Are skill bonuses on races considered racial bonuses?
- Thread starter malcolm_n
- Start date
DracoSuave
First Post
1) Skill bonuses are not racial bonuses. They are untyped. All bonuses without a named bonus type are untyped.
2) Yes this means that a half-elf can benefit from another half-elf's bonus to Diplomacy.
3) Elves cannot benefit from other elves' Perception, because it only benefits non-elves.
4) Half-elves are not elves, and do benefit from the elves' Perception bonus. They only have the ablity to take feats with elf or human as a pre-requisite. They also can't take paragon classes with either pre-requisite, epic destinies, or anything else. Just feats.
All bonuses without types are untyped bonuses.
2) Yes this means that a half-elf can benefit from another half-elf's bonus to Diplomacy.
3) Elves cannot benefit from other elves' Perception, because it only benefits non-elves.
4) Half-elves are not elves, and do benefit from the elves' Perception bonus. They only have the ablity to take feats with elf or human as a pre-requisite. They also can't take paragon classes with either pre-requisite, epic destinies, or anything else. Just feats.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
yes, the non-elf part would be redundant with the perception bonus beeing also racial...
I is perfectly clear how to read it properly: rule as you wish and wait for an official clarification if you need one...
WalterKovacs
First Post
On a quick browse of the PHB1.
Eladrin have a racial bonus to Will defense, but the Human bonus is not racial.
However, every instance of racial bonus has been in sentence form. [i.e. you gain a +2 racial bonus to AC against opportunity attacks]. However in the cases where they do not use a full sentence, they don't use the racial bonus text (i.e. all skill mods are listed as Skill Bonuses: +2 X, +2 Y. The human's bonus to defenses is similarly worded in a list form, and doesn't start with "You gain a ..."
The only exception seems to be resistance, but at the same time, "type" of resistance doesn't really matter since it doesn't stack if it comes from different sources anyway.
Eladrin have a racial bonus to Will defense, but the Human bonus is not racial.
However, every instance of racial bonus has been in sentence form. [i.e. you gain a +2 racial bonus to AC against opportunity attacks]. However in the cases where they do not use a full sentence, they don't use the racial bonus text (i.e. all skill mods are listed as Skill Bonuses: +2 X, +2 Y. The human's bonus to defenses is similarly worded in a list form, and doesn't start with "You gain a ..."
The only exception seems to be resistance, but at the same time, "type" of resistance doesn't really matter since it doesn't stack if it comes from different sources anyway.
Starfox
Hero
PH1 said:
Seems I need to boldface the bit that I think solves the problem. If you consider the first (boldface) sentence the main rule and the rest a secondary, somewhat ill-chosen example, every bonus in the racial write-up is a racial bonus. That's how I read it after the comments in PH2 I quoted above.
Bolongo
Herr Doktor
While I actually agree with your conclusion, I have to point out that your argument isn't that strong. That same page (275 BTW, not 255) also has the statement that "A feat bonus is granted by a feat", among other examples. It also has the general exception that "Some bonuses are untyped."
Logically, what these sentences are saying is that, for example, all feat bonuses are granted by feats, but all bonuses granted by feats are not necessarily feat bonuses.
However, if we apply some serious rules lawyering there is an out here. The exception rule gives the format for untyped bonuses: "a +2 bonus". The skill bonuses under racial traits don't use this format. They don't read "+2 bonus to Bluff" or whatever, just "+2 Bluff". Which I would say still leaves it up in the air what kind of bonus it is.
For the record, I think it's a racial bonus, because it's in a box called "racial traits".
![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
AbdulAlhazred
Legend
Bolongo's observation is exactly mine too, and I also agree with the conclusion that everything in the race boxes SHOULD be a racial bonus. I'd go so far as to say that is how I would generally rule it in my game, but NOT because I think it is definitively RAW, just that it is RAI and in any case changes nothing anywhere in any 4e material that I know of so far.
DracoSuave
First Post
You cannot say a bonus without a type mentioned on it is 'up in the air.' A bonus without a named type is, by definition, an untyped bonus. It's the RAW, and RAI.
As well, it is RAI that if you have, for example, a race that gives you a bonus to diplomacy, that the half-elf could not help them out?
You have -precedent- in the books of what an untyped bonus is, and the bonuses to skills from race follow that precedent. No named bonus = untyped bonus.
It is a logical fallacy to believe that the rule suddenly changes -without any mention- when you're discussing it in the context of race.
It's a house rule that races give racial bonuses to skills -despite all evidence to the contrary-.
All evidence points to non-typed bonuses. They've had a year to resolve this, if they'd intended those bonuses to be racial, they'd probably have fixed it in a rules update, and probably would have templated the new PHB2 races to use the 'racial bonus' terminology. They haven't, so all evidence points to things are to be taken exactly as written in this context.
As well, it is RAI that if you have, for example, a race that gives you a bonus to diplomacy, that the half-elf could not help them out?
You have -precedent- in the books of what an untyped bonus is, and the bonuses to skills from race follow that precedent. No named bonus = untyped bonus.
It is a logical fallacy to believe that the rule suddenly changes -without any mention- when you're discussing it in the context of race.
It's a house rule that races give racial bonuses to skills -despite all evidence to the contrary-.
All evidence points to non-typed bonuses. They've had a year to resolve this, if they'd intended those bonuses to be racial, they'd probably have fixed it in a rules update, and probably would have templated the new PHB2 races to use the 'racial bonus' terminology. They haven't, so all evidence points to things are to be taken exactly as written in this context.
RAW, I agree with DracoSuave the bonuses to skills are untyped from your race.
It's also likely that some designer made the reasonable assumption that skill bonuses from race are racial bonuses, and thus wrote the Twilight Guardian path feature to refer to "racial bonus", thus making the PH2 wrong.
RAI...I have no idea. I suspect that typing every bonus is probably a good idea, although yes, that makes certain races loose benefits from having a half-elf in the party and has other consequences.
It's also likely that some designer made the reasonable assumption that skill bonuses from race are racial bonuses, and thus wrote the Twilight Guardian path feature to refer to "racial bonus", thus making the PH2 wrong.
RAI...I have no idea. I suspect that typing every bonus is probably a good idea, although yes, that makes certain races loose benefits from having a half-elf in the party and has other consequences.
Bolongo
Herr Doktor
Where did you find that definition? Because the only one I can find is the one I quoted from page 275. And I've already covered that, by taking the typical rules lawyer's literal-mindedness to the next level. If you're serious about treating the RAW as scripture, how can you object to that?
Also, I'm fascinated by your certain knowledge of the RAI. Who or what are you channeling this from, may I ask?
