Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="bakatare" data-source="post: 2755382" data-attributes="member: 36950">[bakatare - did the players have that knowledge forever or was it just regarding a certain encounter that the players were coming up against?Just curious how that fleshed out.]In the case of my campaign, they kept the knowledge forever.  In retrospect, though, it was a competence bonus (not a circumstance bonus) that the PC's gained.  I never thought of it before, and it never became an issue, but assigning the books a maximum skill level cap, such as that mentioned by Sir Brennen on his bit about Manuals, is a good idea.  In the future I will use such a cap, whereby the book only grants a bonus to characters with x ranks or less in a particular area of knowledge.  For example, if a character finds a comprehensive but broadly focused book on the history of Veluna, it would grant a +1 competence bonus to Knowledge (History) checks regarding the nation Veluna to characters with up to 10 ranks in Knowledge (History).  Characters with more than 10 ranks are considered knowledgeable enough on the topic that the book is no longer useful (and thus grants no bonus).  It seems logical to me, though, that keeping a number of books rendered obsolete by their rank caps could still prove useful for references.  Though I have my B.A. in Asian History, and have read scores (hundreds?) of books dealing with particular issues (the Boxer Rebellion, the Cultural Revolution, etc.) I still keep the most general and broad books on Asian (and world) history on my shelf, and re-read them now and again to refresh my memory on the basics.  In D&D, perhaps, maintaining a library of books otherwise useless to an expert (i.e. with a great number of skill points in an area of Knowledge) on a subject could grant some sort of circumstance bonus if used as reference material... maybe a cumulative bonus of +1 per 5 books or so.Just a thought, though, never been tested.</blockquote>

Verification