Does anyone NOT use this house rule?

First off this thread belongs in the house rules forum vice the rules one since it specifically addresses a house-rule.

Second - I would never use the house rule. It just doesn't make any sense to me that suddenly a character has learned more (that is what ranks reflect some sort of learning while ability mod reflect an innact natural ability to do something) 2 years ago (just using the time to reflect levels even though there is no direct correllary).

Third - concerning the reason that an abiity increase to CON gains hit points retroactively is that IMO HP are a reflection of the potential a character has for taking punishment. Note this is not the hit dice (which can be related to training if one wishes) but a natural toughness. So if a character has gotten tougher than his natural limit has increased.

Forth - using retroactive Int increase will likewise open the door for things like more spells for a 1st level wizard and the like.

Bad precendent IMO.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

irdeggman said:
Forth - using retroactive Int increase will likewise open the door for things like more spells for a 1st level wizard and the like.

First off it really doesn't. And second off, allowing an 8th level wizard to get one addional first level spell in his spellbook is almost nothing.

But in the end this is a house rules thread in a house rules forum. No one if actually forcing people to use the rule yet, so I'm amazed at all the negative, the people who don't like the magic answer in a fantasy magic game, and that that somehow training for this can't be like the training in the rest of the game no existant. :cool:
 

Gnome said:
I was wondering if anyone doesn't have changes to Intelligence retroactively affect total skill points? The other way seems way too complicated to keep track of, and I can't imagine anyone perferring that.

Just wondering. :cool:

I don't. Just makes sense. Your intel limited you to certain capabilities. When you increased it, you increased your capacity for learning and pattern recornition.

I can understand greater intelligence granting new insights into learned skills, but allowing you to learn completely new ones instantly? Seems a bit odd, almost like you need a time machine.
 

One of the solutions to learning new skills when using this rrule is to make only untrained skills learnable through retroactive skill point gain.
 

irdeggman said:
First off this thread belongs in the house rules forum vice the rules one since it specifically addresses a house-rule.
It is in House Rules! :mad:
Second - I would never use the house rule. It just doesn't make any sense to me that suddenly a character has learned more (that is what ranks reflect some sort of learning while ability mod reflect an innact natural ability to do something) 2 years ago (just using the time to reflect levels even though there is no direct correllary).
Does it "make any sense to [you] that suddenly a character has learned more" because they went up a level? Because they raised their Int from level advancement and thereafter went up a level? It follows the same principle (especially if you apply the retroactive skills upon the next level advancement), so it makes exactly the same amount of sense as skill points per level do in the first place.
Third - concerning the reason that an abiity increase to CON gains hit points retroactively is that IMO HP are a reflection of the potential a character has for taking punishment. Note this is not the hit dice (which can be related to training if one wishes) but a natural toughness. So if a character has gotten tougher than his natural limit has increased.
Which is exactly the argument that is being made for Int (see my post that contrasts Education, intelligence, and their combined form, knowledge).
Forth - using retroactive Int increase will likewise open the door for things like more spells for a 1st level wizard and the like.

Bad precendent IMO.
This functions under the same principle as languages and going back to edit what happened in an old fight when you made a Knowledge check about an enemy and failed the check by 1 point. Does the wizard get more languages when his Int increases naturally? What about spells known? What about skill points?

See? It's the skill points that change. You learn languages and starting BEFORE creation (in the early childhood years usually). You learn skills BEFORE AND AFTER creation. You learn spells through a specific and very rigidly defined mechanic (you don't find spell, you don't learn spell, unless it's one of the two per level you use independent research on).

You can't base the value of this house rule on the way languages and wizard spells work, because that's an entirely different sphere of mental faculties.

Whether or not you use the rule is up to you, but don't expect your points to be seen as irrefutable.
 

Crothian said:
First off it really doesn't. And second off, allowing an 8th level wizard to get one addional first level spell in his spellbook is almost nothing.

But in the end this is a house rules thread in a house rules forum. No one if actually forcing people to use the rule yet, so I'm amazed at all the negative, the people who don't like the magic answer in a fantasy magic game, and that that somehow training for this can't be like the training in the rest of the game no existant. :cool:
I'm with you here, Crothian. While I can understand that this rule is not for everyone, I can't figure out what the problem some people have with it is. If you don't like it, don't use it; but why in the world are we getting such a strong negative reaction from the idea? I've explained using computer analogies and offered up numerous ideas for how to make the retro skill gain consistent, as have others. But still they are not appeased...

