The way in which backgrounds have been assigned bonus skill points is very simulationist, which is a bit strange for this game ... and also very unbalanced in skill coverage.

 

Here are the spreads, listed by skills rather than background.

 

Lore (Aristocrat)
Lore (Clergyman)
Lore (Philosopher)
Lore (Scholar)
Lore (Artist)
Lore (Mystic)
Lore & Survival (Explorer)
Lore & Mechanics (Scientist)
Lore & Mechanics (Merchant)
Survival (Colonist)
Stealth & Lore (Dissident)
Stealth & Survival (Drifter)
Stealth & Survival (Hunter)
Stealth & Athletics (Raider)
Athletics & Mechanics (Laborer)
Athletics & Lore (Mercenary)
Athletics & Survival (Slave)

There are:

 

• 9 ways to get Lore
• 6 to get Lore +2
• 4 ways to get Stealth
• 4 ways to get Survival
• 2 ways to get Stealth & Survival
• 3 ways to get Athletics
• 3 ways to get Mechanics
• 1 way to get pure Survival
• No ways to get pure Mechanics
• No ways to get pure Athletics
• No ways to get pure Stealth

It would be nice if some of these were changed so there were ways of getting pure Mechanics, pure Athletics, pure Stealth and/or some more combinations with less Lore.

It should be noted that not all of these are available to all Cultures. For example, most of the Lore +2 are mutually exclusive.

 

That being said, it's still lopsided as all hell, and the fact that it's flat-out impossible to get +2 Mechanics, Athletics or Stealth is just plain weird.

Can't give enough thumbs up to this. This has been bugging me forever and each time I thought "They'll even it out in the next update" but it seems that was never the intention.

So yeah, this shouldn't be hard to fix even now. Some (more) pure athletics and survival options please.

Actually it's 10 ways to get Lore. How insane is that lol.

A pure stealth bonus would go well with a criminally inclined background, of which also there is none, but I guess it's too late for adding new ones.

 

Edit: Didn't saw Raider. 

Edited February 28, 201510 yr by Lychnidos

Could probably put it on Drifter or Hunter

That's interesting:) What about to combine this with classes, if I may join?

 

Barbarian: +2 Athletics, +1 Survival
Druid: +1 Lore, +2 Survival
Chanter: +2 Lore, +1 Mechanics
Cipher: +1 Stealth, +1 Mechanics, +1 Lore
Fighter: +1 Athletics, +1 Lore, +1 Survival
Monk: +1 Stealth, +1 Survival, +1 Athletics
Paladin: +2 Athletics, +1 Lore
Priest: +1 Athletics, +2 Lore
Rogue: +2 Mechanics, +1 Stealth
Ranger: +2 Survival, +1 Stealth
Wizard: +2 Lore, +1 Mechanics

 

 

On the left side there are numbers of classes giving +0,+1 and +2 bonuses, respectively, and the same for backgrounds, as provided by Sensuki. Additional fun starts on the right, where we combine them together for individual skills.

 

Some highlights:
- If I'm not mistaken, there are like 187 possible combinations.
- It's actually quiet hard not to get any Lore bonus (24 cases).
- In more then 100 cases (more then half) you will get at least +2 bonus to Lore skill. Please tell me I'm stupid here:)...
- There are only two skills for which you can obtain +4 bonus: Survival (in case of Druid or Ranger + Colonist back.), and surprisingly Lore.
- No love for Stealth (no +3 bonus).
- +3 Mechanics only for Rogues, +3 Athletics for Paladins and Barbarians.

 

Please player, take Lore skill, no pressure.

our preference would be to complete void the skill bonuses for class choice and to expand the importance and breadth o' background selections.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

That's good point, Gromnir. Even partial shift of weight would make backgrounds more noticeable and especially skills stand more on their own next to classes.

(eg. having just +1 bonus for one skill per class, if must) 

 

As now, it's partially class-tied. For example, why would one heavy invest into Mechanics on Fighter if there is Rogue in the party having implicit bonus +2?

Edited March 1, 201510 yr by ushas

That's good point, Gromnir. Even partial shift of weight would make backgrounds more noticeable and especially skills stand more on their own next to classes.

