Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Permanent Increases in Intelligence Question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Greenfield" data-source="post: 7178098" data-attributes="member: 6669384"><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>The only time this gets hard is when you use a spreadsheet or something similar and let it do your thinking for you.</p><p></p><p>As for Iterative Attacks: Why not more? </p><p></p><p>I actually answered that, but I'll do it again.</p><p></p><p>1) The 4/5 multiple works well with the 20 level range when BAB increases. The numbers worked out well.</p><p>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.</p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p><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, <strong>should</strong> yield a powerful result. </Tangent></p><p></p><p>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?</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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. </p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Greenfield, post: 7178098, member: 6669384"] 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, [B]should[/B] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Permanent Increases in Intelligence Question
Top