Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thia Halmades" data-source="post: 2643155" data-attributes="member: 35863">Ultimately this is the house rule board.  If there's one thing I've gotten good at saying, it's this: "I would never, ever do that, but if you want the drama, go nuts."  I come from a pro-house rule setting (since I write 'em all myself, mua ha ha) and I guarantee you that the players would go absolutely ape over the idea of gaining skill points instantly just by adding INT.  I'm falling on the same side as Spatizmaus here, and quite the opposite of IndyPendant.The original question posed was: Does anyone not use this house rule?  The answer is clearly "yes," there's a whole bunch of us not using that house rule.  It isn't a balance issue (although extreme examples are always good for that, nice one Spatzimaus) because what INT giveth, INT taketh away.  My first question back in the original thread was "Do you also reduce skill points for a loss of INT?"  The answer, it seems, is yes, assuming that we're talking about permanent (item, WISH, Level Advance) adjustments to the stat, and not Fox's Cunning.Next point: INT gets the shaft as its only good for skill points and skills related to it.  Have you met my poor, maligned friend CHA?  Friendliest guy in the game, and doesn't even have skill points to his credit; just some personal skills.  We could make dozens of separate arguments about how the stat system is biased towards physical stats.  CON always gives more HP; STR always auto-adjusts on the next hit and what you can carry.  DEX modifies both REF, INIT & AC.  We'd be right on all counts.  But INT fills its niche roll, and for my players, it's a highly prized stat because I run a skill-heavy campaign.I don't hold with retro skill points; IndyPendant makes a good point, though.  You can flavor text anything; you can argue till you're blue in the face.  He also supports the idea that temporary INT changes should give you more skill points.  I simply assume that's what the little adjustment next to your stat is for; to reflect that you've gotten BETTER or WORSE at something because it moves in accord with skills associated with that stat.  I don't come from an INT = all skills attitude.  I come more from the "STR should contribute directly to STR skills" argument, but that (again) is why we have stat modifiers.Anything else seems excessively complicated.LCpt. Thia Halmades</blockquote>

Verification