Permanent Increases in Intelligence Question

Actually, per Feeblemind, it's the intelligence of a lizard.

Give him five minutes for the current rage to subside, and he has no reason to attack. He will, per the text of Feeblemind, know that you aren't friends, but he may not remember that you were the people he fought five minutes previous.

Give him some candy, water him regularly, and make sure he gets enough sunlight.

Greenfield said:

Actually, per Feeblemind, it's the intelligence of a lizard.

Give him five minutes for the current rage to subside, and he has no reason to attack. He will, per the text of Feeblemind, know that you aren't friends, but he may not remember that you were the people he fought five minutes previous.

Click to expand...

Even goldfish have a memory longer than five minutes.

Seriously, Int 1 is -5 on Int-based checks. The DC to remember who was trying to kill you five minutes ago is significantly less than zero. Your interpretation is simply not supported.

Actually I was being literal when I said that most fish have a linear memory of under six seconds.

Look it up.

What version of feeblemind are you using that lists intelligence equal to a lizard. What I have is a decidedly different wording, that deals with game rules and removes the ability to make int and chr checks for victims of the spell. It says nothing about not being able to make Int or Chr checks without the spell. Else why have a -5 modifier?
And the actual memory of fish is trying to shoehorn a micro fact to explain game rules. It is ok as an explanation for how you feel it should work, but has no real effect on game rules.

And, so your house rule came with that wording in all its glory the first time at the table? No beta-testing and fine-tuning?

Why not every 3 levels, wouldn't that allow the fighter to keep

pace with the spell casters for about three levels more

Click to expand...

? Or even every 2? I remember in 1e AD&D that fighters got 1 attack/level but only against less than 1 HD creatures (goblins and kobolds mostly it seemed, though there were many others). No playtesting?

ElectricDragon said:

What version of feeblemind are you using that lists intelligence equal to a lizard. What I have is a decidedly different wording, that deals with game rules and removes the ability to make int and chr checks for victims of the spell. It says nothing about not being able to make Int or Chr checks without the spell. Else why have a -5 modifier?
And the actual memory of fish is trying to shoehorn a micro fact to explain game rules. It is ok as an explanation for how you feel it should work, but has no real effect on game rules.

Click to expand...

Per the SRD:

Feeblemind
Enchantment (Compulsion) [Mind-
Affecting]
Level: Sor/Wiz 5
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Target: One creature
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates; see text
Spell Resistance: Yes
If the target creature fails a Will saving throw, its Intelligence and Charisma scores each drop to 1, giving it roughly the intellect of a lizard. The affected creature is unable to use Intelligence- or Charisma based skills, cast spells, understand language, or communicate coherently.
Still, it knows who its friends are and can follow them and even protect them. The subject remains in this state until a heal, limited wish, miracle, or wish spell is used to cancel the effect of the feeblemind. A creature that can cast arcane spells, such as a sorcerer or a wizard, takes a –4 penalty on its saving throw.
Material Component: A handful of clay, crystal, glass, or mineral spheres.

Click to expand...

ElectricDragon said:

And, so your house rule came with that wording in all its glory the first time at the table? No beta-testing and fine-tuning?

Click to expand...

Yeah, pretty much. There was discussion to make sure we all understood the impact. and then we voted. (We take turns as DM at my table, so all house rules require group approval.)

The "play test" has gone on for several 1-20 campaigns now, no problems.

But, rather than begging the question, please answer it: What would be the "corner conditions" to this house rule? Where are the holes? What's the basis for a challenge?

ElectricDragon said:

Why not every 3 levels, wouldn't that allow the fighter to keep ? Or even every 2? I remember in 1e AD&D that fighters got 1 attack/level but only against less than 1 HD creatures (goblins and kobolds mostly it seemed, though there were many others). No playtesting?

Click to expand...

Fair question.

Normal progression for a Fighter is: Iterative attacks at levels 6, 11, and 16. 21 would be next, but that's in Epic range and the rules change there. No more BAB progression.
Alternate progression for a Fighter is: Iterative attacks at 5, 9, 13, and 17. 21 would be next etc etc etc...

So the fighter gets one extra attack by the end of his BAB progression. The numbers meshed pretty neatly.

Additionally the fighter gets his/her first bump at the same level Wizard gets Fireball and Lightning bolt, their first big-boom area spells. Again, the numbers meshed pretty neatly.

