[Krindi]

I suggest you look into the previous editions' skill listings. It sounds to me that you are aiming for something similar to what SR2 had, which was a lot more simplified than SR5.

Probably on a subconscious level yeah.  I played a lot of SR2 20-years ago, but don't have any of the books still.

[Hobbes]

Would probably need to start looking at reducing chargen skill points too.

You really don't.  Current Skills "C" combat focused character (Samurai/Phys Adept) takes a Ranged skill, a Melee Skill, Sneak, Perception, and throws around some specializations.  2 Group points into a throw away group skill and done.  Changes are that the character can use more weapons, which is 90% cosmetic since most runners have a weapon of choice that they'll use almost all the time.  And the throw away group skill points do about 30% more.  yippee.

Skills "B" for Mages, Deckers, Technomancers, changes very little because the core skills for those roles didn't change.  You're still taking Sneaking, Perception, and maybe a gun skill to go along with the core required skills.  Your 5 Group skill points are likely tied up in a group skill related to your Archetype.  Those particular character types rarely had skill points to burn.  You're still not going to trade off points in Spellcasting or Computer for the Outdoors skill.

The character concepts that benefit the most from the re-arrangement are the Mundane, non-hacker, skill monkey concepts with an A or B in skills.  Those particular builds are rarely mechanically optimal.  I'd be pleasantly surprised if somehow those kinds of builds could suddenly compete with Mages and Samurai.  They absolutely still can't btw. 

Ultimately what you've got is Riggers who can fix anything and Samurai that can use an Ares Predator and an Ingram Smartgun.  oooooo,  Oh, and people that can perform a standing back flip can also swim, and folks that can bring a mostly dead runner back from the brink of death to combat functional within 20 seconds can also install Cyberware and diagnose cancer.  Again.  ooooooo.   

Skills A is still likely a Trap, just slightly less so.  Plus players will be less likely to over invest in skills in the first place since there are just less skills overall that they feel the need to have.     

And PiXeL01, yes.  Earlier editions of Shadowrun had less skills that were broader and about the same amount of starting skill points IIRC.  I don't recall any of my earlier edition characters struggling to cover "the basics" like 5th edition characters seem to.   

[ScytheKnight]

*cough*Biotech was placed in Biotech group in the very first errata*cough*

[Strill]

Your 5 Group skill points are likely tied up in a group skill related to your Archetype.

No, that's generally something you want to avoid, because you want 6s and specializations in your archetype skills. Skill groups prevent you from taking specializations.

[Senko]

I had it recommended as a 2 and 3 in things like outdoors for my mage?

[Whiskeyjack]

I agree with Hobbes. Reducing the number of skills doesn't automatically mean reducing the number of skill points since many of those removed skills were never taken to begin with, or redundancy made it very impractical/redundant to do so (say with multiple firearms skills).

I applaud the effort of this thread. This game has been bloated with skills of extremely variable value for at least the past 2 eds.

[Hobbes]

Your 5 Group skill points are likely tied up in a group skill related to your Archetype.

No, that's generally something you want to avoid, because you want 6s and specializations in your archetype skills. Skill groups prevent you from taking specializations.

Skills "B" 36/5.  Decker is looking at Computer, Hacking, Electronic Warfare, Cybercombat, Hardware, Software, Sneaking, Firearms, and maybe even Perception.  Mages can get by with Spellcasting, Conjuring, Counterspelling, Sneaking, Astral Perception, and use those 5 group points on something non-magical I guess, but if you're willing to go with that short of a Skill list you can drop to Skills "C" and likely come out ahead overall.

Not saying you can't do it.  But really how awful would it be if a Mage took 5 group points in Acting instead of Conjuring.  Just sayin'.  Certain Archetypes are still going to be short on skill points given typical Priority allocation. 

And Group points don't prevent Specialization, they at most delay it.     

[Squirrel]

If we could somehow group every skill into a group, then you'd only buy groups at chargen which are as expensive as attributes. That would be an opportunity to simplify even further.

[Senko]

I agree with Hobbes. Reducing the number of skills doesn't automatically mean reducing the number of skill points since many of those removed skills were never taken to begin with, or redundancy made it very impractical/redundant to do so (say with multiple firearms skills).

I applaud the effort of this thread. This game has been bloated with skills of extremely variable value for at least the past 2 eds.

