Do the bonus skill points a character gains for being human or taking a level in their favored class apply after a negative intelligence modifier or before.
For example, would a human with an intelligence of 5 get three skill points per level (2 for being a paladin, minus 3 for being dumb (minimum one), plus 1 for being human, plus 1 for taking a level in his favored class) or one (2 for being a paladin, plus one for being a human, plus one for taking a level in his favored class, minus three for being dumb)?
After. Your example is correct. The only formula stated that gives any sort of example for calculating skill points is listed under classes, where it is "2/3/6/8 + Int" There is no mention of miscelaneous modifiers in that formula, which implies they would apply after you finish said formula.
Rules lawyers might counter-argue that since there is no mention of misc mods in said formula, you don't get them at all, but thats silly, because those misc mods DO exist, thus they can be gained.
And overall, most of the time I've seen that if there is no explicit order to use (such as in the case of saving throws and energy resistance) you apply the factors in the manner most beneficial to you. Which you again be your example.
Others can shoot me down if they like.
I guess that makes the choice between Human Paladin and Half Orc Paladin a bit tougher. On one hand you could dump stat int (as all good Paladins should) and still get three skill points per level. On the other you could stay conscious at negative hit points and lay hands upon yourself as a swift action to rejoin the fight.
By raw ya get 3, at my table you would not get 3 I would give ya 1 as ya have 2 for paladin, 1 for human and 1 for fc-3 giving you one. I know that is not totally by the rules but Int is not a dump stat and I do not award loopholes.
like others said by raw you get 3, but check with your dm, because seeker is not alone in considering this a loophole, I personally never let a player have less then 2 skill points regardless of stats or class.
Eh I never allow a class to have less then 4. But if ya want to dump your Int you should not be able to gain the same amount of skills as the player who did not.
By RAW a human paladin who can not count past 10 has the same amount of skills as a dwarf paladin with int of 10,someone twice as smart. So yes I see it as a loophole
Eh I never allow a class to have less then 4. But if ya want to dump your Int you should not be able to gain the same amount of skills as the player who did not.
By RAW a human paladin who can not count past 10 has the same amount of skills as a dwarf paladin with int of 10,someone twice as smart. So yes I see it as a loophole
I respect the position, i just disagree for my table. But then again, all of the dm's in my group give blanket +skill points, we want everyone to have more skills.
I'm not sure its a loophole.
Race (and class) benefits change things. And should change things.
Now I'm not saying that Int should always be a dumpstat but by saying "this is a loop hole I'm closing" you are really saying "I am denying you a benefit of your race, and one choice in your class benefits, because you chose to dump Int".
If someone dumps Con do you also hose them on the +1hp for their favored class?
Myself, it wouldn't bother me if the DM told me I couldn't.. I'd just change my choice from "skill point " to "hit point" or vice versa and keep moving.
The guy is already having to use alternate features though just to try to get a point or two of skills. I'm not sure its a "loophole". (afterall, he could choose a different race altogether or select HP instead of Skills for his favored class bonus.)
And by RAW a human with any given int vs a race of any other given int, has more skills. That is what the human bonus gives. More skill points.
I dunno, maybe its just me.. but I don't really like taking away someone's class and race features just because they chose to lower a stat. The game already provides dis-incentives for doing that. If they chose to do it anyway and have some feature that negates it.. Well, that is part of the game.
Do you also deny Dwarves their racial trait to not be further slowed by armor? Afterall- its just a loophole to allow them to wear heavy armor and not be slowed by it. Maybe they should stick to light armors?
(no sarcasm meant by it.. Its just the closest parallel I could think of..)
-S
If you're a half-elf you gain the half-elf skill focus bonuses no matter your intelligence...
Extra skill point is a human bonus...you should keep it.
If you're taking a skill point for favored class, you're NOT taking the extra HP...
I would not penalize those choices...
Eh I never allow a class to have less then 4. But if ya want to dump your Int you should not be able to gain the same amount of skills as the player who did not.
By RAW a human paladin who can not count past 10 has the same amount of skills as a dwarf paladin with int of 10,someone twice as smart. So yes I see it as a loophole
I would point out that this would award the player for not playing human.
After all if you are only going to get one skill point either way why waste the race and FC on skill points you aren't going to get?
Instead you could take your 1 skill point, have an extra HP and then get a race with better options outside of skills (like half orc).
