Back in the day, when 3rd edition and imthen 3.5 was being developed, there was a clear desire among all of the base races introduced and used: no racial bonus to strength or intelligence. It was feared with strength the bonus to attack and damage would be too unbalanced, and so the only race to get a +2 to strength also took a hit to two of their other attributes and got shit racial abilities. And nobody got an Intelligence bonus. Somehow, it was feared that a bonus skill point would be broken, and let alone a boost to wizard shenanigans. In better times, Pathfinder got away from these superstitions, and bounteous racial bonuses to the two attributes were had by many.
This was ok, because each attribute had it’s own uses and benefits to all characters, and taking many of those higher was not upsetting any balance for the most part. Especially since skills were super one-dimensional and getting a single bonus skill rank really didn’t have the impact that was feared. Then came 2nd Edition, and everything changed.
The info we have gotten has lead to wild speculation, with lots of new info leading to lots of debate, but one thing I have not seen discussed; What the heck will Intelligence be used for? Skill points are no longer a thing, you now get a bonus equal to your level and instead increase your proficiency between several ranks on set level intervals. Intelligence seems to have nothing to do with how many proficiencies you can increase. So what does the attribute do for players who are not int-based casters other than giving a bonus to lore skills?
They seem to be revamping all of the attributes more than is being let on. Charisma is now tied to your resonance score, which makes it much more important than in the past, what other changes are being made to make attributes more important? Without skill ranks players will need some reason to want to avoid a penalty to Int, but I can’t really think of anything. Is it used to ignore an amount of armor bonus to an enemies AC? Is there some new pool of points used to power witty comebacks? What do you think will be the new use for intelligence?
I'm pretty sure I saw a post that indicated Int would help determine the number of skill proficiencies you get. So, basically what Int was used for previously.
Yeah, rather than extra skill points per level, it would just be extra starting proficiencies at 1st level. Hopefully Lore checks against monsters will also give meaningful benefits this time, which would also boost its usefulness for non-wizards/skill monkeys.
Hit points.
I didn’t see anything about Int giving more skill proficiencies, if that is the case then yeah not much has changed. But I do recall every character getting lore skills from their background, and if they all let off of Int then having a higher score for these skills would add more usefulness to ones background for role play purposes. Either route is fine with me.
I think you have to fail an intelligence check to become an adventurer. To save trouble, they will probably just remove that stat since any true adventurer would dump it anyway.
Or maybe not. ;)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn’t see anything about Int giving more skill proficiencies, if that is the case then yeah not much has changed.
Mark Seifter hinted at it by noting that due to his high Int, an Alchemist he played had a spare Proficiency to throw into Thievery.
The current theory is that it adds to starting Skill Proficiencies at 1st level, but thereafter only raising Int gets you more skills, with the progression being one at 3rd and every two levels after otherwise.
Which is a little different because it means that, while high starting Int can help you get a broad base of skills, it doesn't help at all with raising their Tier (or at least not without retraining...which may not even be legal if you can only retrain to get stuff you could've gotten when you bought the first thing).
It would mean that raising Int does help in getting multiple high Tier skills, but you can probably do that even if you started with an Int of 10, and it's just as useful for you in that regard as it is for the guy who started with Int maxed (and the heavy implication is that you can raise something like 4 stats every 5 levels).
But I do recall every character getting lore skills from their background, and if they all let off of Int then having a higher score for these skills would add more usefulness to ones background for role play purposes. Either route is fine with me.
This is also true. It sounds like there's been a lot of skill consolidation, but even so it sounds like Int gives a bonus to more skills than any other stat, which isn't nothing.
|
I didn’t see anything about Int giving more skill proficiencies, if that is the case then yeah not much has changed.Mark Seifter hinted at it by noting that due to his high Int, an Alchemist he played had a spare Proficiency to throw into Thievery.
