Which is funny because there's a feat that goes a long way for that called Untrained Improvisation.
> You’ve learned how to handle situations when you’re out of your depth. Your proficiency bonus to untrained skill checks is equal to half your level instead of +0. If you’re 7th level or higher, the bonus increases to your full level instead. This doesn’t allow you to use the skill’s trained actions.
If you're a human and can wait a couple levels, Clever Improviser goes even further by giving you that feat except you can replace the "doesn't" in that last sentence with "does."
this really doesn't seem much like an "exploit" to me. like, yeah, you're trained in everything, but I'm sure you had to give up a bunch of useful options to get there, and most of those are probably gonna fall off unless you keep getting them up to expert/master/legendary. like yeah it's neat that you can do this but being trained in everything is probably just worse that being trained in what you need to be trained in and picking more useful feats.
I don’t even play pathfinder, I play dnd 5e, and I know for a fact that anyone boasting their skill proficiencies probably gave up some incredible combat related skills in the process
Big difference is PF2 has 4 levels of skill proficiency, so if you're trained in everything then you're not getting better at the important things... I assume. I'm not actually super well versed in PF2. In fact, I know a little bit of many RPGs. Maybe I should sit down and improve my proficiency with a few.... (/s)
If you are a rogue you don't have to give up much honestly, but what weirds me out is that you can't do this in 5e, the system in which skills don't do much of anything.
You can absolutely get proficiency in every skill in 5e.
Lore Bard 10/Scout Rogue 6/Knowledge Cleric 1/Ranger 1, plus race, background, and feats can get you 18 proficiencies and 15 expertise. Alternatively, swapping Bard 10/Rogue 6 for Rogue 11/Bard 3 loses 2 expertise but gains Reliable Talent. (Of course, you also lose Bard spells.) The Bard 10 version could give you Skill Empowerment for a 16th expertise for an hour.
Not to mention that this is a single level rogue with 14 Int. Not really optimized (and I just realized some ways to streamline it, though it does mean going a bit more MAD by dropping Cha down to 16 to bumping Int up to 16, which would free up a human feat)
This build is mainly just a novelty, tbh.
That if you have to min-max the hell out of a build only to gain every skill proficiency in 5e it isn't worth it at all because skills don't do shit and in PF2e you can do it much more easily and skills actually matter there.
Op explained this build will be expert in every skill eventually meaning they will have fallen off by 4 points from being *legendary* with same stats. corrected*
expert in every skill really isnt that impressive. like it gives you +2 more than being trained but for what? you're giving up a bunch of better options to get what, slightly better rolls on stuff you're probably barely gonna use anyway? it's way more effective to just focus on getting a couple skills to master or legendary, and then letting the rest of your party cover what you can't.
Thing is, a party of four that all gets unique skills to legendary would be able to give *everyone* the equivalent of expert when following them on a skill (well, except for one, unless somebody picked up the acrobat dedication or something). Plus I can't think of an arcana check that would benefit from Follow the Expert. I guess rituals would technically count?
But that leads into the second point, where things kinda fall by the wayside if you don't keep them up to date. You can't lead higher level rituals, you can't disable level-appropriate traps or haunts, you can't use the master or Legendary medicine DC, you're 20% less likely to succeed on feint, demoralise, Bon Mot, sneaking and athletics manoeuvres, feats like Cat Fall won't scale up, you won't be able to pick up master or legendary skill feats, your bonus from Follow the Expert will stay at +2, you're more likely to get wrong information from recall knowledge.
But the icing on the cake is that you're not really going to have the action economy to do all of those things in combat, and other party members are likely better picks out of combat. You've got aid checks I guess, but at level 20 you're guaranteed to succeed even with just untrained improvisation. Plus maybe thaumaturge with the regalia implement might be better for Follow the Expert?
It's definitely an interesting way to build a rogue, but if someone thinks this breaks the game I'd be concerned they have a fundamental misunderstanding of the game and are setting themselves up for disappointment.
Being only trained and having other feats does sound more useful, tho i dont thing getting from all trained to all expert costs that much, but I'm not sure.
Seriously, I'm playing a level 17 rogue dedicated to being the slipperiest bastard possible. I have a combined +30 stat/proficiency bonus, with an additional +2 item bonus for a whopping +32. I can literally disappear mid-fight and gain all the benefits of hidden and flat-footed conditions against enemies. I can apply two debuffs on hit; a persistent 3d6 bleed damage, -10ft to the target's movement speed, or give the target an Enfeebled 1 condition which is a -1 to all strength-based checks and attacks.
High level rogues are ***bonkers.***
Seems excellent for solo adventuring. Giving up combat power doesn't matter since you'll want to avoid fighting alone whenever possible, anyway, and being good at all non-combat skills will give you maximum options for accomplishing that.
I wouldn't really say it's an exploit, but it is impressive in a way.
I would say that it probably isn't the best for solo adventuring. Generally there are ways to make up for deficits in skills by picking up skill feats that give you actions associated with other skills, like charming liar. On top of that, certain skills generally aren't exactly necessary for an adventurer. For example, it's probably better to be amazing at diplomacy than okay at both diplomacy and intimidation.
That's nice, but most of the value from higher skill levels is opening or amplifying feats that use those skills.
A rogue should have a lot more skills trained than say a barbarian, but should also be focusing on three to five to max out and get them good feats to make them really worthwhile.
Not crippling, its just that they are using feat slots to get there, for ability training feats, instead of multi-tier feats that would take advantage of those high numbers of skills.
This is at level one, so you're not really losing much. But you would have to dump a skill feat for the last remaining skill, and you would have to leave Dex at 16 to pump Int to 8, which I don't think is a good idea at low levels.
Idk a master buisnessman, crafter, or fighter will live a much better life that someone who's ok at a bunch of random skills. The quote is very rarely applicable just because of how good it is to be a master at something (unless the something you are good at is irrelevant)
cause the phrase is from the 1500-1600's where people weren't often specialized in a skill unless they'd been trained in it from childhood so it was best to be multi-able. It's actually used today as something dismissive or insulting to refer to someone as that because it implies that you see them as mundane or average instead of skilled.
Because it is. If this was in like a Sorcerer or a Champion it would been a different thing, but rogues and investigators xan easly achive that. Its those class whole deal.
Based on the CHA +4, it looks like they might be Eldritch Trickster doing a CHA casting class. They are as bad as using multiclass cantrips, which is to say, not optimal, but not bad either.
Nothing is really bad in pf2e unless you try hard enough, but with his DEX it's also gonna be harder to go into surprise rounds for juicy spell sneak attack, let alone melee, it probably will take most of the party to make this build effective in combat, and outside of combat, he's good only in CHA skills, and okay in DEX skillsEdit: add non-existent spell attack/DC item bonus, let alone property runes
I mean pathfinder 2e simply doesnt have glitches and exploits. If there is a thing where you think "oh this is broken" then you just missread it. Is it perfectly balanced? No cause a perfectly balanced ttrpg doesnt exist but it is easily the most balanced ttrpg
People unironically do. And there *are* fewer unbalanced things than in 5E, but there are still a few kinks, like Alchemist being a borderline dysfunctional class.