No if you want to min/max loophole skills then raw allows it. Human gets 1 skill point. I will not award people who dump int to the level of a trained dog then go "Well I am human so I still get 3 skills"
No. Your skill point is there to show how adaptable humans are..Some one with an int of an 5 year old is not very adaptable. I will not allow a player to loophole the system,even if that loophole is built in.
That player choose not to take advantage of his races ability, kinda like playing a dwarf and dumping con to 5. Sure you can do it but ya know it will not take advantage of your races ability
Anyhow ya can run your game how you like, I would never allow such a thing.
|
I'm with Seeker here. The penulty for dumping Int should matter.
An alternative, maybe instead of loosing ranks, for every minus skill point that the character would have, they instead do not recieve the +3 for class skill, (and the DM chooses which ones).
Basicaly, you are constructing a characer who should be in the hole, and their Race and FC are not enough to bail them out, yet they get free points anyay. That is a loophole. They are choosing to make the character that way. I can see a min of 1, but that is it.
Alternatively, you could rule that they simply can not have an Int penulty small enough that they would be "in th hole".
Again I ask:
Do you force dwarves to wear light armor? Or do you let them take advantage of their racial ability? Are they exploiting loopholes when they wear heavy armor?
Denying someone their racial ability because they choose to make another perfectly valid and legal game play choice just.. isn't right.
If you feel that strongly about it, you should just inform players that the minimum value for any given stat is X, rather than 3.
Dumping int as a human is no less valid a decision than being an elf who takes advantage of the dex boost to become a rogue or of a dwarf who bounces his con down to 3 knowing it'll actually become a 5.
Its your game, and you run it how you like.. but it sounds like you are just double penalizing players. Just make something against the rules if you really don't like it. Don't deny them their class and race abilities because you disagree with a valid choice they made.
-S
I allow humans to take advantage..but if they choose not to buy dumping INt lower then a goblin then it's not my issue
By raw
Human fighter int 10 4 skills max
Human fighter int 5 3 skills max
How the hell is that fair? It is not fair your rewarding a player for using a built in loophole while giving the player who chose not to use the loophole nothing. You just made the human skill point useless unless players chose to exploit a loophole or take high INT leaving those who choose not to exploit it out in the cold
I am sorry I can't spell, write my name, count past 10 or walk and talk at the same time..but I am just as skillful as a half orc with int of 10
yeah very, very fair.
As I said RAW back ya up and your more then welcome to run your games as such, but I do not allow munchkin builds or loophole hunting and truthfully that is all this is.
|
|
Again I ask:
Do you force dwarves to wear light armor? Or do you let them take advantage of their racial ability?
There is a big difference. More appropriate would be like saying a Dwarven Druid, (who has material issues). It isn't that their race is being ignored, it is that THEY made a bad combination.
The difference is also that the character is purpossefully put themselves in the negative, and using bad math to justify it. Not saying the rule is wrong, but it is bad math and cheese.
They are using their racial ability. To buy off the penalty.
I'm actually not seeing anywhere that the +1 racial or FC comes after the total, (and didn't in 3.5).
In fact, the racial abilities are one step before getting skills when you level up, so the actualy the math looks like , which is also min, problem solved.
Umm ... on the "NO WAY" side of things, you guys *do* realize that all Int-based skills will still fully be taking the (-) modifier to the skills in the first place, right?
Anything modified by Int is going to SUCK for this character that dumped his Int ... isn't that bad enough?
In all honesty, forget the human business, and just look at 2+ int modifier (minimum of 1) and the class sp/hp thing. The 1 dump-stat guy is still getting at least 1 point for his skills (trained dog or not), and he's got the option of sp or hp - HIS CHOICE. What's the big deal? Honestly, if a character is dumping Int that much, I'd not expect many skills in the first place (ie: end up at minimum 1 fast), but then if he's using the class-feature thing to bump it up ... by a WHOLE 1 sp - why not? What's broken there? It's 1 more skill point, bringing him up to a grand total of 2. When it comes to any Int-based task, the character is still "Double D" in rating (Dumb as Dog-s$@~), and would need to dedicate a LOT of skill points to show him/her as anything better than that regarding intellect.
Part of the skills and ability split to determine what governs which skill is to show, if anything, multiple modalities of intelligence. Certain things are simply more relevant to different aspects of the character's make-up (ie: sensory and Wisdom, climbing and strength, etc). If you *DO* want to go and penalize these people in this way, what you're really doing is saying they CAN NOT learn well in ALL modalities of intelligence. IMO, that's going too far. Sure - you're hitting home the importance of intelligence, but in the skill system it's already factored in by governing all Int-based skills (that this *small* skill point bonus does NOT help with) and the ability governance split of the various skills.