In a way, though, you could call our last several campaigns the "beta test". We might try a different progression. But four and five interchange so nicely over a 20 level progression, and the results are positive enough that tinkering doesn't really seem to be called for.

We had a player (now departed) whose Cleric had a fighter cohort, and he was disgusted with the cohort's inability to really weigh in on some combats. Seems that the cohort was several levels lower than the PC, due to ECL adjustments, and a 13th level fighter just can't keep up with a 17th level party. But the player swore that: (A) You can't run a relevent fighter at higher levels, and (B) yu can't actually play a Lawful Good in a D&D campaign.

Next campaign I ran a straight melee machine, built straight from the PHB, and another player ran a Paladin. Knowing that a run of the mill fighter type does fall behind on the power curve later on in life, I had mine work to increase his usefulness early and often. To the point where one player challenged his choice of weapon (Spiked Chain), demanding to know what book it came from (PHB), and the group in general became uncomfortable with the Spiked Chain/Improved Trip/Combat Reflexes combo, and had to ask me to tone him down. He swapped the Spiked Chain for a Ranseur (same source, same reach, same damage, just as usable in a Trip, and it freed up a Feat since it's not an Exotic weapon.) Somehow they were satisfied with the change.

As for our Paladin, the disgruntled player was unhappy that the PC wouldn't "take a walk" at convenient times so prisoners could be tortured etc. The same behavior that his own "Lawful Good" PC had tried to get away with in the previous campaign. Yet the Paladin was effective and more than carried his weight in the game.

The point of this is that different people can handle rules and game situations differently. Not just me, but my group has no problem handling stat changes (including INT) the way the rules say they should, but they're not comfortable with power gaming. You seem to favor a different direction, and that's okay.

But if you're going to ask a question like yours on the forum, it's not very good form to dismiss or outright ignore answers that don't support the decision you've already made.

From my copy of the SRD:
Feeblemind
Enchantment (Compulsion) [Mind-Affecting]
Level: Sor/Wiz 5
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Target: One creature
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates; see text
Spell Resistance: Yes
If the target creature fails a Will saving throw, its Intelligence and Charisma scores each drop to 1. The affected creature is unable to use Intelligence- or Charisma-based skills, cast spells, understand language, or communicate coherently. Still, it knows who its friends are and can follow them and even protect them. The subject remains in this state until a heal, limited wish, miracle, or wish spell is used to cancel the effect of the feeblemind. A creature that can cast arcane spells, such as a sorcerer or a wizard, takes a –4 penalty on its saving throw.
Material Component: A handful of clay, crystal, glass, or mineral spheres.

Note, mine may be older than yours. I haven't seen an update in quite a while. IS yours the PF SRD? Mine is 3.5 SRD1.1. But I am unsure why that phrase would be added, it adds nothing to the spell description other than to obfuscate all the game rules already included. It is fluff, in other words.

Why should a dragon, one of the most powerful creatures in the game get an ability that is denied to player characters just because it is easier to do it that way?

Click to expand...

The best answer boiled down to, "The dragon takes too long as it is; player characters do not deserve such bonuses, it takes too much time and effort."
I explained that the effort is minimal and actually requires less paperwork. The characters are worth the effort. And dragons get many, many bonuses and really do not need even more, more icing on the cake with 3 levels of icing already. Your job seems to be to try to find corner cases where my rule doesn't work all the while trying to convince me not to use such a rule because it doesn't work for you.


You read my challenge, why not any other number of iterative attacks for fighters? How did you determine that one extra attack would make all the difference? Why not two, or three extra attacks, or the fighter's level number of attacks? How did you determine the "remains competitive for 3 more levels" part. And it does seem that you broke it without hardly trying, if your group made you change weapons for balance. Or do you blame that on the weapon/feat combo alone (corner case). Or do you blame it on your group's inability to cope with an effective fighter (challenge)?

I have been DMing difficult characters since 1978; OTTR (On The Table Rules) are sometimes called for during gameplay and do not invalidate a rule, just require a bit of refining of the rule sometimes. I think that OTTR are a necessary part of gameplay, else you were able to accurately predict everything your players would or could do while you were planning the adventure (I still hope to do that one day, but not yet). Corner Cases and Challenges validate a rule; if there are no corner cases, it would not be a game of imagination.

I looked in my physical copy of the 3.5 PHB. The Lizard reference is there, so I'm going to stick to my guns on this one.

Keeping track of when INT modifiers apply is pretty easy, actually: You gain a new level, figure out your skill points using current, permanent stats. That means you don't count stat boosts from items that can be removed, spells that can expire or be Dispelled, etc. Use the base score.

