Qualifying for Skill Tricks

[heavyfuel]

There was a debate in the RAW Thread, so I decided to start a new thread.


Q 169

Earliest level you can take a skill trick?

Swift Concentration:12

Level 8
Concentration 11

Level 9
Concentration 12

Can I learn it 8->9 by spending 1+2 points? Or do I have to grab it at 10?


A 169 Skill tricks are bought with skill points. That's the time you do it in the level-up decision tree. You may take swift concentration at 9, assuming you have 12 ranks in concentration.



A 169

You have to grab it at 10. No rule says you choose the order you spend your skill points, you spend them all at once.

So first you need to qualify for the trick, and next time you gain skill points you can spend them on the trick.


Where's the rule that says you spend them all at once?


It's not a rule, it's absence of a rule that says otherwise. The rules don't say you can, so you can't.

As per standard procedure, further discussion should be in a separate thread.


There is absolutely a rule that says otherwise. The Player's Handbook outlines the process for spending skill points step-by-step on page 62. Not only do you not spend them all simultaneously, there's actually an order given for which skills you typically buy first.


Fair point. But that's for buying ranks.


For getting Skill Tricks, you need to already have the ranks, because you must get them when you acquire the skill points.

You acquire them before Step 1. Step is see how many you have, so acquiring them is "Step 0"

And Skill Tricks say: Whenever you acquire skill points, you can choose to spend skill points to acquire a skill trick instead of purchasing ranks in skills.

You buy ranks after acquiring, but you need to get your Skill Tricks before that.


This is not a real rule. This is the RAW thread. Please stick to RAW. If you want to discuss your houserules, please follow your own advice and start a new thread.

TL;DR: If a skill trick requires 12 ranks, can you pick it up when you reach 9th level, buy the 12th rank and then buy the skill trick, or do you need buy the 12th rank at 9th level and then get the trick at level 10?

Venger and Troacctid argue you can get at 9, I argue you can only get at 10.

Their reasoning is that you can spend skill points in any order you want as per PHB p62.

My reasoning is that skill tricks must be acquired when skill points become available, not a single moment later as per the first paragraph in the "Acquiring Skill Tricks" topic on WotC's website (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20070105a&page=5).

So, what say you, rest of the forum?

[BowStreetRunner]

"Whenever you acquire skill points, you can choose to spend skill points to acquire a skill trick instead of purchasing ranks in skills." CS82

The way I read this, you can purchase skill tricks whenever you acquire skill points - whether it's the normal skill points you acquire from gaining a level, skill points acquired from taking the Open Minded feat, or some other more esoteric reason. This is the meaning of "Whenever you acquire skill points" to me - it means any time you acquire skill points, and not at any other time.

In addition, I read where it says "you can choose to spend skill points to acquire a skill trick instead of purchasing ranks in skills" as meaning that you can put the skill points into skills or into skill tricks. The purchase of a skill trick replaces the purchase of a skill rank.

I think that people trying to read this as telling the exact instant when this can be done like it's part of the Magic the Gathering LIFO timing rules are just reading too much into the wording. If the wording meant that you had to decide immediately "whenever you acquire skill points" before you can spend any on skill ranks, then the bit about spending on a skill trick instead of purchasing ranks would be unnecessary, since by the time you went to purchase ranks the points would already be spent and therefore no longer available. The "instead" there suggests to me that it is part of the same step.

[KillianHawkeye]

I read this as meaning "Whenever you have skill points, you can spend them to acquire a skill trick or spend them to purchase ranks in skills." The rules allow you to buy more than one rank in a skill at a time, so I don't see any reason to limit switching from gaining ranks to learning tricks. Don't make this more difficult than it needs to be. It doesn't need to be all or nothing.

Get your 12th rank at level 9 and then spend a couple more points to learn your skill trick. Done and done.

[heavyfuel]

I read this as meaning "Whenever you have skill points, you can spend them to acquire a skill trick or spend them to purchase ranks in skills."

This is not what's written, though.

[zergling.exe]

Whenever you acquire skill points, you can choose to spend skill points to acquire a skill trick instead of purchasing ranks in skills.