Here's that post for reference:
My high Intelligence helped broaden my horizons in terms of skill training.This is one of several nice benefits. You can put in as much as you want and get something useful if what you want to put in is "not much" or something awesome if what you want is "all in." For instance, in one of our 14th level playtest games, my alchemist was trained in Thievery because it was really easy for him to do with all that Intelligence, and that let me pick locks and disable some types of traps if necessary. The rogue was still way better than I was, but I was a competent if not stellar replacement when we were forced to split up our efforts in different areas and wasn't just useless like someone with 1 rank would be at 14th level in PF1.>Thievery
>IntelligenceYou lost me there Mark. Does that mean that Thievery scales off of Intelligence or that your skill ranks do?
Ah, that definitely clears that up. A little disappointed, as I was kinda hoping for new toys for Int, but not so much that it lessens my excitement for the play test.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
+10% EXP gained on Magic-Users for having a high prime requisite score?
+10% EXP gained on Magic-Users for having a high prime requisite score?
Don't forget the extra 100 per spell level they get off casting those extra bonus spells every day.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey as long as my barbarian still gets EXP for smashing magic items.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
^The above few posts remind me how insanely hard it was to roll(*) characters that could meet some of the requirements for some classes and experience bonuses in 1st Edition AD&D . . . unless you did something like spin-stabilized the dice.
(*)3d6 in order, no drops, no rerolls.
I think the unearthed arcana in AD&D had special rules to help with that. You would roll 9 dice for most important and gradually drop down to 3 dice for the least so fighter would roll 9 dice for str 8 dice for con 7 for dex 6 for wisdom 5 for charisma 4 for in 3 for comeliness or something close to that anyways.
It did, and I remember that, but I started playing before that came out (actually started on Basic D&D when AD&D 1st Edition was really new, and then we switched over a couple of weeks later) . . . .
Maybe you should be the one with the long bearded avatar then XD
(*)3d6 in order, no drops, no rerolls.
Oh, man, that is not how I learned AD&D at all.
Best 3 of 5d6, reroll 1s and 2s, unless you roll a yahtzee.
Yahtzees are 18 + face value, so 19-24.
Strictly enforced, with all rolls in front of the DM.
Because with that rolling method, he was the only one allowed to cheat.
(*)3d6 in order, no drops, no rerolls.
Oh, man, that is not how I learned AD&D at all.
Best 3 of 5d6, reroll 1s and 2s, unless you roll a yahtzee.
Yahtzees are 18 + face value, so 19-24.
Strictly enforced, with all rolls in front of the DM.
Because with that rolling method, he was the only one allowed to cheat.
Ye olde "I don't like point buy but my stats must be higher than 25 buy".
I don't remember that XP for casting bonus spells rule! IIRC bonus spells for high INT didn't even exist til 2e... right?
I don't remember that XP for casting bonus spells rule! IIRC bonus spells for high INT didn't even exist til 2e... right?
Mage XP for casting spells was a 2e rule.
Anyone but Clerics/Druids getting bonus spells wasn't until 3e.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't remember that XP for casting bonus spells rule! IIRC bonus spells for high INT didn't even exist til 2e... right?Mage XP for casting spells was a 2e rule.
Anyone but Clerics/Druids getting bonus spells wasn't until 3e.
Yeah 2nd Ed. . . It's been a while, but that chart gave you a ton of languages you could then exchange for proficiencies, and illusion immunity too.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
^The above few posts remind me how insanely hard it was to roll(*) characters that could meet some of the requirements for some classes and experience bonuses in 1st Edition AD&D . . . unless you did something like spin-stabilized the dice.
(*)3d6 in order, no drops, no rerolls.
Funnily enough, that was never a suggested ability generation system in AD&D1e. 2e, yes, that was the default, but Gygax stated in the 1e DMG that 3d6 in order made characters too weak and he presented several alternative systems. Note the oddity that the methods for even rolling ability scores were in the DMG, not the PHB.
2e had nearly the same class minimums and did default to 3d6 straight down. Nearly impossible to legit roll a paladin, ranger or specialist wizard in AD&D2e.
2e wizards got 50 xp/spell level for casting spells usefully. Clerics got a 100/spell level but only in the service of their faith. So a cleric of a healing god would rack up the xp adventuring while clerics of agricultural deities were a bit screwed. Tracking all this stuff to give xp as a DM was "super fun."
Bards got 25 xp per spell level cast, 5 per hit die monster defeated, and 1 per GP gold obtained.