List of items that give skill ranks?

[Emperor Tippy]

Does anyone have a list of items that actually give you ranks in a skill when used?

For example, The Codex Anathema (LoM, 214) gives you 5 ranks in Knowledge (dungeoneering), 2 ranks of
Knowledge (arcana), and 2 ranks of Knowledge (the planes).

As those are actual ranks (and not just bonuses) they can be used for early entry to a PrC. So what other items give you actual ranks?

[Madcrafter]

Being a quori and possessing someone gives you their skill ranks, though that is not really an item. Don't think there are that many that actually give ranks though, the codex may be the only one.

[Mato]

As those are actual ranks (and not just bonuses) they can be used for early entry to a PrC. So what other items give you actual ranks?If by early you mean nine levels late then yes.

The Codex Anathema costs 37,500gp.
Even devoting your entire WBL to it you can't afford it until level 10.

[Emperor Tippy]

If by early you mean nine levels late then yes.

The Codex Anathema costs 37,500gp.
Even devoting your entire WBL to it you can't afford it until level 10.

It's only WBL, there are dozens of ways around that IC. :smallwink:

[JoeYounger]

The Admirals Bicorn grants 5 ranks in profession salor iirc, from Stormwrack(?).

Thats the only thing I can think of, unless you're allowing like 3rd party 3.0 books. Theres an AEG feats book that has a feat that works like skill focus, but it gives you three options, one of which is to gain 3 ranks in the selected skill.

[Venger]

The Admirals Bicorn grants 5 ranks in profession salor iirc, from Stormwrack(?).

Thats the only thing I can think of, unless you're allowing like 3rd party 3.0 books. Theres an AEG feats book that has a feat that works like skill focus, but it gives you three options, one of which is to gain 3 ranks in the selected skill.

I am afraid not, it grants a +5 untyped bonus though, which is awfully nice. curiously, it only works for humanoids and monstrous humanoids though

[Chronos]

Theres an AEG feats book that has a feat that works like skill focus, but it gives you three options, one of which is to gain 3 ranks in the selected skill.Open Minded, from Complete Adventurer, gives you 5 skill points to spend however you'd like, but you're still limited to the level skill cap.

[0nimaru]

As far as a RAW concern, can this item even get you over the Rank-Level cap? The SRD is pretty specific when it says
"Your maximum rank in a class skill is your character level + 3."

It doesn't say "You may spend your skills when leveling up to a maximum of Character Level + 3"
It says "The Cap is CL+3" The end.

Since the Codex grants you ranks and doesn't specifically say that it removes this cap, the state of the world should immediately snap you down the CL+3 ranks after the book is read.

In contrast, the feat Primary Contact which gives you +1 Rank of a skill has language that mentions that it functions even if the extra rank pushes you over the Rank-Level cap.

[Emperor Tippy]

Specific trumps general.

The Codex says "you gain 5 ranks". It would be the specific rule.

[0nimaru]

It would only be specific if it trumped the maximum ranks that you could get. I don't deny that you would get the ranks for a theoretically minuscule time before the game rules corrected themselves.

You get the ranks, and then lose them. If the intent was different there would be specific language as in the case of Primary Contact which addresses specifically the case where you are already at maximum ranks.

I understand that you want it to work, but the text is not specific enough and does not address the true concern that would be generated.

[Godskook]

Specific trumps general.

The Codex says "you gain 5 ranks". It would be the specific rule.

If it doesn't say anything about how it interacts with that rule, it can legitimately be argued that either implication* is the accurate one, making this RAI territory.

*Those two implications being:
"but capped as normal"
"even if this breaks the cap"

[arguskos]

It would only be specific if it trumped the maximum ranks that you could get. I don't deny that you would get the ranks for a theoretically minuscule time before the game rules corrected themselves.

You get the ranks, and then lose them. If the intent was different there would be specific language as in the case of Primary Contact which addresses specifically the case where you are already at maximum ranks.

I understand that you want it to work, but the text is not specific enough and does not address the true concern that would be generated.
This isn't Magic, there are no State Based Effects and things don't actually work that way. If a specific rule says "you gain 5 ranks" and makes no comment about the rank cap, you and your DM can rule it any way you wish. It seems reasonable from where I'm sitting to rule that those ranks are in addition to whatever you have. If, at level 20, that means you breach the rank cap, cool, good for you. Given that we're talking about a +5 at level 20, I don't see a balance issue.

[Emperor Tippy]

It would only be specific if it trumped the maximum ranks that you could get. I don't deny that you would get the ranks for a theoretically minuscule time before the game rules corrected themselves.

You get the ranks, and then lose them. If the intent was different there would be specific language as in the case of Primary Contact which addresses specifically the case where you are already at maximum ranks.

I understand that you want it to work, but the text is not specific enough and does not address the true concern that would be generated.

No, you don't loose them. Once you have something you only loose it if a specific way to do so it given.

The rules don't say that any ranks in addition to the maximum are lost, just that you can't gain them.

The codex says you gain 5 ranks and makes no mention of the cap blocking you; ergo it ignores the cap.

