no
Don't listen to Malfus he's wrong.
Permanent Bonuses
Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.
It's a bonus to a stat -- it lasts longer than one day -- you gain the bonuses just as surely as you gain hp for levels you already have if you had instead boosted Con.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, Malfus, you do.
If you have, say, 15 INT and at 8th level you use your stat bump to bring it to 16, you'll gain however many skill ranks you'd get for that level, plus 7 more (1 for each previous level).
Same with CON and HP.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then I retract my earlier statement and declare yes :P
All bonuses are retroactive when an ability score increases, be they bonuses to damage, to skill ranks, to hit points, to saves, to skill checks... all of them. Skill ranks not being retroactive are a 3.5 convention we specifically removed from the game because it was a weird exception to the rule, and since now there are no exceptions to this rule, there's no need to specifically state that skill ranks are retroactively granted if your Intelligence goes up.
Now you should listen to Malfus -- he's right.
I like how James Jacobs put it, "it was a weird exception." Personally I preferred it that way, no need to keep track of individual skill points. Nightmare city imo.
That would suck if you didn't count.
If it were not retroactive when you raise your Strength you get the full benefit as if you'd always had a higher Strength but if you raise you're Intelligence you only get part of the benefit? I'd feel cheated if it actually worked that way.
I like how James Jacobs put it, "it was a weird exception." Personally I preferred it that way, no need to keep track of individual skill points. Nightmare city imo.
Well now the only time you have to worry about it is with drain, since that's the only thing that actually lowers your stats. Energy drain is just a bunch of penalties now so there isn't all that "gain a level lose a level, do the hokey pokey and gain another level before dying and losing two" stuff that happened in 3.5.
3.5 style had it where you gained the extra skill point on level up, not the retroactive ones. The danger of retroactive points is that you have to keep track of individual skill points gained. Not to mention what happens when your Int gets drained.
Well now the only time you have to worry about it is with drain, since that's the only thing that actually lowers your stats. Energy drain is just a bunch of penalties now so there isn't all that "gain a level lose a level, do the hokey pokey and gain another level before dying and losing two" stuff that happened in 3.5.
Don't get me wrong, I love not having to ever worry about losing a level, but keeping track of skill points was never my cup of tea, and retroactive individually assigned points are something I would never want to deal with. Of course, the removal of "half points" helps matters considerably.
|
Why would you need to keep track of when you spent the skill points? Just make sure none are above your maximum and you're fine. Unlike 3.5, we do NOT have a 4x at first level rule to muck that up.
EDIT: *Or* the half-rank stuff from 3.5 for that matter. Basically, a skill point is a skill point now and when you got it doesn't matter.
You don't have to keep track of what order you spend points. Look at RL. When you lose capacity you don't always forget things in the same order that you learned them.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In fact, if you DIDN'T get retroactive skill points for increased Int, then you'd have to keep track of when you put points into which skills.
When auditing a character, you'd have to know if and when Int was increased in order to know if the number of skillpoints was correct or not.
With retroactive skill points, you just multiply Int bonus by level, add in points by class at each level and you're done. Of course I'm ignoring favored class skill point/hit point choices, but those are tricky no matter whether Int gives retroactive points or not.
Also remember that a Headband of Vast Intelligence works differently. It has a skill (or skills) associated with it when it is created, and it only ever grants ranks to that skill (or skills). If you already have ranks in that skill (or skills), then it doesn't stack.
So be sure not to buy a headband associated with spellcraft if you've already been putting ranks in spellcraft.
So this is written down somewhere?Im guessing the pfsrd is the prd pdf but i cant find it anywhere.Curious because it makes a huge difference in skill points in this case
It is actually written down:
This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses.