The only time this gets hard is when you use a spreadsheet or something similar and let it do your thinking for you.

As for Iterative Attacks: Why not more?

I actually answered that, but I'll do it again.

1) The 4/5 multiple works well with the 20 level range when BAB increases. The numbers worked out well.
2) We started with a relatively minor change to see how it worked, and see if there were any other unforseen effects. The first version seemed to do what we wanted with minimal game disruption, so we stayed with it.
3) Because this rule can affect monsters as well as PCs, and there are far more brute-force type critters than stealth or spell caster types, increasing the iterative attacks for them would make more work for DMs in planning encounters, and make lower level PCs even more breakable than they already are. As it is, you only have to worry about a relatively few monsters whose BABs fall at the break points. Shorter gaps mean more break points, and more work for DMs.

So, how did I determine that it kept the Fighter in play three levels longer? By playing it through two 1-20 level campaigns. As I said, our "beta test" of the house rule has run successfully for a while. We've seen no reason to change it.

As for my character's weapon/feat combo, you're trying to make a case that isn't there. Like your challenge of how I handled your rule (which I don't use), I think you read things that weren't there.

The player's discomfort with that had to do with their general dislike for min-maxers and power gaming. It's not a corner-case, and had nothing to do with the 4/5 BAB rule.

<Tangent>Many people object to the Spiked Chain, claiming that no such weapon existed, historically, as if that were relevent to a magical/fantasy campaign. (Also ignoring a number of Oriental chain weapons.) The fact is, it's a powerful combo that's limited in use, and comes at the end of an undocumented Feat-Tree: Expertise/Exotic Weapon/Improved Trip/Combat Reflexes. A feat tree, four feats deep, should yield a powerful result. </Tangent>

So now that I've answered your attempt to beg the question (again), would you please answer the original question? You said every new rule will have "corner conditions", and provoke challenges at the table. What are the corner conditions on this rule? Other than your, "Can I have some more please, sir" question, what challenge do you see coming up to this?

Corner cases don't validate a rule. The ability of a rule to operate without corner cases validates it, or if you prefer, the ability of a rule to handle corner cases without the need for rationalizations or the need for OTTR. If you need to make stuff up on the fly to cover the holes in a rule, you're not validating it, you're proving that there are holes, that maybe the rule needs to be reconsidered.

Rules should flow and merge organically with the game system. I personally hate it when game mechanics interfere with the flow of play, or become disruptive to the story. Boiler-plate rules tend to distract and drain the adrenaline of the moment.

As for experience: I'm in my 60s, and I've been playing since Chainmaille, Eldritch Wizardry, Gods Demigods and Heroes, and the original Blackmoore. (i.e. since the game was three saddle-stitched booklets and one supplement.) So let's not turn this into a chest-beating contest. We might impress ourselves (but not each other), but you and I aren't the only people who read this. Let's keep the personalities out of it.

Greenfield said:

Simple question: How does a character suddenly and retroactively learn skills that they never studied?

Click to expand...

The increased Intelligence allows you to more fully understand what you have already learned, you can add skill points only to those skills that are not maxed out yet (Spot and Listen come to mind). This is not the modifier, which shows up as increased utility of the skills, the same roll will be met with better results because the skill gets easier to do, rather than by increased capacity with the skill.

Whereas anyone gets all Str stat bonuses immediately, as they do with Con, Dex, Wis, and Cha; only Intelligence gets the shaft. Only Intelligence gets two parts of it removed: the beginning languages of the character, which should not change with stat increases because of how it is named (Starting Languages) and the number of skill points per level.

Every other stat allows all parts of it to be applied immediately upon gaining a stat increase by magic or by level increase or by age.
I am saying when the increase is from magic, there is no reason to put real-life realistic answers as to why it can't be done.

The "It is not realistic" answer could be spread to most of the other stats too: increased strength must face a period of training until the full bonuses are gained from practice; increased dexterity makes reflex saves (at the old number) to not trip over your own feet until you get used to it, increased constitution doesn't give the hp until your body adjusts to being more resilient (or is it more dodging, blocking, and parrying since hp are not really damage for the most part); increased charisma requires the use of the old cha mod for cha checks and turn undead rolls until the increased social ability is fully processed, etc. And you have suggested the required time period: until next level.

It is a magical world, and gaining a stat mid level is a magical event that should be FULLY rewarded. Magic. That's how and that's why.