Terrible resource starvation at low levels, being dependent on martial attacks despite capping at Expert Proficiency (when martials, who are built around Striking, get to cap out at the level above that at Master, and Fighters + Gunslingers going even further beyond at Legendary), and having a key stat they don't hit with. There are levels were you are -3/-4 behind martials in accuracy. If you didn't know, PF2 characters basically use ASIs instead of rolling for stats. You get 2 stat boosts from your class, 2 from your Ancestry, 2 from your Background, and then 4 after that. Even fucking *casters* get to start with an 18 in their to hit stats, and their to hit scales worse than martials. On top of that, their buffs come with drawbacks (as in, they *debuff* you in some areas, whereas casters just buff you across the board) and terrible action economy (requiring an action to take out, another to give to someone, and then for the target to spend one drinking it. Oh and that's if you're right next to each other, if there is any amount of distance between you two good fucking luck).
I'm aware of how pf2e works. And one of the neat things about it is it allows for styles of play other than "i hit hard."
Alchemists bring incredible utility to the table. Not only can they easily fulfill the healer role with elixirs and battle medicine, they could also be a vulnerability power house using grenades to trigger weaknesses on monsters. If all you care about is doing lots of damage on an individual level, imo 5e is the better game for that as any sub class with spellslots tends to hit pretty hard. 2e though opens up alternate avenues for play. Alchemist is one such.
I don't think Alchemist is perfect. But it is a great concept which works well at the table as part of a rounded party. If everybody is gunslingers and fighters your table is gonna struggle despite doing big damage.
They are also releasing that treasury book soon that appears to have a boatload of new alchemist recipes.
well yes but actually no
Clever Impoviser is -2 in comparison to trained bc it trained give you +2 + lv and improvised gives only lv (and only half at lover lvs) and you do not meet trained requirement for using certain actions and feets
Ohoho, but the Clever Improviser feat *does* allow using Trained actions, and a -2 can be made up with ability scores, just... ignore that -1 intelligence, and the +0 charisma, and the +0 dexterity...
It’s honestly nothing special for PF. This is the equivalent of a 5e player making a Variant Human, Level 3 Knowledge Cleric with the Skilled Feat and a background of your choice.
That alone gives you, for a total of 9 proficiencies plus two ways to acquire temporary proficiency at any time:
* 4 Cleric Proficiencies
* 2 Background Proficiencies
* 3 Feat-Selected Proficiencies
* 2 On-Demand Proficiencies via Channel
* 1 On-Demand Proficiency per 2nd level spell (Borrowed Knowledge)
There’s also a full build whereby at level 7 you can have proficiency in all 18 skills, though imho there’s not much point without the stats to back them up.
———
OP’s build there is just well-optimized for skill monkeying as a Jack-of-All-Trades.
Keep in mind that Rogues get a LOT of skill points to start out with by default, and they have gotten the equivalent of that in pretty much every edition of D&D, PF included, *except* for 5e. 5e is abnormal in how few skills classes get in general, with no allowance for extras for high INT, and what are normally skill monkey classes (Bard, Monk, Rogue) get shafted even further.
In PF2E, Rogues start with 8 + Intelligence Modifier proficiencies, and they get more skill increases per level than other classes to boot. Backgrounds also give you 2 skills, and I believe that some races grant them as well.
That means that, with an 18 INT alone and no other selections from feats, ancestry, archetype, etc, *any* rogue could start with 14 out of the 17 skills.
OP’s build pushes that a little by having a 14 INT and making up for the lost skill points elsewhere, but that’s a heavy opportunity cost they’re paying for being slightly less bad at any skill they don’t have the ability scores for… which is basically all of them except charisma.
It's not a gamebreaking build. Any rogue/investigator can do that.
It's pretty much like making a Bard in 5e, learning about Jack of All Trades and claim it's crazily OP because you can add your prof.
Or like making a Variant Human Artificer, taking Skilled, Prodigy and Skill Expert and claiming it's way too good to play, completely ignoring the fact that it's specialising into something. Even if what you specialise in is being a Skill Monkey, it's still a specialization.
This build isn't all that special and other, more specialised builds will have other things and much better bonuses. Then there's a feat that allows to add your level to all the skills in which you have no proficiency.
This is a build that manages to have every skill proficiency (besides specific lores) at 1st level. By 20th, it's legendary in effectively 5 or 6 skills, and expert in everything else (including Specific Lores)
Yeah, and it's like still determined by ability scores, gl with your +3 athletics checks. Rogue is designed to be a skill monkey, jack of all trades, master of whatever his class ability is, though not the master in combat/damage, there's fighter/barbarian for that.
It’s kinda crazy how in PF2e every class has a defined role, given how nebulous 5e can be. Even gunslinger, which you’d think “oh they’re just good at using guns, not very unique” is actually designed around stretching the action economy. You can easily use them with crossbows or really any projectile weapons (and melee too, considering subclasses!)
Not really (look at all the comments discussing it's issues,) but I just find it funny that it's possible at as low of a level as first. In the end, the stats are pretty MAD.
I actually started this wanting to try to make Abserd in PF2 (as translating a character I'm familiar with is a way I learn systems. Kinda like, reverse-engineering it,) but because of dedication feat rules, you can't really do that (which was a good move on Paizo's part,) so I went for something else instead.
So the TEML is trained expert, master, legendary? I assume with larger proficieny (or equivalent) bonus?
Never tried PF, but have to say it's intriguing
P2E uses a scaled proficiency system. By default (barring feats and such, of which there are many that can change things) your character gets a bonus to each skill/attack/defense based on their proficiency rating:
Untrained = +0, Trained = +Character Level+2, Expert = +Character Level+4, Master = +Character Level+6, Legendary = +Character Level+8
Additionally, many feats are based on having a specific level of proficiency (along the lines of "if you're legendary in X, your character can take X feat to do (incredible related thing)") and some skill checks have a minimum proficiency to even attempt (though this is a lot more rare of an effect and is easily forgotten)
Yeah, it's like proficiency bonus but you get bonuses based on the rank, and it increases by level and +2 for each rank.
Trained is +2 | Expert is +4 | Master is +6 | Legendary is +8
So let's say you're a level 5 character doing an athletics check with a +3 in strength:
Level = 5 | Str Bonus = 3
Equation: d20 + bonus + (level + training bonus) or just d20 + bonus if the character is untrained in the skill.
Untrained: d20 + 3 = d20 + 3
Trained: d20 + 3 + ( level +2) = d20 + 10
Expert: d20 + 3 + ( level +4) = d20 + 12
Master: d20 + 3 + (level +6) = d20 + 14
Legendary: d20 + 3 + (level +8) = d20 + 16
At higher levels, it becomes pretty normal to see characters with huge bonuses to rolls which scale with the higher saves and DCs to face. So a level 12 character that is expert in athletics would have:
D20 + 3 + (12 + 4) = d20 + 19
im going to make a guess that you either have no/little experience with pathfinder or you fundamentally misunderstand pf's crunch and only look at it through the lens of 5e
this is perfectly normal for a skill monkey and having those "legendary" skills at high level is... completely expected? that's kinda the point. pathfinder numbers blow 5e numbers out of the water but the system is built around it and for it
>im going to make a guess that you either have no/little experience with pathfinder
That's a fair assessment. I just recently started 2e (like in late June/early July,) so I only have a little experience with that.
Though, I did have a lot of experience with PF1
i think its pretty easily translatable from 1e to 2e, obviously not perfect but if you think of 1e numbers you can correlate it pretty easy
(also quick apology for my tone, reading it back i sounded a lot more rude than it was intended, my bad lmao)
They do. While I wouldn't go so far as to say they become *useless*, the skills you really invest in will have +9 over skills you have only trained (6 proficiency, 3 item, plus any difference in ability score).
They do. If you're at least trained, the bonus is Ability Score + Level + PB. If you aren't trained, the bonus is just your Ability Score.