I think, in your knee-jerk reaction to "loop hole" you're missing the bigger picture of how skills fully work in-game terms. A few extra skill points does NOT = "smart character" at all. I think the best thing to help understand why it's an "ok" thing and not broken is to look at it in terms of why skills are split up amongst abilities in the first place and consider that a "Double D" character is still "Double D" regarding Intellect. You closing off those few skill adders does two things:
1) Negates a player option (sp/hp - you'll essentially FORCE that kind of PC to always take the bonus HP over sp since you're disallowing an official stance - game designer has already weighed in). Never a good thing to simply negate such a thing, IMO.
2) Negates a racial advantage (humans don't get all that much as it stands, you want to crap on that small skill point boon? Really? Sheesh ...). Again, not a very good idea.
Honestly, just consider the big picture of how the system works, and why it works before making your final ruling. It's your game, so house-rule away - but don't expect players to be happy about the ruling.
There are always better in-game ways to deal with int-dumping characters if you're looking to "punish" player designs. Just keep putting 'em in situations where Int and Int-skills matter. The character will clearly cease to shine in those encounters. EVERY. SINGLE.TIME. If that's not enough, you could make some heavy consequence come along with those things, BUT ... that's being an abusive GM, IMO.
Calm down everyone. I didn't mean to stir up a hornet's nest.
My DM wanted us to roll our stats, and I got 8, 16, 15, 5, 16, 14. With that nasty little 5 I was going to have to dump stat something. I figured why not put the 5 in intelligence and play a Paladin, they're all idiots anyways. I was just wondering if there was any advantage to playing a human and putting my favored class bonus towards skill points, instead of playing a half orc and choosing to apply my favored class bonus towards hit points.
Agreed... We all know the official answer here... now we are more into the arena of discussing houserules on the situation...
I personally don't see a problem with it. Humans get 2 things (stat bonuses aside)... an extra feat & an extra skill point. Not exactly what I would consider a loop hole.
Min/Max'ing, this again, really? Making a character who plays well based on creation choices using the core rules... *stands up* "Hi, my name is Dan, and I am a min/max'er."
Yeah as Beckett and Abraham have said we all know how RAW works, we are just talking the realms of house rules. None of us are upset or angry over it, we just say it like we see it is all.
As for me int of 5 is int of 5 you choose to not take advantage of a given ability. That is just how I see it. And how I have used it for more then 8 years now.
Now do keep in mind that I also bump all 2 skill class to 4, so even with and int of 5 your paladin would gain 3 skill points in my games where as a human paladin with an int of 10 would gain 6 if he used his FC as well
And as to speakers claim, I call BS, the INT mod means nada as this guy will not be taking INT based skills so it does not even come into it. He is still suffering almost no skill effect of how many he can have and ya bet your ass skill are indeed about how smart you are or they would not be effected by neg modifiers
|
I allow humans to take advantage..but if they choose not to buy dumping INt lower then a goblin then it's not my issue
By raw
Human fighter int 10 4 skills max
Human fighter int 5 3 skills maxHow the hell is that fair? It is not fair your rewarding a player for using a built in loophole while giving the player who chose not to use the loophole nothing. You just made the human skill point useless unless players chose to exploit a loophole or take high INT leaving those who choose not to exploit it out in the cold
I am sorry I can't spell, write my name, count past 10 or walk and talk at the same time..but I am just as skillful as a half orc with int of 10
yeah very, very fair.
As I said RAW back ya up and your more then welcome to run your games as such, but I do not allow munchkin builds or loophole hunting and truthfully that is all this is.
Umm I don't know, I don't play games to be FAIR, I play games to have FUN. Denying a player access to an ability he is supposed to have just because YOU don't think it is FAIR is not FUN.
But it is your game, but pretty sure I would NOT want to play in it because I have a feeling it won't be FUN. Sorry.
Fun and fair go hand in hand in gaming. If you allow one player to do something yet do not allow another then you diminish some players fun and allow the loophole hunter his way. Your allowing one player the same benefit with no penalty that another player who did not take a hit to int got. In a sense your showing favoritism to the min/maxer and rewarding him for skirting the rules while diminishing the other player because he chose not to use the loophole
It is a loophole as the human with an int of 1 still gets 3 skill points, sure he can not talk understand language or the like but he can use non- int based skills as well as the player with int of 10, he just gains one less and can keep 3 maxed out at all times
Yep that's a loophole
So yes if your the kind of player that must have his way no matter how it effects the other players you would not be welcome at a game I run, sorry.