The PRD is Paizo's official online reference. The PFSRD is the un-official reference. The latter links in more information (such as FAQs or unofficial rulings like James') and groups things together by what they are rather than what source they're from. But it's unofficial, so some people don't like to use it.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The PRD is Paizo's official online reference. The PFSRD is the un-official reference. The latter links in more information (such as FAQs or unofficial rulings like James') and groups things together by what they are rather than what source they're from. But it's unofficial, so some people don't like to use it.
There are two real kickers about PRD vs SRD:
1) The PRD is on the same web domain as the messageboards. I've seen lots of "Sorry, I can't link it because the SRD is blocked from this computer". You won't have that trouble with the PRD - if you can access the messageboards, you can access the PRD.
2) The SRD includes lots of fan-made references, charts, tips, shortcuts, etc. On the one hand, this can be incredibly convenient. On the other hand, it's (apparently) not always clear what's actual rules text and what's their own fan-made reference material.
You don't have to keep track of what order you spend points. Look at RL. When you lose capacity you don't always forget things in the same order that you learned them.
"...but Marge...you know I can only store so much in my brain. Remember that time when I learned to play tuba and forgot how to drive?"
Just to keep this thread going, do you think that the PC should also get an extra Language and for a Wizard an extra 1st level spell for their spell book? I would say no, because those are 1st level bonuses, but I could see an arguement either way.
Well, there is the argument that (see bold):
Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.
The question then comes down to if skills and statistics also include class abilities. To that, I would ask if it's a tracked number. Number of spells at level 1 = 3 + int mod? Sounds like a tracked number, and therefore a statistic, to me, so yes.
Languages I would say yes. Although it's not granting a retroactive language, it's allowing him to pick up another one in game.
Spell, I'd like to say no, but it should probably be yes.
Reasoning : The entire purpose of the retroactive skill points was to make it so you didn't have to worry about what order you did things with a character or NPC created after first level. Under that logic, if you created a character at 8th level, you'd just total up everything and assign languages, spells, etc. So I'd do the same thing when he boosted his int. Again though, I'd treat it as him doing some extra research in game to research the spell. Just like learning a new language, not retroactively knowing an additional one.
|
|
I used the Wizard in the example because they can spontaniously just learn new spells, i.e. when they go up in level they get two new ones for their spell book eventhough they did no 'actual' research for the spell. I guess I could also use Alchemist, Magus, and Witch.
So, I could see an excuse to give the Wizard a new 1st lvl spell spontaneously when he adds to his INT. Of course that gives a +2 INT item a little too much power because not only do you get +1/lvl skill ranks but also a new language, new 1st level spell after 24hrs.
Languages I would say yes. Although it's not granting a retroactive language, it's allowing him to pick up another one in game.
Spell, I'd like to say no, but it should probably be yes.
Reasoning : The entire purpose of the retroactive skill points was to make it so you didn't have to worry about what order you did things with a character or NPC created after first level. Under that logic, if you created a character at 8th level, you'd just total up everything and assign languages, spells, etc. So I'd do the same thing when he boosted his int. Again though, I'd treat it as him doing some extra research in game to research the spell. Just like learning a new language, not retroactively knowing an additional one.
I agree the common sense answer is probably no. However, RAW, I gotta say yes since there are no qualifiers. To me, the very next sentence just reinforces the fact you get everything related to an ability score when the modifier changes. At no time is there a "but" to what you get (e.g. "skills points but no additional spells").
For headbands of +Int, I usually do the following :
+2 Headband (Int)
Language : Goblin (only if resulting INT > 10)
Skill : <skillname>
Skill Bonus : (only used for list of languages granted if skill is Linguistics)
So I'd probably add...
Spell : 1st level spell granted to spellbook/familiar
Yeah, you'd have to or else you can gain a new spell every 24 hours.
How so? You lose anything gained through ability bonuses if you lose the bonus. The book even tells you to track what you gain through bonuses in case you lose them.
Yeah, you'd have to or else you can gain a new spell every 24 hours.How so? You lose anything gained through ability bonuses if you lose the bonus. The book even tells you to track what you gain through bonuses in case you lose them.