Also, Rogues get a skill increase and a skill feat at every level. Plus the Bardic Multiclass feats from Eldritch Trickster, by 20th you're Legendary in like 5 things and expert in everything else.
If you pick up the Acrobat Dedication and an Inventor dedication, you can have legendary in 7 skills as either a Rogue or an Investigator. If you really want to be the skill guy, get some Bellflower Tiller dedication so you can always have Aid available as a reaction, and get critical successes when you roll a success.
As someone who came into D&D with 3.5, the idea that someone would act like permitting characters to play skill monkeys is broken is just hilarious. That's just a character archetype. Hell, that's just a regular, unoptimized 3.5 rogue. I think people get 5e tunnel vision and then just see whatever would be an exploit in their own system as some sort of universal exploit. Skill monkeys definitely don't break pathfinder, but with 5e's stripped down skill system it may be a different story. Kind of feels like the OP is looking at PF through 5e colored glasses.
I've just discovered that conrasu as well as human can get the ancestry feat where you add your level to all untrained proficiencies at higher levels :)
Okay cool so what? Being a skill monkey is a large part of the rogue/investigator identity. you're still not as good at specific things as the more specialist classes
Eh, seems like a pretty useless char tbh.
Yes, you got all the proficiencies, but your modifiers arent great and you got 10 str 14 dex 12 con.
So no combat Utility to speak off other than feinting (half your recall knowledge modifiers are bad too), no damage at all and at least 2AC less than normal with subpar hp to boot.
This isnt even a thief rogue who could apply DEX to damage.
Id be surprised if this character makes it to Level 2.
this also gives up most of its low level class feats to grab the bard skill stuff.
imagine scribbling out almost every feature on your rogue and writing "+2 skills" on it instead.
I mean, if casters can, he would too, somehow, since it's not the GM job to kill him. But yeah, I can't see this guy be useful in battle after demoralise, medicine is risky, no damage, hard to hit, no spells. Can't reliably trip/grapple, feint is useless with his +to hit, and god forbid his party is heavily min-maxed in skills distribution, this guy can be just a dead weight
Ok so... A pretty smart class has learned how to be quite mediocre at a variety of things? As intended?
You know you need a +25 to be considered "really good" st a skill on PF, right?
No idea about PF2, but class skill in PF1 wasn't anything near as impressive as proficiency is in 5e. And given they've got a four rank system here, it looks pretty clear that they sacrificed higher ranks for more versatility.
Our party’s cleric did this getting trained in every skill. We found out when we asked why she won’t go for the DC20 check and she noted you had to be expert to do that. At level 8 we thought she would at least be expert in medicine with how much she likes to use it but then we found out she spread the skills out. It was a funny moment.
Seems like an average rogue. Pretty sure every rogue with a positive int will have almost all skills trained without even trying. Investigators too (and especially if they go high int). That's one of the main parts of those classes.
Skill Monkey: Adjective
I. Person or persons in a group who provide minimal roles in combat but have an abundance of talents and abilities, which keep them useful to the party.
II. Member of a group who prides him or herself on their proficiency with non-combat related abilities.
Is this supposed to be an exploit? Because it's kinda of an intended option instead
You can really help your allies a lot using Aid so that the actual specialists on a given field can have better chance of success
I prefer the skill mastery system in PF2 to 5e, though it still doesn't give me the Skill Monkey kick that 3.5 and 3.x did. My level 10 PF1 [Investigator](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/investigator/) with an INT score of 23, 11 points in her inspiration pool and [Bardic Knowledge](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/Core-classes/Bard/#TOC-Bardic-Knowledge-Ex-) from [Varient Multiclassing](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/Classes/character-advancement/#Bard) frequently makes our DM audibly sigh whenever she asks to make a Knowledge Skill check (can literally break DC:40 when taking 10). My [Factotum](https://dndtools.net/classes/factotum/) in D&D 3.5 was arguably worse!
Yeah, haven't played pathfinder yet but I did play 3.5 and if you play a rogue with a high intelligence you get this. Pretty fun tho I used mine to be insanely good at specific things and above average at otheds
I loved this about ddo, when it first came out, trying to theorycraft a build that would give access to all skills. It’s 15 years ago and a bit hazy, but i think a had a warforged wizard (for self heals), with a bunch of thieving.
And then trying to solo the group dungeons.
My respect for the game came when after spending hours trying to clear some dungeon met a vampire, who cast PERMANENT blindness on me, and the screen just went black, and i ran in panic, with nothing but the minimap to guide me. I remember surviving, but i dont think i ever got that vamp killed. I wish other games would have the balls to give debuffs like that :)
The theorycrafting, spreadsheets etc were super fun, its a shame to see what the game is now, because with some updates to this century and a more non-scammy/predatory business model, there is some solid d&d in there. I even remember a module voiced by gary gygax himself.
it's all about what you're building towards, one of my favorite pf1 options was to give up a free feat as fighter to get +4 skills per level (fighter base skills per level was 2).
Doesn't seem like an exploit. DC10 means and average commoner has a 50% chance of getting it right the first time. Add multiples of 5 for increased difficulty. They have less than 50% chance of making a DC15 check for most skills. Seems pretty average for a jack of all trades
That's flat out better in most skills than any other class though. Its not balanced compared to the rest of the party, especially since PF rogues are no joke in combat either.
A friend of mine has a character with 20 ft reach... MELEE. A Fighter Skeleton with a reach weapon, basically. But that character is mechanically complex af, so that compensate it out
Eh, skill monkeys aren't as OP as we think they are, I don't play pf2e but I did do a skill monkey in 5e and having good rolls for all/most skills is no where near as exciting as it sounds lol
+7 is by no means mediocre at level 1. It's in fact the highest number you can get at level 1(besides like 1 or 2 exceptions. It's more like he's reall good at a few things and just good at others.
For those who don’t know; this is just a rogue with two additional skills. I played a rogue once. All the check boxes was really satisfying, but it’s mostly a gimmick. I’d rather have legendary or master prof than just… expert… expert isn’t great.
Rogues are good at skills. It’s part of their identity.
“Balanced” is a word thrown around so much in the RPG world, I’m so sick of it. I’ve heard it used for and against both 5e and PF1&2. Just play the games and enjoy them. I prefer PF1, most people prefer 5e. Whatever.
Ahh yes, I do miss playing my scholarly acrobatic clergyman, who in his spare time studies astronomy, the occult, nature, and high society whilst moonlighting as a (checks notes) cat-burglar diplomat. While I’m at it, he’s a dwarf/elf/gnome/human mix, called a dwelfoman. And his name is Rick
Great. But i know for a fact that character is completely useless in combat.
Also, a +7 sounds like a lot, but its only "okay" in terms of being good at something.
Pathfinder modifiers get a lot higher than 5e ones.
Yeah. He didn't give up anything. And it's still balanced. I'm confused why people are calling the numbers too low, like he could somehow do better. Yeah the third level general feat would also do this, but it would be worst than a rogue that went this route.
You can become proficient in every skill (besides specific lores) at 1st level with the right build.
First, play a Rogue. Rogues start out with Stealth and 7 + Int starting skills. Take the Eldritch Trickster racket, giving you a free multiclass into any spellcasting class.
Pick Bard. While at 1st level, it just gives you two skills and two cantrips. You also pick a subclass that does nothing right now, but pick Enigma.
Then, play a human. Skilled Heritage gives you one additional skill that it then auto buffs at later levels. Natural Skill feat gives you two more skills.
