D20 'philosophy' cramping my style

[Turanil]

First, explain to me why I am stupid and this is NOT an example of anything being wrong anywhere except in my head (since I know nobody will agree with me) and second, tell me technically if I can give this thing a few bluff skill ranks (and no, using it as an unranked skill isn't going to cut it)

Potion of Glibness (+30 to Bluff for one hour)

I don't know if it has already been suggested (admit having not read through the whole thread), but you could use some magic item to make up for lack of Bluffing abilities, don't you?

 

[mmadsen]

Using the rules to give a creature an abiliy that it doesn't posses normally in order specifically for it to dupe chracters into thinking it is something that it is not isn't "jumping through hoops", but is exactly what the ability to add class levels to creatures is for. Want to make anything good at lieing? Give it 1 or 2 levels of rogue. Not hard to do at all.

Adding a level or two or rogue instead of just adding a few ranks of bluff is a perfect example of the system asking you to jump through hoops. Instead of saying, this imp has four ranks in bluff (and nudging its CR up a tad), the DM has to add in a couple hit dice, modify BAB, saves, etc. Those are unnecessary interdependencies

Flat out adding things increases the abilities and difficulty of a creature while ignoring an increase of the Challenge Rating. [...] If you view CR as a hindrance then give creatures whatever abilities you want, but don't complain when these creatures defeat PCs of seemingly appropriate level because of arbitrary ability additions.

Adding abilities without increasing CR would be a problem. I never said otherwise. In a system with fewer interdependencies though, you'd just add four skill points to the overall cost of the creature -- analogous to adding a fraction of a CR in the current system.

 

[Kichwas]

If you do swap the skill points around or give it class levels you should explicitly say you did such in the text so that the publisher doesn't get hit with emails demanding errata from people who think you just added it in.

 

[Cergorach]

Adding a level or two or rogue instead of just adding a few ranks of bluff is a perfect example of the system asking you to jump through hoops. Instead of saying, this imp has four ranks in bluff (and nudging its CR up a tad), the DM has to add in a couple hit dice, modify BAB, saves, etc. Those are unnecessary interdependencies

Adding two points of intelligence results in enough skill points to solve the problem, two extra points of intelligence doesn't require an increase of CR. Very quick, very simple, and completely within the rules.

Adding abilities without increasing CR would be a problem. I never said otherwise. In a system with fewer interdependencies though, you'd just add four skill points to the overall cost of the creature -- analogous to adding a fraction of a CR in the current system.

Increases of CR are giant leaps of power, a couple of skill points doesn't impact the CR at all. But that's not the problem, the problem is: where did those skill points come from. Just adding some skill points for a homebrew adventure isn't that big of a deal, for a published adventure it is a very big deal and indicates unprofessional game mechanic and game statting skills. If this is your design policy, you and your publisher have a problem, because a lot of reviewers (especialy those around here) are very critical in the game mechanics/stats used and the editing/correctness of those game mechanics/stats.

 

[Aaron L]

So you are telling me that a Devil shouldn't have the ability to lie? Or that 4 ranks of bluff are likely to tip the scales against a party?

DB

No, Im telling you that it's painfully simple whithin the rules to make the imp a good lier. The higher intelligence mentioned above by Cergorach is the simplest way so far. Swapping skill points is easy as well.

And yes, 4 ranks in bluff against a party with no one who is good at Sense Motive could mean they fail.

 

[Psion]

Adding a level or two or rogue instead of just adding a few ranks of bluff is a perfect example of the system asking you to jump through hoops.

Um, what was the problem with reassigning skill points again?

 

[Darrin Drader]

If you do swap the skill points around or give it class levels you should explicitly say you did such in the text so that the publisher doesn't get hit with emails demanding errata from people who think you just added it in.

I don't necessarily agree with this. It is one thing to mention in the text that this imp has ranks in Bluff and quite another to provide an explanation on how the creature was redesigned. If someone wants to poke holes in your design work, they should have to go through the trouble of deconstructing the entire thing. Besides, even if the designer is wrong, most publishers aren't going to humor the nit-pickers anyway.

 

[GSHamster]

I think we'd all agree that it would be wrong for a player to "magically" add 4 ranks in Bluff to his character.

So why then would it be okay for a DM to do the same? Especially when there are so many options to get the same effect legally (circumstance bonuses, higher intelligence, class levels, etc.).

 

[Psion]

I think we'd all agree that it would be wrong for a player to "magically" add 4 ranks in Bluff to his character.

So why then would it be okay for a DM to do the same? Especially when there are so many options to get the same effect legally (circumstance bonuses, higher intelligence, class levels, etc.).

Once again, what was the problem with reassigning skill points again? Perfectly legal, perfectly within the rules. You do realize that monsters that appear in the MM are only "typical" specimens, right?

 

[Crothian]

I think we'd all agree that it would be wrong for a player to "magically" add 4 ranks in Bluff to his character.

So why then would it be okay for a DM to do the same? Especially when there are so many options to get the same effect legally (circumstance bonuses, higher intelligence, class levels, etc.).

Becasue when players do it, it is called cheating and when DMs do it, it is called improvisng.

Remember until the DM createis the monster and crosses the T's the monster is just not defined. THe DM can reassign skill pointw, alter attributes, etc to the MM monster and that is perfectly fine.

I agree with Psion, I'd just reasign the skill points.