D20 'philosophy' cramping my style

[S'mon]

I might be bothered if you just "give" the imp extra skill points.

I think this is what the poster is complaining about - why should it bother anyone?

 

[S'mon]

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.

Yup, this is what he's complaining about. Personally I'm sick of reviewers like that.

 

[S'mon]

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.).

Because the DM sets the rules for the game. As DM I can even 'magically' add skill ranks to PCs!

 

[Aaron L]

Because the DM sets the rules for the game. As DM I can even 'magically' add skill ranks to PCs!

Why bother having rules if you're going to alter them on a whim?


"Sorry Bob, you would have made your Sense Motive check, but I decided to give the imp a +4 bonus just now, so you didn't."

 

[Creamsteak]

It's basically a story. This is what is supposed to have happened.

What's supposed to have happened...

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.

Or add 2 points to it's intelligence and gain 3+hit dice bonus skill points. I'm not seeing what's so hard about these changes. These "interdependencies" make the game system what it is.

I think the problem is that adding "ranks" of bluff rather than a racial bonus is inconsistent. If you want to give a creature a +4 racial, circumstance, or competence bonus, I'll never complain. Giving a creature more skill ranks than it's hit dice modified by intelligence would bring, however, is something that might erk some people. It's inconsistent.

 

[Dancer]

Why bother having rules if you're going to alter them on a whim?


"Sorry Bob, you would have made your Sense Motive check, but I decided to give the imp a +4 bonus just now, so you didn't."

Point is, in this instance, it's not on a whim. It's part of the story the module is trying to tell. Part of the story framework being designed so that everyone can have an enjoyable time. If the monsters in the MM are just typical examples, then I see nothing wrong with giving the imp 4 levels in Bluff.

If you have to question where the levels come from, maybe the imp is an accomplished liar (and not neccessarily a thief, which he would gain with additional rogue levels). Perhaps, hundreds of years of living in the abyss has made him develop 4 levels in Bluff. Not too big of a stretch I think.

Another point, the difference between a GM doing this and a player doing it is that usually, the player is looking out for his own welfare. His percieved job is to have his character survive and thrive and grow more powerful. The GM's job is to provide a framework in which this is possible and worth doing. If that means that an imp has an additional 4 levels of Bluff, then damn, give it the levels and get on with the fun.

 

[GSHamster]

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

It would have been covered in the 'etc.'. I didn't mean to imply that reassigning (as opposed to simply granting) skill ranks wasn't legal or a valid solution.

 

[Creamsteak]

I think this is what the poster is complaining about - why should it bother anyone?

Yep, I think that I'm one of the people *specifically* being complained about by the poster if he's who I think he is.

I still don't understand his perspective though. There are 40 different ways to get what he wants, all he has to do is use a word other than "ranks" and note the specific change. Skill ranks come from hit dice modified by intelligence and also by the human racial bonus (and any other races that might have it). Maybe there are some non-core feats and such that add other skill ranks, but they declare this explicitely. All you need to do is note that the change is a competency or circumstance bonus, comes from a magic item, boost the creature's intelligence, add hit dice, or alter the race and give it a racial bonus. There's 40 ways to do what you want, the very simplest of which is to bump the Int or add a circumstance modifier.

 

[Cergorach]

Yup, this is what he's complaining about. Personally I'm sick of reviewers like that.

Don't forget that your the exception to the rule, most players and DMs want consitency in both the storyline and the rules. If it says uses D20 system, it should follow the D20 system. You wouldn't want to buy a 24carat ring only to later find out that it's only 16carat, the retailers responding: "It's gold isn't it!"

Because the DM sets the rules for the game. As DM I can even 'magically' add skill ranks to PCs!

Yes you could, most DMs and players though aren't comfortable with such 'extreme' freestyle gaming, because if you magically add a couple of skill points to their character, what's stopping you from suddenly making them evil, another gender or race, making them senile, or worse...

If you want to make the rules more flexible for the DM, the players should know beforehand, not after the fact. It might suprise you, but most RPGs work on the mutual consent principle, and because there are often more players then DMs it means that DM should hear what the players have to say. So if the players say, no side trips to the planet earth, no meetings between my character and my real world self (don't ask), no more extended expeditions to elemental planes, no more fudging of the roles because you can't handle the fact that we outwitted your NPC (again), you as the DM should better listen, because otherwise your out of a job!

If your a publisher it goes even further, you should stay within the rules, otherwise give a good reason why you outside the rules. Just 'giving' the imp 4 extra ranks of bluff without a good reason (and i don't feel like it isn't a good reason, neither is it's cramping my style), while there are plenty of good ways to add those 4 ranks of bluff without 'fudging/bending' the rules.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

If you feel that adding a few racial hit dice or a level of rogue is "jumping through hoops," then do as others have suggested: rearrange skill points and make a special note saying "this Imp has Bluff as a class skill." There ya go. No need to tack on extra skills. You're just changing the nature of your standard imp. No big deal, and you're all done.