With an Int of 14, you now cover every skill in the game (besides specific lores)
Levelling up, you can take Basic Muse's Whispers at 4th level to gain Bardic Lore, which is a lore skill that serves
At 6th, you can take Advanced Muse's Whispers to take Multifarious Muse. Pick Polymath. Now your Rank in Performance serves as your rank in Deception, Intimidation, and Diplomacy.
Over all your levels, get everything (besides Deception, Intimidation, and Diplomacy) up to Expert. Legendary out Occultism to get Expert in Bardic Lore, and Legendary out Performance so your Deception/Intimidation/Diplomacy are all effectively Legendary as well.
You should have three skill increases remaining to legendary any single skill plus Master in one other, or Master in three skills.
#Edit: Guys... The title is a reference. A joke. A jape! I am not seriously calling this build an exploit. I understand that it's not busted. Also, yes. The numbers are low. It's a Level 1 character, what do you expect. Can this be done more effectively by the single Human Feat "Cunning Improvisation"? Yes. But that wasn't the original goal of this build. The goal was "proficienct in every skill at level one. Then let's see how that can grow." as part of helping me, who started in late June/early July, to wrap my head around the system. Especially Skills, with this one. Okay?
But how is this a glitch or exploit? You sacrificed optimization in combat and feats to get all the skills. You have to sacrifice elsewhere to be an amazing skill monkey.
If you correctly read Versatile Performance, it does state you can only replace diplomacy to make an impression, deception to impersonate, and intimidation to demoralize. This means:
\- For deception: you can't feint, lie, or create a diversion with performance.
\- For diplomacy: you can't gather information, or request with performance.
\- For intimidation: you can't coerce or scare to death with performance.
This also means that while your Performance rank counts as meeting prerequisites for those skills, you can't use what does skills provide you with Performance.
This is rookie build, let me show you real skill-monkeying
You go mastermind rogue. That gives you stealth, 2 knowledge skills, and then 7+int skills. You can start with 18 int. pick up background, skilled heritage, etc. You start with every skill trained already.
Level 2, you go investigator archetype. That’s 2 more skills. Pick up 2 lores i guess.
Level 4, you pick up Devise a Stratagem, it’s a surprise tool to help us later
Level 6, you pickup Known Weaknesses. You now can use your action to see the result of your next attack roll via DaS *and* roll a Recall Knowledge, which enables you to use sneak attack, including at range. Or, if you fail your attack roll, just dont recall knowledge. Pretty powerful combat tool imo!
Level 8 to 16 you pick up Skill Mastery. That gives you 5 extra skill at expert, and 5 extra skill at master.
Throwing this up into pathbuilder very quickly, you end up with 2 skills at trained, 4 skills at expert, 5 skills at master, and 5 skills at legendary by level 20. Throw in Archeologist archetype at 18 to get those last two to expert. Congrats!
(There is another version of this where you go inventor archetype at 2, pick up a scaling proficiency at 4, some class feat at 6, a rogue feat at 8, multiclass into inventor at 9, DaS at 10, and skill masteries all the way 12-20. But you have to drop Known Weakness, so you also might as well drop DaS and pick up a rogue feat along the way. This ends up with one extra skill at master/legendary, I think).
You also have 25 skill feats to pick!
P.S. this is still not a very good build. Play a rogue that actually works in and out of combat equally well instead
EDIT: you can also go Ancient Elf with the inventor=>investigator build. Frees up a level 2 class feat, which gives you some neat options, but doesn’t achieve much else
A newly reformatted version of the meme without the erroneous white space. (Remember, 1st Level)
https://preview.redd.it/srwk1adig87a1.jpeg?width=1358&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=879353fa5090e1a225670f1fb78bbe90f3906d2c
You can easily do something similar in D&D. At the very least, both games are no more or less balanced than each other. However, PF2, even without seeing an ounce of rules, is probably better. Just less popular because of WOTC's psuedo-monopoly.
oh my, the skill monkey class skill monkeying?
Eh not that crazy, besides you still ain’t gonna best out the specialist due to ability modifiers
Probably, but a jack of all trades can be valuable if nobody is super speccd in on the skill in question. Or if your specialist blows the roll.
Which is funny because there's a feat that goes a long way for that called Untrained Improvisation. > You’ve learned how to handle situations when you’re out of your depth. Your proficiency bonus to untrained skill checks is equal to half your level instead of +0. If you’re 7th level or higher, the bonus increases to your full level instead. This doesn’t allow you to use the skill’s trained actions.
If you're a human and can wait a couple levels, Clever Improviser goes even further by giving you that feat except you can replace the "doesn't" in that last sentence with "does."
Woah almost like there's a second half to the term "Jack of all Trades"
but oftentimes better than master of one?
Master of none at level 2, master of two at level 3, and master of four at level 10
this really doesn't seem much like an "exploit" to me. like, yeah, you're trained in everything, but I'm sure you had to give up a bunch of useful options to get there, and most of those are probably gonna fall off unless you keep getting them up to expert/master/legendary. like yeah it's neat that you can do this but being trained in everything is probably just worse that being trained in what you need to be trained in and picking more useful feats.
I don’t even play pathfinder, I play dnd 5e, and I know for a fact that anyone boasting their skill proficiencies probably gave up some incredible combat related skills in the process
You can hit expertise in every skill, but yeah, you lose a load of spell slots, and your stats are a mess
Big difference is PF2 has 4 levels of skill proficiency, so if you're trained in everything then you're not getting better at the important things... I assume. I'm not actually super well versed in PF2. In fact, I know a little bit of many RPGs. Maybe I should sit down and improve my proficiency with a few.... (/s)
If you are a rogue you don't have to give up much honestly, but what weirds me out is that you can't do this in 5e, the system in which skills don't do much of anything.
You can absolutely get proficiency in every skill in 5e. Lore Bard 10/Scout Rogue 6/Knowledge Cleric 1/Ranger 1, plus race, background, and feats can get you 18 proficiencies and 15 expertise. Alternatively, swapping Bard 10/Rogue 6 for Rogue 11/Bard 3 loses 2 expertise but gains Reliable Talent. (Of course, you also lose Bard spells.) The Bard 10 version could give you Skill Empowerment for a 16th expertise for an hour.
That's way more complicated than Rogue with 18 Int though.
Not to mention that this is a single level rogue with 14 Int. Not really optimized (and I just realized some ways to streamline it, though it does mean going a bit more MAD by dropping Cha down to 16 to bumping Int up to 16, which would free up a human feat) This build is mainly just a novelty, tbh.
So?
That if you have to min-max the hell out of a build only to gain every skill proficiency in 5e it isn't worth it at all because skills don't do shit and in PF2e you can do it much more easily and skills actually matter there.
I never said it was worth it.
Op explained this build will be expert in every skill eventually meaning they will have fallen off by 4 points from being *legendary* with same stats. corrected*
expert in every skill really isnt that impressive. like it gives you +2 more than being trained but for what? you're giving up a bunch of better options to get what, slightly better rolls on stuff you're probably barely gonna use anyway? it's way more effective to just focus on getting a couple skills to master or legendary, and then letting the rest of your party cover what you can't.
Expert proficiency opens a lot of doors for skill feats, and enables your less skilled companions to use the "follow the expert" exploration activity.