[Jack_Simth]

This isn't Magic, there are no State Based Effects and things don't actually work that way. If a specific rule says "you gain 5 ranks" and makes no comment about the rank cap, you and your DM can rule it any way you wish. It seems reasonable from where I'm sitting to rule that those ranks are in addition to whatever you have. If, at level 20, that means you breach the rank cap, cool, good for you. Given that we're talking about a +5 at level 20, I don't see a balance issue.
The balance issue comes up with early entry into certain PrC's. Now, granted, the argument could be made that the issue isn't the early entry, it's the PrC's, but skill ranks are one of the most common "this is limited to level X" restrictions intended to help balance the game a bit better. When you bypass that, there's a balance issue. For instance, almost nobody would say that the bard-10/Sublime Chord-5 is too strong compared to the Sorcerer-15 - that's the entry that PrC is supposed to have; it gets spells a level behind the Sorcerer, but it works out. If you break the rank cap (which is the primary restriction method of the Sublime Chord) and go in early, then the Bard-6/Sublime Chord-9 is playing around with 9th level spells when the Sorcerer-15 is still shy of 8th level spells. In most cases, this is where the game balance issue originates with breaking skill caps.

[0nimaru]

No, you don't loose them. Once you have something you only loose it if a specific way to do so it given.

The rules don't say that any ranks in addition to the maximum are lost, just that you can't gain them.

The codex says you gain 5 ranks and makes no mention of the cap blocking you; ergo it ignores the cap.

Specificness by omission? That's contradictory and does not follow the flow of the rules.

I wish I had other things to reference here, but quite directly the game rules specifically avoided giving you extra ranks in skills for the balance purpose Jack mentioned. The only other source is Primary Contact, which as mentioned has specific text stating that it is allowed to bypass the cap.

[Emperor Tippy]

The Codex says "You gain 5 ranks in the skill."

That is what it does. That it puts you over the cap is utterly irrelevant as it doesn't say "Unless this would give you more than the maximum number of ranks.".

That would be the specific case.
As a general rule your skill ranks can't exceed HD+3.

Specific trumps general.

RAW is clear.

Whether that is balanced is another question entirely, but it's also not relevant to the discussion at hand.

[Madcrafter]

Mind you, by putting yourself over the cap, you wouldn't be able to put more ranks in when you gain a new level, but if you are using it for early entry, I suppose that's not as much of a concern.

I believe I saw a thread on this once, but are there any PrCs that have a prerequisite of Know(Dung.) besides that dark stalker one?

EDIT: Ah it gives Know(Arc) and Know(Planes) too. Those are much more useful.

[0nimaru]

Are all omissions claims of specific nature?

The Spell list in Complete Arcane never specifically says that the spells on it's list follow the rules of the PHB. By following this logic, a random spell like Orb of Acid, Lesser says it deals 1d8/2 levels. It doesn't say on that spell that Acid resistance will protect against it.

Sure, the tag is [acid], but it specifically doesn't say "Apply acid resistance or immunity to this spell when dealing damage." Nope. Deal Xd8 damage, full stop. It's specific that it does damage, so I guess it's a primary source that overrides the general source of Resistances and Immunities. I have made an inference by omission.

[Emperor Tippy]

No. Those spells don't say that they ignore immunities so they don't.

The Codex says you gain 5 ranks so you do.

One is a positive statement (you gain 5 ranks) the other is an implied statement (the [acid] descriptor meaning the spell is ineffective against those with acid immunity).

When two positive statements contradict each other you go with the more specific one, in this case that would be gaining the skill ranks.

[0nimaru]

Semantic Argument. Orbs of X say that they "deal YDZ damage". This is a positive statement.

Arguments Using Implied Meaning: Spells with the [Acid] descriptor are subject to Acid Resistance and Acid Immunity.
When you gain 5 Ranks via this item, you may exceed the normal CL+3 cap.

The [Acid] descriptor has no more implications that you are following the general rules than the word [Rank] when referring to skills if you use the "omissions imply specific nature".

[Thurbane]

So aside from debating the legality of the ranks under RAW, are there any other items that give "free" skill ranks?

[JadePhoenix]

I think it's pretty clear you can't get above the cap with the item, even if it does not say so specifically.
If you're into RAWmongering, though, there is no need to do it anyway. There are plenty of ways to get above the skill rank HD limit, namely by increasing your own hit dice. Polymorphing into a dusk giant, a nabassu or a barghest and using the needed tricks already works fine enough... and are all just a DC 25 Knowledge check away due to Pazuzu. So worrying about a item that gives minor skill ranks in a few skills with a debatable method when there is already a RAW-proven method that works better seems kind of irrelevant.

[The Gilded Duke]

Not an item, but Favored Contact in Cityscape gives you an extra skill rank in a skill that specifically can go over level cap. Requires the "Favored" feat as a prerequisite, which can make it rather feat expensive unless you were planning on taking favored anyway.

[Chronos]

Assigning skill points gives you skill ranks, too. It specifically says that you gain that many ranks, so that trumps the general rule about the maximum ranks. Right?

[Madcrafter]

Asking "Right?" at the end of your argument makes it sound much less convincing. You know, just sayin'.