Hm.
First method:
Open Locks 12+ (Level 6) +30%
Find and Remove Traps 13+ (Level 6) +25%
Pick Pockets 11+ (Level 6/7) +30%
Move Silently 12+ (Level 6) +30%
Climb Walls 4+ (Level 4-6) +10%
Hide in Shadows 14+ (Level 6) +25%
Hear Noise 10+ (Level 5) +20%
So, in general, you’re starting off with the abilities of a ~6th level standard thief, and you’re getting an extra 25-30% success rate. I’m sure I’m wrong by a point here and there.
By the time a thief gets to 6th level, he’s had the ability to choose 4 proficiencies, plus INT bonus, if any. A proficiency spent on a skill more-or-less equates you to an 8th level standard thief.
Powergamer hat says that’s a hard choice, and I think it’s really one that depends on the game itself, and the DM. A DM that applies bonuses/penalties for lock or trap complexity, for example, would lean towards the standard method. A game where you’re not expecting to go into domain play favors the new method.
A slower progression that tops out after another 35% or so (say at the 10th/11th level numbers) would be an easier sell. Actually, if you had them all stop around the 3+ mark, that would match up with the guaranteed Magical Research failure throw.
And building a class that gains a power at a later level would be less of an issue.
Second Method:
126 points to spend over a 14th level career, and taking everything to 1+ costs…145 points. That leaves a 19 point hole, spread over 7 skills means you’ll have…5 at 4+ and 2 at 3+, at 14th?
That’s not bad. I favor this just because I like the occasional point-buy.
Class-build wise, lower Thievery values would just get less points at start and per level?
If the first method included a slower progression, I think I’d like it better. I already apply bonuses/penalties to Open Lock and Traps, just because of the failure rate (I do a sliding time scale, lower roll it takes longer and longer to fiddle with the lock) and I could eliminate a lot of that sort of thing.
If not, then the second method, as I’d rather be bad at things by choice than by fiat. (and the occasional, “Well f*ck, does it look like I climb walls?” sort of interaction) and I like the idea of including those builds in the templates.