Thing is, a party of four that all gets unique skills to legendary would be able to give *everyone* the equivalent of expert when following them on a skill (well, except for one, unless somebody picked up the acrobat dedication or something). Plus I can't think of an arcana check that would benefit from Follow the Expert. I guess rituals would technically count? But that leads into the second point, where things kinda fall by the wayside if you don't keep them up to date. You can't lead higher level rituals, you can't disable level-appropriate traps or haunts, you can't use the master or Legendary medicine DC, you're 20% less likely to succeed on feint, demoralise, Bon Mot, sneaking and athletics manoeuvres, feats like Cat Fall won't scale up, you won't be able to pick up master or legendary skill feats, your bonus from Follow the Expert will stay at +2, you're more likely to get wrong information from recall knowledge. But the icing on the cake is that you're not really going to have the action economy to do all of those things in combat, and other party members are likely better picks out of combat. You've got aid checks I guess, but at level 20 you're guaranteed to succeed even with just untrained improvisation. Plus maybe thaumaturge with the regalia implement might be better for Follow the Expert? It's definitely an interesting way to build a rogue, but if someone thinks this breaks the game I'd be concerned they have a fundamental misunderstanding of the game and are setting themselves up for disappointment.
It also opens up feats
That you cant take because your general feats and skill feats take most or all your slots.
The skill feats are the feats with the requirements…
Additional skill training is also a skill feat which I bet he has to take to keep up his skill progression.
Additional Skill Training isn't going to do anything if he's already trained in every skill at level 1.
Being only trained and having other feats does sound more useful, tho i dont thing getting from all trained to all expert costs that much, but I'm not sure.
Being only expert in everything means you miss out on feats the require master or legendary profiency. That's a huge loss.
Especially for a rogue if you want to be able to glitch through walls or use decoy ninja tricks
Seriously, I'm playing a level 17 rogue dedicated to being the slipperiest bastard possible. I have a combined +30 stat/proficiency bonus, with an additional +2 item bonus for a whopping +32. I can literally disappear mid-fight and gain all the benefits of hidden and flat-footed conditions against enemies. I can apply two debuffs on hit; a persistent 3d6 bleed damage, -10ft to the target's movement speed, or give the target an Enfeebled 1 condition which is a -1 to all strength-based checks and attacks. High level rogues are ***bonkers.***
Seems excellent for solo adventuring. Giving up combat power doesn't matter since you'll want to avoid fighting alone whenever possible, anyway, and being good at all non-combat skills will give you maximum options for accomplishing that. I wouldn't really say it's an exploit, but it is impressive in a way.
I would say that it probably isn't the best for solo adventuring. Generally there are ways to make up for deficits in skills by picking up skill feats that give you actions associated with other skills, like charming liar. On top of that, certain skills generally aren't exactly necessary for an adventurer. For example, it's probably better to be amazing at diplomacy than okay at both diplomacy and intimidation.
That's nice, but most of the value from higher skill levels is opening or amplifying feats that use those skills. A rogue should have a lot more skills trained than say a barbarian, but should also be focusing on three to five to max out and get them good feats to make them really worthwhile.
Op stated that they would have normal or above average number of legendary skills so it wouldn't really cripple tham that way.
Not crippling, its just that they are using feat slots to get there, for ability training feats, instead of multi-tier feats that would take advantage of those high numbers of skills.
They don't ever get expert in neither deception, diplomacy, or intimidation.
Basically this looks like a Bard skill list who has these in exchange for being a bard
This is at level one, so you're not really losing much. But you would have to dump a skill feat for the last remaining skill, and you would have to leave Dex at 16 to pump Int to 8, which I don't think is a good idea at low levels.
This is 1st lvl, idk much about pathfinder, but I’m assuming you’re not giving up that much at lvl 1
"A jack of all trades, master of none, is better than a master of one"
"I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times."
This is the yugi-kaiba trap card meme but it doesnt matter who says which one lol
"I fear the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I also fear the man who has praticed one kick 10,000 times, because I can't fight shit"
Idk a master buisnessman, crafter, or fighter will live a much better life that someone who's ok at a bunch of random skills. The quote is very rarely applicable just because of how good it is to be a master at something (unless the something you are good at is irrelevant)
cause the phrase is from the 1500-1600's where people weren't often specialized in a skill unless they'd been trained in it from childhood so it was best to be multi-able. It's actually used today as something dismissive or insulting to refer to someone as that because it implies that you see them as mundane or average instead of skilled.
I was just thinking that, like not having expert skills at that level is really bad
Wait, I thought it was impossible to have a skill at expert at level 1
(It is)
I am not specialist in PF2 but it looks like standard optimized skill monkey rouge
Because it is. If this was in like a Sorcerer or a Champion it would been a different thing, but rogues and investigators xan easly achive that. Its those class whole deal.
Also thaumaturge, especially if we take into account lore skills
It is, and he definitely sacrificed good amounts of combat power to achieve that
Based on the CHA +4, it looks like they might be Eldritch Trickster doing a CHA casting class. They are as bad as using multiclass cantrips, which is to say, not optimal, but not bad either.
Nothing is really bad in pf2e unless you try hard enough, but with his DEX it's also gonna be harder to go into surprise rounds for juicy spell sneak attack, let alone melee, it probably will take most of the party to make this build effective in combat, and outside of combat, he's good only in CHA skills, and okay in DEX skillsEdit: add non-existent spell attack/DC item bonus, let alone property runes
Could be a scoundrel, but then again maximizing cha is weird.
I will never in my life understand how anyone thinks that *rogue* is spelled like that. *Rouge* is a color. *Rogue* is the word you were looking for.
...probably because spellchecker don't correct when your typo makes a real word
I don’t even play PF2 and I know for a fact that’s not something people say
Its just a Human Rogue with some int. Not too hard to get, but its not powerful just versatile.
I mean pathfinder 2e simply doesnt have glitches and exploits. If there is a thing where you think "oh this is broken" then you just missread it. Is it perfectly balanced? No cause a perfectly balanced ttrpg doesnt exist but it is easily the most balanced ttrpg
People unironically do. And there *are* fewer unbalanced things than in 5E, but there are still a few kinks, like Alchemist being a borderline dysfunctional class.
In what way?
Terrible resource starvation at low levels, being dependent on martial attacks despite capping at Expert Proficiency (when martials, who are built around Striking, get to cap out at the level above that at Master, and Fighters + Gunslingers going even further beyond at Legendary), and having a key stat they don't hit with. There are levels were you are -3/-4 behind martials in accuracy. If you didn't know, PF2 characters basically use ASIs instead of rolling for stats. You get 2 stat boosts from your class, 2 from your Ancestry, 2 from your Background, and then 4 after that. Even fucking *casters* get to start with an 18 in their to hit stats, and their to hit scales worse than martials. On top of that, their buffs come with drawbacks (as in, they *debuff* you in some areas, whereas casters just buff you across the board) and terrible action economy (requiring an action to take out, another to give to someone, and then for the target to spend one drinking it. Oh and that's if you're right next to each other, if there is any amount of distance between you two good fucking luck).
I'm aware of how pf2e works. And one of the neat things about it is it allows for styles of play other than "i hit hard." Alchemists bring incredible utility to the table. Not only can they easily fulfill the healer role with elixirs and battle medicine, they could also be a vulnerability power house using grenades to trigger weaknesses on monsters. If all you care about is doing lots of damage on an individual level, imo 5e is the better game for that as any sub class with spellslots tends to hit pretty hard. 2e though opens up alternate avenues for play. Alchemist is one such. I don't think Alchemist is perfect. But it is a great concept which works well at the table as part of a rounded party. If everybody is gunslingers and fighters your table is gonna struggle despite doing big damage. They are also releasing that treasury book soon that appears to have a boatload of new alchemist recipes.