However the other player has a dwarf that gets to run around in full plate at full speed and his heaviest load on his back all day without problems and my character can't do it... That's not fair!
Heck he even dumped Cha... what in the heck would he need that for?
And darkvision... bonuses against poisons and most magics... and and and...
Or the simple stacking bonuses that elves get, where the Con penalty still wouldn't prevent them from getting full benefit from the extra hp of the FC bonus.
How about the halfling rogue with no strength always getting at least one damage?
The question isn't if it's fair... it is where do you draw the line in the sand.
That is how I see it, I do not think it is fair for one player using the same class and races as another to get the same benefit another gets if he is abusing a loophole.
I also see it an average human gains the skill point, but dumb is dumb no matter the race. Sure the skill point does help but once ya get to a point where the negatives are greater the the positives your in trouble
The paladin above has a -3 yet the loophole rules allows him to ignore that and gain from it.
To me allowing that players to use that punishes the other players who did not dump his INT because he knew he could just ignore it. But as I said in my games paladins have 4 skills per level so even with the -3 he can still pull off 3 without loopholing.
That is how I see it, I do not think it is fair for one player using the same class and races as another to get the same benefit another gets if he is abusing a loophole.
I also see it an average human gains the skill point, but dumb is dumb no matter the race. Sure the skill point does help but once ya get to a point where the negatives are greater the the positives your in trouble
The paladin above has a -3 yet the loophole rules allows him to ignore that and gain from it.
To me allowing that players to use that punishes the other players who did not dump his INT because he knew he could just ignore it. But as I said in my games paladins have 4 skills per level so even with the -3 he can still pull off 3 without loopholing.
He doesn't gain from it. He's still taking int penalties to any int based skill. The human skilled trait isn't about being smarter, it's about being able to pick up new things and learn new tricks relatively easily. It's about the race's versatility. Similarly the "X" in X + int modifier for class skills isn't about intelligence but about what skills a person would pick up by "doing" that class.
A paladin with 5 int still better roleplay a guy dumb as a rock, and is gonna regret his decision if he ever takes int damage. Once he's down to 2 he's going to be very limited in the actions and feats he can utilize.
First, I agree with Krome and Abraham, "unfun" & "where do you draw the line?", but I have a suggestion that you may or may not like...
What if, you let the Human keep their bonus, but instead have them ONLY able to apply it to a mundane/physical skill such as; Climb, Swim and/or Profession(within reason).
Just a thought... for YOUR game.
Personally, I will continue run my Dwarven Paladin and not worry whether or not the Human Monk with the INT of a common garden variety squash has 2 extra skill points. *shrug*
Thanks for the suggestion but I will keep it as is. I already give 2 skill point classes a boost, if they wish to throw that away buy dropping INT to a very low level it's on them after all
Still I can never recall to date having anyone complain really.
And TLO3, He does indeed gain from it. Sure he can not take INT based skills but he still gains more then he should, so it is rewarding him for being dumber then a goblin, while giving nothing extra to those players who did not dump int.
But as I said thats my games and I really am not gonna change my mind on it after 8 or so years of doing it such a way.The debate is intresting however.
|
If a Dwarf dumps strength to 6 should he lose his racial ability to ignore encumbrance?
Is it fair for a Dwarf of strength six to ignore encumbrance when a halfling of strength 10 will struggle with a similar load?
Don't take away what little advantages humans have, change the flavour if you have to - perhaps the mentally handicapped paladin is particularly athletic (Forrest Gump style) and thus explaining their extra ranks in Climb or what-have-you. Or Rain-Man focused on their topic of study (explaining knowledge skills).
I do not take it away, the player does that. It is an advantage, but thats like playing a dwarf then making him a blind wizard and complaining the armor ability and darkvision are now useless. So you decided to drop you INT to a point it negates the extra skill point..eh that was your call
You make your own choices and need to deal with em.
James Jacobs answered the question, go with adding the bonuses after accounting for the penalty.
house rule what you want but the raw says add the bonuses after the penalties.
any alteration you chose to incorporate is your choice not the players.
|
|
James Jacobs answered the question, go with adding the bonuses after accounting for the penalty.
house rule what you want but the raw says add the bonuses after the penalties.
any alteration you chose to incorporate is your choice not the players.
YEAH! This is what I meant!
Don't want an argument over something this trivial okay? :) I like you, Seeker, you are a fine person. I am sorry if I came off as a jerk. Didn't mean to. What Northbrb says pretty much sums up my opinion on this matter.