Do we need to start looking into the physiology of the human brain to see if this sort of "retroactive" knowledge modification is possible? Because the brain does not store memory in any specific location, it does work VERY retroactively with surgical removal, though scientists have yet to pinpoint a given memory with absolute certainty in every case of test removal. In contrast, the ravaging of acetylcholine receptor sites in the hippocampi, which occurs during Alzheimer's disease, simply prevents the acquisition of new memories, without causing one to lose "hard disk space" for the old ones.

So the question boils down to this...

Which is best represented by magical and/or nonmagical Int increases, the storage capacity and general ability of the brain itself, or nothing but the ability of the hippocampi to process memories as they happen? The answer should be obvious. From that perspective, I can firmly stand by my statement that permanent (not including headband of intellect, but including non-removable "magic items" such as those from prestige races, inherent bonuses, and magical tattoos) Int increase, regardless of source, should realistically cause retroactive Int gain.
 

Gnome said:
I was wondering if anyone doesn't have changes to Intelligence retroactively affect total skill points? The other way seems way too complicated to keep track of, and I can't imagine anyone perferring that.

We don't use that house rule, and I don't really see what's difficult about the actual rule. :)

You get 5 (or whatever number) skill points when you level up, you use them. Done.

Bye
Thanee
 

Genshou, to me its a matter of game mechanic ease. I don't use retroactive skill points because its easier to manage, not becuase I can't see how it might work in the faux reality of the game.

My main disagreement is opening it up to temporary INT increases providing on the spot 'bonus' skill points..which creates administrative overhead. My secondary disagreement in reduction of skill points on INT loss being problamatic.

With the added requirement of gaining skill points only at leveling makes it easier, and therefore more palatable to me.. A further step HRing cross-class skills to cost 1 skill point, but still limited by the normal cap, would make it even easier...

But still not as easy as not grantings the retroative points to begin with.

IMC, which rarely goes over 10th level, the impact of this version of the house rule would be neglible at best.. and therefore less worthy of the extra effort that it may require. Even just the effort explaining it to my players would not even be worth it as 5 of the 6 would never increase INT to begin with :)

If I were to delve into the whole 'faux realism' debate, I would be have to {re}ask the question.. does not INT increase already provide a higher bonus to all INT based skills, thereby representing an increase of said knowledge already?

eh.. ignore that.. just like last time.. and we will be good :eek:
No desire to get into frontal lobotamy debates today.
 

Primitive Screwhead said:
If I were to delve into the whole 'faux realism' debate, I would be have to {re}ask the question.. does not INT increase already provide a higher bonus to all INT based skills, thereby representing an increase of said knowledge already?

eh.. ignore that.. just like last time.. and we will be good :eek:
No desire to get into frontal lobotamy debates today.
Oh no, a frontal lobotomy would actually segregate the brain's ability to reason and judge social situations, turning one into a brute with a Wisdom score 4 points lower and a Charisma score of 3. Wouldn't affect memory any more than removing any other part of the brain. Do a web search on Phineus Gage if you want to know more about this slightly off-topic concept.

Meanwhile...

Skill points represent Education (via class skill points per level) and Intelligence which total to the amount of knowledge (not the skill which is capitalized) which you can get out of your training. Since skill points apply to all skills, and not simply Int-based skills, the idea is that the memory in the brain covers ALL skill ranks, and in that way Intelligence does double duty with regards to Int-based skills. The trick is to distinguish between "knowledge" as I define it in my discussion and "Knowledge" as a skill representing booksmarts in a particular field of study. There's a difference, and it's crucial to understand that difference if you hope to see where my points are coming from.

Again, not trying to convince you that you absolutely must use this house rule because it's more realistic. As you pointed out, in its own way it requires just as abysmal of a level of book-keeping as creating a high-level character with Int boosts would.
 

Primitive Screwhead said:
My main disagreement is opening it up to temporary INT increases providing on the spot 'bonus' skill points..which creates administrative overhead.

I don't allow this, so no reason anyone else has to. Just leave it for permanent increases, not temporary ones and I rule magical items temporary.


does not INT increase already provide a higher bonus to all INT based skills, thereby representing an increase of said knowledge already?

Two seperate things. There is knowledge skills and then skill points which represents something else but peopel are using knowledge as a descriptor there. Int does two things, it effects all Int based skills and the number of skill points people get. All I'm doing is allowing the attribute to do both to the fullest extent. So, yes of course it improves skills based on Int. And that increses to some extent knowledge skills but skill points is a more gerneal use of kjnowledge since skills cover a lot more then just knowledges.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top