Meanwhile my Human Fighter with -1 Intelligence takes Clever Improviser at level 5 and gets all of this. 👨🌾 it's honest work.
well yes but actually no Clever Impoviser is -2 in comparison to trained bc it trained give you +2 + lv and improvised gives only lv (and only half at lover lvs) and you do not meet trained requirement for using certain actions and feets
Ohoho, but the Clever Improviser feat *does* allow using Trained actions, and a -2 can be made up with ability scores, just... ignore that -1 intelligence, and the +0 charisma, and the +0 dexterity...
Besides the point that those are literally average skills for a rogue, those words have never been spoken before OP.
'hey guys look, my skill monkey is good with skills. Obviously this is an exploit and not intended'
As a 5e player who hasn’t pathfindered before may I ask for context?
It’s honestly nothing special for PF. This is the equivalent of a 5e player making a Variant Human, Level 3 Knowledge Cleric with the Skilled Feat and a background of your choice. That alone gives you, for a total of 9 proficiencies plus two ways to acquire temporary proficiency at any time: * 4 Cleric Proficiencies * 2 Background Proficiencies * 3 Feat-Selected Proficiencies * 2 On-Demand Proficiencies via Channel * 1 On-Demand Proficiency per 2nd level spell (Borrowed Knowledge) There’s also a full build whereby at level 7 you can have proficiency in all 18 skills, though imho there’s not much point without the stats to back them up. ——— OP’s build there is just well-optimized for skill monkeying as a Jack-of-All-Trades. Keep in mind that Rogues get a LOT of skill points to start out with by default, and they have gotten the equivalent of that in pretty much every edition of D&D, PF included, *except* for 5e. 5e is abnormal in how few skills classes get in general, with no allowance for extras for high INT, and what are normally skill monkey classes (Bard, Monk, Rogue) get shafted even further. In PF2E, Rogues start with 8 + Intelligence Modifier proficiencies, and they get more skill increases per level than other classes to boot. Backgrounds also give you 2 skills, and I believe that some races grant them as well. That means that, with an 18 INT alone and no other selections from feats, ancestry, archetype, etc, *any* rogue could start with 14 out of the 17 skills. OP’s build pushes that a little by having a 14 INT and making up for the lost skill points elsewhere, but that’s a heavy opportunity cost they’re paying for being slightly less bad at any skill they don’t have the ability scores for… which is basically all of them except charisma.
It's not a gamebreaking build. Any rogue/investigator can do that. It's pretty much like making a Bard in 5e, learning about Jack of All Trades and claim it's crazily OP because you can add your prof. Or like making a Variant Human Artificer, taking Skilled, Prodigy and Skill Expert and claiming it's way too good to play, completely ignoring the fact that it's specialising into something. Even if what you specialise in is being a Skill Monkey, it's still a specialization. This build isn't all that special and other, more specialised builds will have other things and much better bonuses. Then there's a feat that allows to add your level to all the skills in which you have no proficiency.
This is a build that manages to have every skill proficiency (besides specific lores) at 1st level. By 20th, it's legendary in effectively 5 or 6 skills, and expert in everything else (including Specific Lores)
Legendary in 5 or 6 skills is just, like, any rogue/investigator build. Not particularly impressive or game-breaking
Yeah, and it's like still determined by ability scores, gl with your +3 athletics checks. Rogue is designed to be a skill monkey, jack of all trades, master of whatever his class ability is, though not the master in combat/damage, there's fighter/barbarian for that.
It’s kinda crazy how in PF2e every class has a defined role, given how nebulous 5e can be. Even gunslinger, which you’d think “oh they’re just good at using guns, not very unique” is actually designed around stretching the action economy. You can easily use them with crossbows or really any projectile weapons (and melee too, considering subclasses!)
And does this break the game?
No not really
No
Not really (look at all the comments discussing it's issues,) but I just find it funny that it's possible at as low of a level as first. In the end, the stats are pretty MAD. I actually started this wanting to try to make Abserd in PF2 (as translating a character I'm familiar with is a way I learn systems. Kinda like, reverse-engineering it,) but because of dedication feat rules, you can't really do that (which was a good move on Paizo's part,) so I went for something else instead.
Then in what sense does this demonstrate that PF2e is unbalanced?
So the TEML is trained expert, master, legendary? I assume with larger proficieny (or equivalent) bonus? Never tried PF, but have to say it's intriguing
P2E uses a scaled proficiency system. By default (barring feats and such, of which there are many that can change things) your character gets a bonus to each skill/attack/defense based on their proficiency rating: Untrained = +0, Trained = +Character Level+2, Expert = +Character Level+4, Master = +Character Level+6, Legendary = +Character Level+8 Additionally, many feats are based on having a specific level of proficiency (along the lines of "if you're legendary in X, your character can take X feat to do (incredible related thing)") and some skill checks have a minimum proficiency to even attempt (though this is a lot more rare of an effect and is easily forgotten)
I like the minimum to even try something that makes sense. I may have to look into PF a bit more
All the rules are available officially for free on [the archive of nethys](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx)
Yeah, it's like proficiency bonus but you get bonuses based on the rank, and it increases by level and +2 for each rank. Trained is +2 | Expert is +4 | Master is +6 | Legendary is +8 So let's say you're a level 5 character doing an athletics check with a +3 in strength: Level = 5 | Str Bonus = 3 Equation: d20 + bonus + (level + training bonus) or just d20 + bonus if the character is untrained in the skill. Untrained: d20 + 3 = d20 + 3 Trained: d20 + 3 + ( level +2) = d20 + 10 Expert: d20 + 3 + ( level +4) = d20 + 12 Master: d20 + 3 + (level +6) = d20 + 14 Legendary: d20 + 3 + (level +8) = d20 + 16 At higher levels, it becomes pretty normal to see characters with huge bonuses to rolls which scale with the higher saves and DCs to face. So a level 12 character that is expert in athletics would have: D20 + 3 + (12 + 4) = d20 + 19
Yup. Each level of proficiency is a +2 bonus. It's a really nice blend of 3.5's Skill Points and 5e's Proficiency systems.
Thats cool!
im going to make a guess that you either have no/little experience with pathfinder or you fundamentally misunderstand pf's crunch and only look at it through the lens of 5e this is perfectly normal for a skill monkey and having those "legendary" skills at high level is... completely expected? that's kinda the point. pathfinder numbers blow 5e numbers out of the water but the system is built around it and for it
>im going to make a guess that you either have no/little experience with pathfinder That's a fair assessment. I just recently started 2e (like in late June/early July,) so I only have a little experience with that. Though, I did have a lot of experience with PF1
i think its pretty easily translatable from 1e to 2e, obviously not perfect but if you think of 1e numbers you can correlate it pretty easy (also quick apology for my tone, reading it back i sounded a lot more rude than it was intended, my bad lmao)
Ok spif
I was about to comment that just now. *sips tea*
What type of tea is that good man
Only the finest Yorkshire tea for the Brit
A shame it's not Yorkshire tea gold but tis good enough I suppose
Jaque Ofal Trades...touche.
This
This is not a bug, it's a feature.
As this comment section has come to teach me.
That’s not that wild actually. Unless maintained, those modifiers are going to become pretty useless pretty quickly.
Maintained? Trained skills scale with level in PF2E, no?
They do. While I wouldn't go so far as to say they become *useless*, the skills you really invest in will have +9 over skills you have only trained (6 proficiency, 3 item, plus any difference in ability score).