Kind of hard to 'lose' a spell that's written in your book. You lose the ability to scribe it in from memory, but that's all.
Kind of hard to 'lose' a spell that's written in your book. You lose the ability to scribe it in from memory, but that's all.
You still lose whatever you gained from bonuses. The book is very clear on this. I'm not saying it makes sense. However, it's what's there regardless.
I think the spells gained at first level are only gained at first level. If you don't get them then you just missed the boat.
Unless I misread the rules, a wizard's INT doesn't affect how many spells ze learns at level-up. (Well, it does in my house rules, but not in RAW.) So number of spells that can be cast per day goes up, but not spells known.
I kinda like the idea of the headland giving a bonus to a specific skill, and a specific language.
The spell thing though is weird. What if a sorcerer made the headland.. Or a bard. What do they know about wizards that they'd waste time (or even understand) putting a 1st level spell in the item.
Class features that are worded along the lines of the "start play with" to me feel inappropriate for retroactive benefit. Though... It's just a first level spell.. So I wouldn't press the point in game either way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just to keep this thread going, do you think that the PC should also get an extra Language and for a Wizard an extra 1st level spell for their spell book? I would say no, because those are 1st level bonuses, but I could see an arguement either way.Well, there is the argument that (see bold):
Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.The question then comes down to if skills and statistics also include class abilities. To that, I would ask if it's a tracked number. Number of spells at level 1 = 3 + int mod? Sounds like a tracked number, and therefore a statistic, to me, so yes.
Here's where I disagree with you, and thus the entire chain of logic that's come out of it. The number of spells in your spell book is not an int-based statistic, nor is it tracked. Wizards can have any arbitrary number of spells in their spellbooks. They can have multiple spellbooks, with some spells duplicated across them. They can have only a single spellbook with a single spell because their primary one got destroyed and this is all they've managed to recover.
Basically, you have to ask yourself: "Knowing only the class, level, and stat mod, can I define everything related to this?" Skills? Yes: (class+mod)*level. X per day abilities? Yes. DCs? Yes. Bonus spells? Yes. Languages? Maybe (I would say 'You learn a language you could have learned at first level.', but it's unclear). Spells in a spellbook? No.
It is not about "a big hold up". The point is whether or not the rules intend for it to work that way. The language for 1st level spells is tied to your intelligence at level 1. It specifically calls that out. Other things such as constitution's modifier to hit points don't have that limitation, and it would not make sense to write something specifying first level if they intended for it to continue increasing.
Normally such things have a language such as "the wizard gains a new first level spell when ever their intelligence modifier goes up."
Not only that, but the only time free spells are mentioned are at first level, and when the wizard levels up. At no place in the book does it say the wizard gets a free spell because he became more intelligent.
|
|
It is not about "a big hold up". The point is whether or not the rules intend for it to work that way. The language for 1st level spells is tied to your intelligence at level 1. It specifically calls that out. Other things such as constitution's modifier to hit points don't have that limitation, and it would not make sense to write something specifying first level if they intended for it to continue increasing.
Normally such things have a language such as "the wizard gains a new first level spell when ever their intelligence modifier goes up."
Not only that, but the only time free spells are mention are at first level, and when the wizard levels up. At no place in the book does it say the wizard gets a free spell because he became more intelligent.
I agree with this. Things that are obviously one-time bonuses should stay that way.
For languages, it makes sense that you could learn/forget it with the headband. For spells in your spellbook? No sense at all, so skip it.
Or to phrase it another way: You character got those spells because those were the ones they were smart enough to scribe *at the time*. It's an exception to the rule as almost all things represent whether you're smart enough now, but that one specific ability represents only how smart you were at that one specific point in time and stores those results in an item rather than in your head. You wouldn't erase spells from the wizard's book if they got their int drained, so you shouldn't add spells if they boost it.
