Talk:Jack of All Trades (3.5e Feat)
Apparently Capitalization is Important[edit]
How confusing, there is this feat and then there is the other jack of all trades... apparently the All makes it a different feat entirely. Confusing for searches though. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 08:01, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Wiki pages are case sensitive as it turns out. Who knew?
- And yeah, this has primacy via date of creation, so fair moves and whatnot. - Tarkisflux Talk 02:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- This one, no. The other one that is tagged a [Prowess] feat? Yeah... - Tarkisflux Talk 04:37, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Who This Feat is For[edit]
It's an interesting feat, but, from what I can tell, it isn't supposed to be for scoundrel types... sort of. It lets someone compete at the skill game across the board, which sure, that's good for characters that need out of combat versatility, but really does some weird things. We've had this on a couple characters in our games, and I've really tried to gather my thoughts on this, but they're still a bit jumbled, so this is going to ramble on for longer than I'd care. I guess I can start by just type and see what happens. Okay, so it makes characters compete at the skill game, but makes them feel generic when doing so. They always have the roll for whatever is called for. Other party members need to specialize in their skills, avoid broad point allocation and coordinate as a party when someone has this. A broad-allocated character like a rogue suffers if someone else has this feat. They become suboptimal. Now, you're asking, wait, shouldn't the rogue/bard have this? They get less out of this than someone who gets few skill points. A martial character with that Int 13, especially at those lower levels, replaces your skillful character in the party. I think that might be the opposite intent, or maybe this is supposed to be for other characters or wizards or whatever when party roles are only being filled by a smaller amount of characters (like a 2 or 3 man party). Have you seen any of this interaction in groups or have you only ever grabbed this on a rogue-man? Also, poor bards, this makes bardic knowledge irrelevant. It basically scales the same, but applies to all knowledge... and jumping and profession (sailor) and crafting and everything else. Mostly just wondering what the intent was here. --Ganteka Future (talk) 16:28, 7 September 2018 (MDT)
- At level 2, it's only giving you +1 relative to not having this feat, and at level 10, it's giving you 8 less than someone actually trained in the skill has. At no point does it actually render the rogue's superior skills irrelevant. Generally speaking, there are two kinds of feats: feats that make you better at the things your character is good at, and feats that let you do something to a useful level that someone with a dedicated class can still do better. This feat is solidly in the second category, and isn't particularly excessive about it. --Foxwarrior (talk) 02:55, 8 September 2018 (MDT)
- I think I may have explained what I was thinking poorly. So yeah, at level 2, with that half ranks, you'd be at a 2 for fake ranks instead of 5 for full ranks, if you put full ranks, and that's really it. Like I mentioned, you have to specialize and put those full ranks in and only those full ranks in, all the way, every level, if that's what we're comparing to. So, most classes with an okay Intelligence are getting something like 5-7 skills they can max out. Generally, for me anyway, I like to max out perceptive skills (as defensive things), like Spot and Listen and Sense Motive. Tumble usually gets some priority because it can also save your life and if you're not garbage at Dexterity and have a big check penalty, it's worth getting up to that +14 so you never fail against a single target threatening you to roll away. That doesn't really need max ranks, but at lower levels it probably will be. Characters generally like having something else they max out, like Spellcraft or a specific Knowledge like Arcana or Religion or something as well. So, that leaves a couple points per level to spend on other stuff you'll probably spread out, which is where the funny thing we noticed happened. Someone with this feat, they already have those big skills they want maxed out, so there's not that +8 difference or whatever, usually. It's all the other skills. The things that don't get first priority. Heck, even someone with okay skill points might not even manage half-ranks in something they want to keep relevant. Those 5 ranks in craft at level 10, well, you may have been training for years, but now the Jack of All Trades is better at smithing than you, and fletching, and a better bowyer, and basketweaver and whatnot. Craft obviously isn't a great example, but it is a weird thing that sorta bothers me about what this feat does for a character and forces the rest of the party to build around. Is that a bad thing? Maybe not, and probably not, but it does weird me out and makes me wonder. A wizard with this is better at skills than a rogue without. He puts max ranks only in skills, and if his buddy who's trained those skills doesn't do the same, he won't ever be as good. I guess maybe I just like being able to spread my points around and still be notably good or decent at something when this just makes everything kinda flat. I don't know. I'd been waffling on even posting anything on this feat for like 8 months or something now since I first started noticing what it was doing in our games. Again, I probably didn't explain things well. --Ganteka Future (talk) 14:30, 8 September 2018 (MDT)