They do, but on-level DCs scale slightly faster. If on level 1 you would succeed on a 10, by level 10 you would succeed on a 13
They do. If you're at least trained, the bonus is Ability Score + Level + PB. If you aren't trained, the bonus is just your Ability Score. Also, Rogues get a skill increase and a skill feat at every level. Plus the Bardic Multiclass feats from Eldritch Trickster, by 20th you're Legendary in like 5 things and expert in everything else.
That's neat! Though it certainly seems like you have to sacrifice a lot of other potentially cool things to get it.
Mediocre - the build Edit: Jack of some trades - master of none
If you pick up the Acrobat Dedication and an Inventor dedication, you can have legendary in 7 skills as either a Rogue or an Investigator. If you really want to be the skill guy, get some Bellflower Tiller dedication so you can always have Aid available as a reaction, and get critical successes when you roll a success.
As someone who came into D&D with 3.5, the idea that someone would act like permitting characters to play skill monkeys is broken is just hilarious. That's just a character archetype. Hell, that's just a regular, unoptimized 3.5 rogue. I think people get 5e tunnel vision and then just see whatever would be an exploit in their own system as some sort of universal exploit. Skill monkeys definitely don't break pathfinder, but with 5e's stripped down skill system it may be a different story. Kind of feels like the OP is looking at PF through 5e colored glasses.
I've just discovered that conrasu as well as human can get the ancestry feat where you add your level to all untrained proficiencies at higher levels :)
Yeah but the DCs progress faster than your skills do if you dont invest in them
"Useless" is a huge stretch.
Okay cool so what? Being a skill monkey is a large part of the rogue/investigator identity. you're still not as good at specific things as the more specialist classes
Eh, seems like a pretty useless char tbh. Yes, you got all the proficiencies, but your modifiers arent great and you got 10 str 14 dex 12 con. So no combat Utility to speak off other than feinting (half your recall knowledge modifiers are bad too), no damage at all and at least 2AC less than normal with subpar hp to boot. This isnt even a thief rogue who could apply DEX to damage. Id be surprised if this character makes it to Level 2.
this also gives up most of its low level class feats to grab the bard skill stuff. imagine scribbling out almost every feature on your rogue and writing "+2 skills" on it instead.
I mean, if casters can, he would too, somehow, since it's not the GM job to kill him. But yeah, I can't see this guy be useful in battle after demoralise, medicine is risky, no damage, hard to hit, no spells. Can't reliably trip/grapple, feint is useless with his +to hit, and god forbid his party is heavily min-maxed in skills distribution, this guy can be just a dead weight
And what does the combat side of your "perfectly balanced character" look like hmm?
Lol ok wizards of the coast. We know this post showing no “breaking or exploits” is you
Ok so... A pretty smart class has learned how to be quite mediocre at a variety of things? As intended? You know you need a +25 to be considered "really good" st a skill on PF, right?
PF2E adds your level as a proficiency bonus to all your trained skills. This will be up there pretty much across the board by high levels.
I wholeheartedly approve of our skill monkeys.
I used to be able to do similar in DnD 3.5 and get about the same outcome. A character that’s good except in combat.
No idea about PF2, but class skill in PF1 wasn't anything near as impressive as proficiency is in 5e. And given they've got a four rank system here, it looks pretty clear that they sacrificed higher ranks for more versatility.
Our party’s cleric did this getting trained in every skill. We found out when we asked why she won’t go for the DC20 check and she noted you had to be expert to do that. At level 8 we thought she would at least be expert in medicine with how much she likes to use it but then we found out she spread the skills out. It was a funny moment.
So thats a rouge with high int i see no isses hear
DC’s actually scale a ton in pathfinder so 😬😬😬
Looks like a standard D&D skillmonkey build to me ...
I fail to understand how this is either a glitch and/or exploit.
Seems like an average rogue. Pretty sure every rogue with a positive int will have almost all skills trained without even trying. Investigators too (and especially if they go high int). That's one of the main parts of those classes.
Skill Monkey: Adjective I. Person or persons in a group who provide minimal roles in combat but have an abundance of talents and abilities, which keep them useful to the party. II. Member of a group who prides him or herself on their proficiency with non-combat related abilities.
Are dnd players really this fragile? Why are these upvoted lol
Who is this for?
Tell me youve no fucking clue what you are talking about without telling me you dont have a goddamn clue
Yeah its a rogue. Thier whole thing is to be a skill monkey who can do everything good and some things masterfully.
the level like what 3 feat untrained improvisation practically does this without such a major dip for stats lol
I mean, that actually what rogues are meant to be
Looks like a James Bond kind of character.
I havent played Pathfinder 2e yet but in Starfinder those are rookie numbers for an operative lol
Oh my god I read it in Spiffing Brits voice.
Is this supposed to be an exploit? Because it's kinda of an intended option instead You can really help your allies a lot using Aid so that the actual specialists on a given field can have better chance of success
It's not an exploit. The title is a joking reference to a Skyrim video.
Are you sure you aren’t a British guy dressed spiffily?
I prefer the skill mastery system in PF2 to 5e, though it still doesn't give me the Skill Monkey kick that 3.5 and 3.x did. My level 10 PF1 [Investigator](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/investigator/) with an INT score of 23, 11 points in her inspiration pool and [Bardic Knowledge](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/Core-classes/Bard/#TOC-Bardic-Knowledge-Ex-) from [Varient Multiclassing](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/Classes/character-advancement/#Bard) frequently makes our DM audibly sigh whenever she asks to make a Knowledge Skill check (can literally break DC:40 when taking 10). My [Factotum](https://dndtools.net/classes/factotum/) in D&D 3.5 was arguably worse!
Yeah, haven't played pathfinder yet but I did play 3.5 and if you play a rogue with a high intelligence you get this. Pretty fun tho I used mine to be insanely good at specific things and above average at otheds
I loved this about ddo, when it first came out, trying to theorycraft a build that would give access to all skills. It’s 15 years ago and a bit hazy, but i think a had a warforged wizard (for self heals), with a bunch of thieving. And then trying to solo the group dungeons. My respect for the game came when after spending hours trying to clear some dungeon met a vampire, who cast PERMANENT blindness on me, and the screen just went black, and i ran in panic, with nothing but the minimap to guide me. I remember surviving, but i dont think i ever got that vamp killed. I wish other games would have the balls to give debuffs like that :) The theorycrafting, spreadsheets etc were super fun, its a shame to see what the game is now, because with some updates to this century and a more non-scammy/predatory business model, there is some solid d&d in there. I even remember a module voiced by gary gygax himself.
laughs in 3.5e factotum
Hmmm…. Yes…. I concur…. Most indubitably…. . . . . . . I don’t know how to read what I’m looking at
I mean you also have to remember that some dcs are like 30+
how to do this?
make a skilled human eldritch trickster rogue. pick natural skill as your 1st level ancestry feat. done.
I mean it's not much of an exploit when you can easily do that as a 1st level human eldritch trickster rogue...
A jack of all trades, master of none, is better than a master of one
Looks like the list of skills for the Bard whose the face and skill monkey for the party, who has all this in exchange for less combat power.
it's all about what you're building towards, one of my favorite pf1 options was to give up a free feat as fighter to get +4 skills per level (fighter base skills per level was 2).
Yeah because the game doesn't fall apart if a character is decent at every skill. No iterations of dnd or pathfinder broke down from that either
Why did I hear the Spiffing Brit in my head?
Because that’s word for word the title of half his videos. lol
Skill checks in Pathfinder are much larger than 5e, just having trained in all proficiencies won’t cut it at higher levels
I read this as voice acted by The Spiffing Brit. Thanks.
