someone who practices oratory (the art of public speaking) is called an orator or public speaker. If you mean what the PBH calls oratory (epic, ode, storytelling) then prob the best equivalent is profession (storyteller or poet).

Absolutely correct I had meant to type perform (oratory) not profession (oratory) - the rest of the logic was sound though.

I have previously covered that being old thing right ?

[tcharazazel]

heheh, old? Old is when you start recounting the good old days and the only people who know what you're talking about can't remember what day today is.

You're not that old, bro.

[tcharazazel]

Ok, to get us back on track to what the thread was intended for do we all agree that these should be the key skills for the following domain actions?


Create/Contest/Rule Province: Administrate.

Create/Contest/Rule Guild Holdings: Profession (Merchant)

Create/Contest/Rule Law Holdings: Knowledge (Law)

Create/Contest/Rule Temple Holdings: Diplomacy

Create/Contest/Rule Sources: Knowledge (Nature)

Create ley lines: Knowledge (Arcana)

Coronation and Invest Province: Lead


Additionally, Fighters in BR would now have K/Law as a class skill to make them better law regents.

We all like these proposed changes? If so, then we can get back to finishing up the Master feats for Ch 1

[Benjamin]

Originally posted by tcharazazel@May 14 2004, 06:49 AM
We all like these proposed changes?

Hmmm. Well, uhm.... yeah. I'll live with that. Perhaps not what I would choose, but I agree that they work well. I like the diversity. You get my vote.

[Don E]

Originally posted by tcharazazel@May 14 2004, 12:49 PM
Create/Contest/Rule Province: Administrate.
Create/Contest/Rule Guild Holdings: Profession (Merchant)
Create/Contest/Rule Law Holdings: Knowledge (Law)
Create/Contest/Rule Temple Holdings: Diplomacy
Create/Contest/Rule Sources: Knowledge (Nature)
Create ley lines: Knowledge (Arcana)
Coronation and Invest Province: Lead

While I haven't playtested using the listed skills, it appears from my experience in other campaigns that the temple regent comes out much 'easier' than the other holdings' regents. In a political and/or mostly social interaction based campaign it is my experience that diplomacy is one of the most useful skills to have. Great for the cleric, but the other regents' holdings now require skills that most likely would not be used nearly as frequently. I also see diplomacy as just as relevant for all the other holdings (bar sources) as it is for temples.

While people have made good arguments for not using knowledge (religion) as the deciding skill for temple holdings, I think it might be fair to choose this one instead. Perform (oratory) might be another choice, but like lead and/or diplomacy it can be seens as useful for all holdings. Depending on how much one see rule/contest temple as a function of proselytizing rather than politicking, it might be appropriate.

And will it be the same skills used for RP collection?

Cheers,
E