Same I'm often struggling for skill points but then I'm a generalist at heart and would rather be decent and multiple things (casting, computer use, combat) than amazing at one (magic, spellcasting specifically). I'd hate to see skillpoints reduced because really all I've seen so far in the proposed consolidation merely makes it a bit more likely i'll be able to scrape up the points for what I want in addition to what I need. It hasn't reduced my need for skillpoints all that much in the second category I still need multiple magic and non-magic skills (spellcasting, counterspelling, summoining, binding, perception etc).

[jim1701]

Athletics, Firearms, Close Combat, Engineering, Outdoors and Biotech Skill Groups each turned into a single skill.  The former individual skills become specializations. 

Chemistry is moved into Biotech. 

Free-fall and Diving merged into Athletics as well. 

Leadership and Performance squished into one skill : Inspiration under the Influence Skill Group.  Intimidation moves under the Acting Skill Group to replace Performance. 

Gunnery, Heavy Weapons, Firearms into a Group skill:  Ballistic Weapons.

Archery, Thrown Weapons, Unarmed Combat into a Group Skill: Archaic Combat.

Locksmith, Escape Artist, Forgery into a Group skill: Quick Fingers

Engineering, Biotech, Demolitions into a Group Skill.  Name TBD.

IMO.  Cyber tech, Chemistry and Medicine are rarely used, only taken by very specialized characters.  The individual firearm or close combat skills add nothing to the game other than a skill point sink for character concepts.  Even merging all the Outdoors skills into a single skill few runners will take it.  Engineering is fixing vehicles, you'll always take the one for the vehicle you own.  Again the extras are just skill point sinks for character concepts.  Athletics is all about Gymnastics, running and swimming are niche, don't get me started on Free-fall and Diving. 

Skill Group points cost 2.5 times what an individual skill costs and are often only worth 2 times what an individual skill costs if that.  Make them worth buying after chargen.   

I think I hit the underperformers.  Anyway, my thoughts on the subject.

Edit: Armorer.  I forgot where Armorer was supposed to go.  Was I going to lump it in with Engineering?  Ah well.

I like the cut of your jib sir.  And while I don't have a problem with skill groups in general the fact they are forced on you in chargen at higher skill priorities enrages me with the fury of a thousand suns.  I have a house rule that when making a character using priority players can trade in skill group points for singular skill points on 1 for 2 basis. 

[Kirito99]

I would angle problem form another perspective - there is no problem with quantity of skills, there is problem with starting skill points. I would rule that PC can take on start only 2-3 skills on 6, but there is 1,5x more skill points to spend on skills in all priorities - less very-specialized, more points to cover must-have skills.

[Strill]

I would angle problem form another perspective - there is no problem with quantity of skills, there is problem with starting skill points. I would rule that PC can take on start only 2-3 skills on 6, but there is 1,5x more skill points to spend on skills in all priorities - less very-specialized, more points to cover must-have skills.

What does that leave for say, mages? A Mage needs high Assensing, Spellcasting, Counterspelling and Summoning. They probably also want high Binding, and Ritual Casting.

[Hobbes]

I would angle problem form another perspective - there is no problem with quantity of skills, there is problem with starting skill points. I would rule that PC can take on start only 2-3 skills on 6, but there is 1,5x more skill points to spend on skills in all priorities - less very-specialized, more points to cover must-have skills.

You could also cap initial skill investment at 2 points.  *shrug*  Yes your characters wind up with more skills at lower dice pools.  That doesn't really solve the issue of some skills being poor investments.  There is a huge difference between letting a Player make a less optimal choice, and mechanical trap choices.  One is a character choosing Skill A over Skill B, the other is having a "Medic" character spend 24 skill points on a slew of skills that are all overshadowed by a mage with a heal spell and a med kit. 

And, as mentioned by Strill, Hackers/Mages/Faces with multiple skills competing for attention are really put into a bind.  Essentially, 1 skill at 6, 2 skills at 5 or whatever cap you decide on is just specialization + 1 .   

[gradivus]

Assuming the interaction isn't one where there a possibility of something catastrophic happening from a glitch (like all the Yaks start shooting)... in which case he still has to roll those two dice...which is still better than 1 or none.

[Kirito99]

Well guys I read that problem is when very super hyper specialized character can be decent in only one area. I suggested easier solution that rewrite core skills. And now I read that my solution is not good because PC cannot have maxed out more than few skills. IMHo is fair business - only thre skills can have 6, but you have + 50% skill points.  And no, mages typically due to priority build don't have six in all magical skills, especially like in thsi reduction ad absurdum example like ritual spellcasting.