Improving rank 1 abilities

[coldwind]

If you reduce an ability to rank 1 in character creation for the bonus 50 experience, hiw much does it cost to later improve it to 2?

[Zorbeltuss]

By RAW, it would be 30.

Because raising from 2 to 3 in-game costs 30, even if it costs 10 at character creation.

[Reinard]

If you increase ability from 2 to 3 during character creation - it would cost you 10 points,
If you decrease it from 2 to 1 - you would gain 50 points, but then it would cost you 30 points to increase it to 2 again and 30 more to increase it 3... leaving it with net cost of 10 points as well.

[Ser Richard]

Note that the Narrator doesn't have to allow a character to drop a abilitie to 1.

[jyster]

Ive decided to be more harsh if they decide to lower a stat to 1.

They have to pay back the 50 exp plus the cost of the upgrade 30, a total of 80 pts. If you take a 1, you can not raise a stat higher then 4, until its been raised from 1 o 2.

My game, at character creation the highest stat can be 4.

[coldwind]

Ive decided to be more harsh if they decide to lower a stat to 1.

They have to pay back the 50 exp plus the cost of the upgrade 30, a total of 80 pts. If you take a 1, you can not raise a stat higher then 4, until its been raised from 1 o 2.

My game, at character creation the highest stat can be 4.

That... that is incredibly harsh.

[Reinard]

It is also sort of stupid (no offence). The 80 cost is harsh, but sort of ok. The fact that a single one keeps a completely unrelated ability for surpasing 4 is the stupid part.
You can't be a great scholar because you really suck at archery? Does the citadel has special training courses for maesters who can't fight, shoot or make push ups?

[aprewett]

I did the same. Pay back the 50 exp bonus to go back to 2. What is so wrong with that. Otherwise you are just giving the character a bonus of 20exp if they only have to pay 30 to go back to 2.

[jyster]

People who take ones usually do it to powergame, to get more exp for stats (nothing wrong with that, I do it also). There are a few who do it for other reasons, but for the most part its min max the character. My way makes people, REALLY think if they want to do it.

[coldwind]

People who take ones usually do it to powergame, to get more exp for stats (nothing wrong with that, I do it also). There are a few who do it for other reasons, but for the most part its min max the character. My way makes people, REALLY think if they want to do it.

Well yes, people do it to get more xp for starting stats; that's the entire point of the optional rule.

Claiming that it's necessarily powergaming though might be unfair. I'm sure some people do that, but you're likely to not have anything but anecdotal evidence, which is hardly proof.

I don't always take 1s on my characters, but I do it frequently enough. And each and every one has a story-based reason for only being a 1 - from the noblewoman who's never picked up a weapon in her life (Fighting 1/Marksmanship 1), to the recently freed slave (Status 1), to the knight afraid of horses (Animal Handling 1).

Now admittedly, I might just be one of those who fall into your "other reasons", but don't condemn the practice, condemn the powergamer (if you don't like the practice). And of note, all three of those characters mentioned above want to increase those attributes in play - the noblewoman was forced to fight when her house was attacked, the ex-slave hopes to gain enough prestige to start his own khalasar one day, and the knight is trying to overcome his fear.

[jyster]

Im guessing you just glossed the post I wrote, because I didnt condemn the action, I made a statement that included that I also do it.

[coldwind]

Im guessing you just glossed the post I wrote, because I didnt condemn the action, I made a statement that included that I also do it.

Sorry my post came off stronger than I intended.

I more so meant, having a 1 is already a difficult prospect (so long as it's in an attribute that might reasonably see use. If you see people abusing it, deal with that player; I don't see why you'd make it even more difficult to use legitimately.

[Ancient1]

They way i see it is that you should really have a good reason to take a 1 on a stat.

And yes is gives 50pnts...and yes later on it 'only' costs 30 to get it up 1, but still in the game investing 30 poinst to go form a 1 to 2 (which is still not to usefull) is a heavy price to pay....

[Carriker]

In my own games, I simply required PCs to pay back the 50xp before bringing a 1 back up from a 2.

If they chose a trait at a 1, then they were narratively describing an incredible weakness in the character, a distinct limitation. Overcoming such limitations should not be as easy as the process of improving in something you're already good at, in my mind. It should be a real investment, one nicely reflected by such a heavy chunk of Experience.

It also tempts players to instead use their accumulated Experience on something else way before they get that 50. You hit 35 or so, and start looking at the other stats you could raise right now, instead of waiting, and more than half the time the player says "Screw it, I'll increase it later." As a result, the limitation sticks around longer - player characters are far likelier to want to increase the traits that they are good at, going from good to better, than to increase a trait from bad to average. That reinforces the severity of a trait rated at 1, and keeps that weakness as part of the character's reality around longer.

[vonpenguin]

Slightly related question, other than the difference between getting 50 EXP or getting a new destiny point is there any mechanical difference between lowering a stat and taking a flaw in a stat?

[Carriker]

Slightly related question, other than the difference between getting 50 EXP or getting a new destiny point is there any mechanical difference between lowering a stat and taking a flaw in a stat?

For the most part, not so much. It only really matters at the high end of the trait. Lowering a stat doesn't prevent you from eventually raising it to its maximum and gaining full benefit of that maximum. A flaw will always inflict its penalty, even at the high end, until that flaw is bought off.

[coldwind]

Slightly related question, other than the difference between getting 50 EXP or getting a new destiny point is there any mechanical difference between lowering a stat and taking a flaw in a stat?

At a given level, a stat of X is slightly worse than a stat of X+1 with a flaw; this is probably most noticeable between a rank 1 and a rank 2 with a Flaw; rank 1 is just a single d6, rank 2 with a Flaw is essentially roll 2d6 and take the best, which ups your odds a bit.

Also, bonus dice are restricted by test dice, so at rank 1 you can roll one bonus dice, at rank 2 with a flaw, you could roll 2 bonus dice (but still only count the highest of the four)

At least, that's my read. Carriker (or others) may correct me.

[Carriker]

At least, that's my read. Carriker (or others) may correct me.

Actually, that's very right on, and a point I totally missed. Good catch.

[Ser Richard]

instead of thinking of was to keep a player's characters stat at 1 by making it more expensive you can just not let him take the -1 for 50 xp.

[coldwind]

Allowing 1s (and yet allowing them to be raised) can be useful for modeling certain character types - the noblewoman who has never held a weapon but finds herself forced to defend her lands for one.

[Ser Richard]

yes if there is a go reason behind it that's why it has to be approved by the GM.

[babayaga]

I would point out that the xp advantage one gets is not so much from taking a 1 and later improving it; instead it comes from avoiding a 2 at character creation.

Take any pair of starting characters of the same age; let's call them Arya and Brienne. Now choose a third "advanced" character, Catelyn, such that every ability of Catelyn is equal to or higher than the corresponding ability of Arya and Brienne (in other words, you can obtain Catelyn from "advancing" either Arya or Brienne). How much experience does it cost to advance Arya to Catelyn, and how much Brienne to Catelyn? If Arya has the same number of abilities at 2 as Brienne, it costs exactly the same. If not, the character with more 2s has to pay more xps -- precisely 20xp for each extra 2. In other words, it's as if at character creation you got a bonus of 20xp for every ability that's NOT a 2. This is true whether you allow 1s at character creation or not.

It would be interesting to hear from the game developers if this was -- as I suspect -- a patch introduced, on top of an initial system where every ability point was worth 30 xp, to discourage hyperspecialization at character creation (something that "flat" ability increase costs always tends to produce, particularly when many abilities are involved).