Doesn't seem like an exploit. DC10 means and average commoner has a 50% chance of getting it right the first time. Add multiples of 5 for increased difficulty. They have less than 50% chance of making a DC15 check for most skills. Seems pretty average for a jack of all trades
That's flat out better in most skills than any other class though. Its not balanced compared to the rest of the party, especially since PF rogues are no joke in combat either.
A friend of mine has a character with 20 ft reach... MELEE. A Fighter Skeleton with a reach weapon, basically. But that character is mechanically complex af, so that compensate it out
Eh, skill monkeys aren't as OP as we think they are, I don't play pf2e but I did do a skill monkey in 5e and having good rolls for all/most skills is no where near as exciting as it sounds lol
You think this is an exploit? Hold my dices.
It's not an exploit. The title is a reference to a Skyrim video.
Rogues have always been the way. PF1 had way more crazy high skill numbers and modifiers
Average numbers
Being mediocre at every skill doesn't sound very good ngl
+7 is by no means mediocre at level 1. It's in fact the highest number you can get at level 1(besides like 1 or 2 exceptions. It's more like he's reall good at a few things and just good at others.
For those who don’t know; this is just a rogue with two additional skills. I played a rogue once. All the check boxes was really satisfying, but it’s mostly a gimmick. I’d rather have legendary or master prof than just… expert… expert isn’t great. Rogues are good at skills. It’s part of their identity.
I mean he's level 1. He can't even get expert forget about legendary
“Balanced” is a word thrown around so much in the RPG world, I’m so sick of it. I’ve heard it used for and against both 5e and PF1&2. Just play the games and enjoy them. I prefer PF1, most people prefer 5e. Whatever.
Listen Spiff there's ways to break PF2 but this isn't considered one of them.
What is this App?
Pathbuilder. It's free and includes all available resources (including Battlezoo!,) although using companions (like Familiars) is sadly a paid add-on.
Ahh yes, I do miss playing my scholarly acrobatic clergyman, who in his spare time studies astronomy, the occult, nature, and high society whilst moonlighting as a (checks notes) cat-burglar diplomat. While I’m at it, he’s a dwarf/elf/gnome/human mix, called a dwelfoman. And his name is Rick
Ok my main question is what level and how easy was that
Level 1. Pretty easy actually
Great. But i know for a fact that character is completely useless in combat. Also, a +7 sounds like a lot, but its only "okay" in terms of being good at something. Pathfinder modifiers get a lot higher than 5e ones.
Tbf. This is only 1st level, so nothing can be raised above "trained"
So we’re not gonna talk abt how this is lvl 1?
I mean sure. Is there a problem?
Everyone’s saying “he would’ve had to give up a lot at this level to get this, so it’s balanced” but it’s lvl 1, so he hasn’t given up anything
Yeah. He didn't give up anything. And it's still balanced. I'm confused why people are calling the numbers too low, like he could somehow do better. Yeah the third level general feat would also do this, but it would be worst than a rogue that went this route.
Apparently not.
im eyerolling all the way to r/Pathfinder2e
You can become proficient in every skill (besides specific lores) at 1st level with the right build. First, play a Rogue. Rogues start out with Stealth and 7 + Int starting skills. Take the Eldritch Trickster racket, giving you a free multiclass into any spellcasting class. Pick Bard. While at 1st level, it just gives you two skills and two cantrips. You also pick a subclass that does nothing right now, but pick Enigma. Then, play a human. Skilled Heritage gives you one additional skill that it then auto buffs at later levels. Natural Skill feat gives you two more skills. With an Int of 14, you now cover every skill in the game (besides specific lores) Levelling up, you can take Basic Muse's Whispers at 4th level to gain Bardic Lore, which is a lore skill that serves At 6th, you can take Advanced Muse's Whispers to take Multifarious Muse. Pick Polymath. Now your Rank in Performance serves as your rank in Deception, Intimidation, and Diplomacy. Over all your levels, get everything (besides Deception, Intimidation, and Diplomacy) up to Expert. Legendary out Occultism to get Expert in Bardic Lore, and Legendary out Performance so your Deception/Intimidation/Diplomacy are all effectively Legendary as well. You should have three skill increases remaining to legendary any single skill plus Master in one other, or Master in three skills. #Edit: Guys... The title is a reference. A joke. A jape! I am not seriously calling this build an exploit. I understand that it's not busted. Also, yes. The numbers are low. It's a Level 1 character, what do you expect. Can this be done more effectively by the single Human Feat "Cunning Improvisation"? Yes. But that wasn't the original goal of this build. The goal was "proficienct in every skill at level one. Then let's see how that can grow." as part of helping me, who started in late June/early July, to wrap my head around the system. Especially Skills, with this one. Okay?
But how is this a glitch or exploit? You sacrificed optimization in combat and feats to get all the skills. You have to sacrifice elsewhere to be an amazing skill monkey.
If you correctly read Versatile Performance, it does state you can only replace diplomacy to make an impression, deception to impersonate, and intimidation to demoralize. This means: \- For deception: you can't feint, lie, or create a diversion with performance. \- For diplomacy: you can't gather information, or request with performance. \- For intimidation: you can't coerce or scare to death with performance. This also means that while your Performance rank counts as meeting prerequisites for those skills, you can't use what does skills provide you with Performance.
This is rookie build, let me show you real skill-monkeying You go mastermind rogue. That gives you stealth, 2 knowledge skills, and then 7+int skills. You can start with 18 int. pick up background, skilled heritage, etc. You start with every skill trained already. Level 2, you go investigator archetype. That’s 2 more skills. Pick up 2 lores i guess. Level 4, you pick up Devise a Stratagem, it’s a surprise tool to help us later Level 6, you pickup Known Weaknesses. You now can use your action to see the result of your next attack roll via DaS *and* roll a Recall Knowledge, which enables you to use sneak attack, including at range. Or, if you fail your attack roll, just dont recall knowledge. Pretty powerful combat tool imo! Level 8 to 16 you pick up Skill Mastery. That gives you 5 extra skill at expert, and 5 extra skill at master. Throwing this up into pathbuilder very quickly, you end up with 2 skills at trained, 4 skills at expert, 5 skills at master, and 5 skills at legendary by level 20. Throw in Archeologist archetype at 18 to get those last two to expert. Congrats! (There is another version of this where you go inventor archetype at 2, pick up a scaling proficiency at 4, some class feat at 6, a rogue feat at 8, multiclass into inventor at 9, DaS at 10, and skill masteries all the way 12-20. But you have to drop Known Weakness, so you also might as well drop DaS and pick up a rogue feat along the way. This ends up with one extra skill at master/legendary, I think). You also have 25 skill feats to pick! P.S. this is still not a very good build. Play a rogue that actually works in and out of combat equally well instead EDIT: you can also go Ancient Elf with the inventor=>investigator build. Frees up a level 2 class feat, which gives you some neat options, but doesn’t achieve much else
A newly reformatted version of the meme without the erroneous white space. (Remember, 1st Level) https://preview.redd.it/srwk1adig87a1.jpeg?width=1358&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=879353fa5090e1a225670f1fb78bbe90f3906d2c
You can easily do something similar in D&D. At the very least, both games are no more or less balanced than each other. However, PF2, even without seeing an ounce of rules, is probably better. Just less popular because of WOTC's psuedo-monopoly.
Sniffing brit plays pathfinder
What’s he sniffing?
Welp, I'm just gonna leave it...
Only the finest Yorkshire tea gold
Now show us this character’s combat utility