(eg. having just +1 bonus for one skill per class, if must) 

 

As now, it's partially class-tied. For example, why would one heavy invest into Mechanics on Fighter if there is Rogue in the party having implicit bonus +2?

am recognizing that poe is not a game on rails, but if the beta is any indication, currently one must needs max a skill with an inherent bonus from either class and/or background to have a chance at successful overcoming the more/most difficult skill checks one encounters in areas where the combat challenges is level appropriate.  for example, the bb rogue were needing to either max stealth OR mechanics to reasonable overcome the chosen check on all beta release maps.  we could have our bb rogue choose to be stealthy or good at picking locks and disarming traps, but there were no perfect calculus that allowed us to be successful at both skills. 

 

we do understand that there will be skill boosting items in the game, so perhaps such gear will make a 2-skill character viable, but at the moment, Gromnir does feel at least partial limited by our class selection in regards to determining our skill choices. by providing numerous classes, the developers is necessarily limiting the combat role o' each class. fine. we get that offering us unique classes require some definition o' role that limits player customization. we don't expect that our priest should be able to tank as good as a fighter, or that the fighter should deal damage on par with a rogue.  each class gots a combat role and the more unique (appealing?) the developers make each class, the more they must needs define the role.  more definition = less customization.

 

...

 

defined combat role need not be a limit on skills.  one aspect that coulda'/shoulda' been left  more open to player choice and customization is our limited ability to choose backgrounds and skills.  why limit customization more than absolute necessary?  limit combat roles makes perfect sense when creating a multitude o' unique classes, but we see no rationale for imposing a similar limit on skill choice.  developers shoulda' removed skill bonus from classes and made backgrounds more significant cause that woulda' increased player customization o' their character... which is a good thing in a crpg, no?

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps we recognize that the options to improve this aspect o' the game will be limited as the background choices have impact on dialogues, and those dialogues will not be altered at this late date to accommodate major changes. am suspecting we is stuck with the backgrounds we has already seen and the only changes possible is adjusting the bonuses those backgrounds provide.  even so, regardless o' the 11th hour nature o' this issue, we would prefer if the class inherent skill bonuses were reduced to 0 and the backgrounds were retooled to be more diverse and significant.

Edited March 1, 201510 yr by Gromnir

This seems more like a min/max scenario rather than a Roleplaying scenario.

Back in the day of Baldur's Gate, people pretty much just roleplayed the game.

This seems more like a min/max scenario rather than a Roleplaying scenario.

 

Back in the day of Baldur's Gate, people pretty much just roleplayed the game.

...

 

uh, sure.  is not as if folks who played bg literal spent hours re-rolling to get UBER attribute scores or other such nonsense.  and there were many folks who played diviner mages... you know, for role-play reasons. how many folks played a dual-class bg character?  dual-class were kinda the ultimate min-max nonsense possible in d&d... other than maybe old ad&d bard. etc.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited March 1, 201510 yr by Gromnir

This seems more like a min/max scenario rather than a Roleplaying scenario.

 

Back in the day of Baldur's Gate, people pretty much just roleplayed the game.

This is partially an RP issue. If I want to RP as a mercenary it seems odd to have a +lore bonus. Or If I want to play as a pure stealth class with no +2 stealth options.  

Well... I don't think it's super necessary for everything to be perfectly balanced in the sense you're speaking of. But I think they could have made the background bonus' a lot more interesting. Instead of just boosting skills, they could have done all sorts of interesting things. Aristocrats could have gotten extra gold, mercenary's could have started with a nice weapon, hunter could get bonus to ranged weapons etc. etc.

Edited March 2, 201510 yr by Heijoushin

Well... I don't think it's super necessary for everything to be perfectly balanced in the sense you're speaking of. But I think they could have made the background bonus' a lot more interesting. Instead of just boosting skills, they could have done all sorts of interesting things. Aristocrats could have gotten extra gold, mercenary's could have started with a nice weapon, hunter could get bonus to ranged weapons etc. etc.

..which would make only one of those worth choosing (from mechanical standpoint). Hard to find a cRPG where you don't swim in items and gold after some time, making hard bonuses to stats >>>> getting stuff on character creation.

I get what you're aiming at ,though.

 

I'd rather see a greater emphasis on skill bonuses from background/culture than from class - that would alleviate the issue presented here to a great degree. It is ok if only  magical classes can get +4 lore at start or rogue is the only one with +4 bonus in mechanics.. but having more than +1 skill point from class shoehorns players even stronger into stiff combinations of class+skills to choose.