And if your players are okay with it, no problem. If I were in your game I would accept it with no hesitation and go on. The only SKILL a FIGHTER needs is to swing his AXE afterall... let the elves worry about seducing trees!
:)
It's cool krome. Not everyone sees eye to eye on everything, be kinda dull really. Yeah I know by RAW how it is done and all. I just do not agree with it is all :) And is sooooooooooooooo hate fighters lack of skill points...gods I hate that, so I fixed it for my games.
And heh I have been a jerk all day so, sorry bout that if I came off that way.
Threadjack, not sure what kinda armor ya mean but I see no issues with it. I would not allow the duel shields however. At lest not without someone helping you get them on and off and such ans would heavily advice against it.
Any alteration you chose to incorporate is your choice not the players.
Truth.
i agree with seeker on one thing. when you compare INT 5 to INT 10 of another player who didn't use this so called "loop hole" it might SEEM unfair but is it truly? it's been stated that the 5 INT character wouldn't use INT based skills and would get rewarded for being dumb and exploiting a loophole. but the 10 INT character would still have a greater advantage. INT based skills would still be an option for him and he would also have more language options. It's not the players choice that he rolled a 5,im sure he wanted an 18. having a low score like that is a penalty in itself,disappointment. i see this no differant than a player choosing a subrace so he can take his dump stat from the negative with racial mod-which i see EVERY campaign.
|
How cruel.....taking away one of two abilities that humans get. They get a feat and they get one measly skill point extra per level. How utterly game-breaking that they get 3 where another character that's smarter only get 2 in the same situation. This is just the saddest argument.
While we're at it, lets have the low dex halflings lose their "sure footed" if they don't have enough dexterity.
It really depends you know.
Having a 5 intelligence makes you wild, unknowledgeable, less open to learning stuff, indeed. But it does not necessarily makes you dumb. A low INT and high WIS makes a very perceptive character overall, capable of survival in a certain comfort. The idea of the typical barbarian. As such, he can know how to climb, swim, intimidate, track (survival)... etc. You require skill for those, and it is from such source as favored classes and human bonus skills that they can be complete characters.
I work with point-buy ability generation, so I take for granted a low-intel character is either a concept, or a power-gaming attempt. The latter, I will add a lot of puzzles and roleplay issues this character will have trouble following, and make him the laughing matter of the party.
I am a maniac of roleplaying abilities properly. People dumping mental stats because they favor fighting over everything else, and do not roleplay accordingly to his 5-7 INT WIS CHA, has a talk with me between sessions, and considering he does not intend to bend for a more developed character.. he changes table, P-E-R-I-O-D.
After all.. ressourceful characters are so much funnier to play than a mass of big meaningless numbers on physical attributes, isn't it?
|
|
That....is being a bully DM. You don't attack a player because you don't like how they made their character.
I work with point-buy ability generation, so I take for granted a low-intel character is either a concept, or a power-gaming attempt. The latter, I will add a lot of puzzles and roleplay issues this character will have trouble following, and make him the laughing matter of the party.
That....is being a bully DM. You don't attack a player because you don't like how they made their character.
I work with point-buy ability generation, so I take for granted a low-intel character is either a concept, or a power-gaming attempt. The latter, I will add a lot of puzzles and roleplay issues this character will have trouble following, and make him the laughing matter of the party.
He's punishing the power gamer, not the guy who's actually roleplaying the dumb character.
Correct. he is attacking a player because he does not like his method of character creation. That defeats the purpose of a game that is meant to be fun to play. That is being a bully.
There's a reason people advertising their tables put in things like 50/50, or 20/80 combat/RP. If his table knows they need to back their character sheet up with how they play their characters, yet ignore this table policy then they deserve what's coming to them.
It's hardly bullying to enforce house policy as long as it's understood by the players at the beginning what's expected.
|
|
No one said anything about what exact table rules they are using. There was only a blanket statement that if a player lowered INT to 7 in point buy, they would be punished. You are introducing new aspects to the discussion that were not there. We are now in the realm of punished a players roleplaying.....very subjective.
No one said anything about what exact table rules they are using. There was only a blanket statement that if a player lowered INT to 7 in point buy, they would be punished. You are introducing new aspects to the discussion that were not there. We are now in the realm of punished a players roleplaying.....very subjective.
That's not what he said. He said "a low-intel character is either a concept, or a power-gaming attempt. The latter, I will add a lot of puzzles and roleplay issues this character will have trouble following, and make him the laughing matter of the party." Even if the player isn't a very good roleplayer, if he has a concept for a low int character and isn't just trying to crunch the numbers without penalty then he's golden.
