Refresh for Extra Skills

[MWKilduff]

If had a character that wanted to purely rely on skills in a game what would you say is a fair rate?  -1 Refresh = how many skill points?  Minus how many Refresh to increase the skill cap?  I guess one final question slightly out of line with the previous questions.  Minus how many Refresh to increase the number of aspects on a character sheet?

Or, is this really out of line with the game mechanics?

[finnmckool]

Well you could simply use those refresh points to buy mortal stunts which can give bonuses to skills.

the refresh:aspect question...no idea.

[Tbora]

I would say like maybe 3 skill points for one refresh?

I honestly don't know really...

[Barodahn]

Pretty long and involved discussion here.

http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,19664.0.html

[CBIrish]

Also, if you look under the thread "Is Pure Mortal Viable" (or something like that), one poster does a write up for a Batman-style character that includes the stunt "Extensive Training." This allows you to take extra skill points equal to the number of Refresh spent on stunts.  Since mortal stunts are wide open and subject only to the discretion of the GM, that might be an alternative way to go.

[JosephKell]

Stunts are the best way to go.

Giving straight skill points for refresh leads to a disparity of ability because skill points always stack with stunts.

For example.  Let's say you already have your stunts and/or powers picked up.  And nothing else will stack, but skill points do.  Granted you pay for it (by maintaining your "pyramid").  But it still always stacks.

Not only that but having the maintain the pyramid of skills means that such a character is WAY more diverse (more average and fair skills) while still being more specialized (their cap skills, plus any stunts they normally take).

[Arcteryx]

Stunts are the best way to go.

I'd agree. The mechanism's already built in - build a stunt to further your character's concept.

I don't know how anybody else feels about this but I've noticed that the whole skill cascade tends to force characters to focus on a 'direction' or 'concept'.

[JosephKell]

I'd agree. The mechanism's already built in - build a stunt to further your character's concept.

I don't know how anybody else feels about this but I've noticed that the whole skill cascade tends to force characters to focus on a 'direction' or 'concept'.

The more I play the game, the more I see that more skills at Good and Great is way more important than getting a few skills at Superb and higher.

Good means +0 on 4dF succeeds on maneuvers.  Great means -1 on 4dF succeeds.

Average skills feel like it means "Hope ya got a fate point to spend."

[Deadmanwalking]

Good means +0 on 4dF succeeds on maneuvers.  Great means -1 on 4dF succeeds.

Huh? A minimum of 3 for Maneuvers is an Evocation thing not a general rule. Non-magical Maneuvers just need to beat the victim's defense roll (and not even that for navel-gazing).

[JosephKell]

Huh? A minimum of 3 for Maneuvers is an Evocation thing not a general rule. Non-magical Maneuvers just need to beat the victim's defense roll (and not even that for navel-gazing).

Yes, yes, not all maneuvers require a Good result.  But being able to succeed on Good easily makes most maneuvers with that skill almost automatic.