It's like a previous poster mentioned about where to draw the line in the sand. Ultimately it's up the the GM. Personally, I'm not in favor of stripping a characters racial benefits away to punish min-maxing, but if I want a roleplay centric campaign and people role up characters with ultra low stats and don't apply those stats to how the character is roleplayed then I'd call them on it. I probably wouldn't take the passive aggressive route of making the game harder on them, I'd just ask them to conform their character concept to their stats or find another game.
Seeker, may I be so bold to ask, if Int is not to be a "dump" stat, then what is? Especially for a Paladin, which is MAD to the core.
None? No stat should be dumped? Not realistic at all.
Considering a loophole the action of dumping Int and benefiting from your Human bonus (one of the very few they get I might add) and your CHOICE of FC is basically favoring:
1. Every non-human race.
2. Choosing HP over skills
3. Wizards
As if 1 and 3 where not powerful enough already. That, in my opinion, is much more unfair.
How does your system unfairly benefits wizards? Wizards (and sorcerers arguably) can always dump Strenght - they don't need it AT ALL.
So, unless you impose a major penalty on a Wizard choosing to dump strenght (he needs to be pretty strong to carry that huge book of his around all day long after all), I believe calling a loophole the act dumping Int for a class where the only smart dump choice is Int majorly unfair.
I am sorry I can't spell, write my name, count past 10 or walk and talk at the same time..
That's OK, you can still post on the boards.
KIDDING! Sorry, couldn't resist. Come on, you set that up.
Seriously, though, although I do see your reasoning, I disagree with it.
I allow humans to take advantage..but if they choose not to buy dumping INt lower then a goblin then it's not my issue
By raw
Human fighter int 10 4 skills max
Human fighter int 5 3 skills maxHow the hell is that fair?
Granted, it seems like rewarding a player for such a flagrant dump-stat, but IF that player is powergaming, he's just going to see that ruling as making it not worth playing a human, unless he desperately wants the feat.
So, using your table rules for the penalty (I know you give more than RAW, but that's not really the issue), look at it a different way (FCB = Favored Class Bonus):
Human paladin with a 5 INT who puts his FCB in skills:
1 skill point
Human paladin with a 5 INT who puts his FCB in HP:
1 skill point and an extra HP.
So, you're not really penalizing him, since if he's really trying to exploit something here (powergaming), he's going to put that point in HP anyway. Most power gamers I know don't even look at skills, unless they've built the whole character around having absurdly high skill modifiers. But if he's just trying to compensate for the shortcomings the dice dealt him, he might put it in skill points if he gets anything out of it, which means he's paying for his low INT with HP.
So, even by your reasoning, allowing the FCB and racial point after stat modifier, he's paying for the low INT one way or the other.
It is not fair your rewarding a player for using a built in loophole while giving the player who chose not to use the loophole nothing. You just made the human skill point useless unless players chose to exploit a loophole or take high INT leaving those who choose not to exploit it out in the cold
I'm just not seeing this particular instance as trying to use a loophole.
I would guess that in your game you use a point buy instead of rolling dice. So, in that case, making a stat a 5 would be a clear case of dumping one stat for more power in other "crunchy" stats. But this guy said those were rolled. And a paladin NEEDS 3 stats (Str, Con, and Cha) to be an effective paladin. He has to put that 5 somewhere. Can't go in DEX, that would cripple his AC. So it's either Wisdom or Int, and one would think someone with a spiritual calling to his god would have a higher wisdom. So, the 5 INT is the least of three evils. He could choose to give up worrying about skills and just take the HP, but he wants to shore up a weakness instead of buffing a strength.
In my mind, that's the opposite of powergaming, and should be rewarded.
eh It has nothing to do with point buy or rolling. Int is not a dump stat, it's really that simple. If you choose to do so, cool but just do not expect to be as skill or almost as skilled as someone who did not dump it.
To me it is a loophole as it ignores set rules.A player is free to put 5 on his INT but at that point his human ability will not help as he is at -3{ well it would in my games but not in ones using 2 skills}
It's kinda like the halfling some one brought up. He still gets sure footed but if ya put 5 on str and 5 on dex ya would never tell he had it as the -3 totally eats the +2. Same thing with elves and perception if ya have a 5 on wis the +2 is lost as your -3 eats it. This is no different
Int is not a dump stat, it's really that simple.
Again, if Int if not a dump stat, what is?