The most RAW way to read this line is that at any one level you can buy skill tricks OR you can buy skill ranks. Want that fancy new skill trick? Better be willing to give up all your skill ranks for that level, because you can only buy one kind or the other!

[Goaty14]

The most RAW way to read this line is that at any one level you can buy skill tricks OR you can buy skill ranks. Want that fancy new skill trick? Better be willing to give up all your skill ranks for that level, because you can only buy one kind or the other!

I second this.

Oh, and if you can't take things that you qualify for just for leveling up (i.e taking a feat that requires 9 ranks in a skill @ lvl 6), then that utterly destroys a lot of what people have been assuming thus far (i.e under the different ruling, totemists have to wait until level 10 to take double totem chakra).

I guess you could have a counterpoint that you take skills and feats at a different time while levelling up, but then how is Venger/Troaccid's argument (that taking skills is measured in steps) not valid?

[heavyfuel]

The most RAW way to read this line is that at any one level you can buy skill tricks OR you can buy skill ranks. Want that fancy new skill trick? Better be willing to give up all your skill ranks for that level, because you can only buy one kind or the other!

Hmm. I suppose that is what it says. You have to give up buying ranks for a single skill trick. Are the dysfunctional RAW threads still going? :smallbiggrin:


I second this.

Oh, and if you can't take things that you qualify for just for leveling up (i.e taking a feat that requires 9 ranks in a skill @ lvl 6), then that utterly destroys a lot of what people have been assuming thus far (i.e under the different ruling, totemists have to wait until level 10 to take double totem chakra).

I guess you could have a counterpoint that you take skills and feats at a different time while levelling up, but then how is Venger/Troaccid's argument (that taking skills is measured in steps) not valid?

I'm AFB, but I remember something about a level-up order in the PHB. I distinctly remember this argument, but I'm not in a position to look for it now. I'll do it later.

But the premise is that when leveling up you follow the same order as the chapter order in the PHB, as in, first you choose your new class, then the skill points this class gives you, then feats, then spells. So having a feat that requires skills is ok by this logic.

Note: I could very well be talking crazy here

[Zaq]

The PHB specifies that you spend skill points and then pick your feat, in that order. (Level 1 is different.) The pages you're looking for are 58-59.

I don't have any particularly new ways of explaining the situation, but I'm of the opinion that you can qualify for a skill trick and purchase the skill trick at the same level. I don't see any benefit to assuming that you have to somehow spend all of your skill points "simultaneously," even if this is the only way it can possibly matter. I can squint and kind of see the "when you gain skill points" clause being parsed in the opposite way, but I don't think that it requires any rhetorical twisting to just spend the points individually, and I don't think it makes the game better to choose the ambiguous reading that punishes players.

[Troacctid]

The PHB specifies that you spend skill points and then pick your feat, in that order. (Level 1 is different.) The pages you're looking for are 58-59.
They don't have to be in that order. In fact, one of the examples (page 87) indicates that they can be gained at the same time.

[BowStreetRunner]

The most RAW way to read this line is that at any one level you can buy skill tricks OR you can buy skill ranks. Want that fancy new skill trick? Better be willing to give up all your skill ranks for that level, because you can only buy one kind or the other!Considering you may only purchase one skill trick at any given level, you are assuming that they actually intended a single skill trick to be worth an entire level's worth of skill ranks.

Since there is a perfectly reasonable way to read it that doesn't draw such an extreme and counter-intuitive conclusion, I'll just go with that instead.

By the way, page 4 of the player's handbook states "Your character might be a strong fighter or a clever rogue, a devout cleric or a powerful wizard." Note that not only is there no mention of any other class - so no paladins, druids, barbarians, bards, sorcerers, rangers, or monks - but the fighter you play must be strong, the rogue clever, the cleric devout, and the wizard powerful. After all, that is the most RAW way to read it.

[Telok]

Hmm. I suppose that is what it says. You have to give up buying ranks for a single skill trick. Are the dysfunctional RAW threads still going? :smallbiggrin:
That thread will probably outlast the RAW threads. WotC is terrible about following their own rules.


I'm AFB, but I remember something about a level-up order in the PHB. I distinctly remember this argument, but I'm not in a position to look for it now. I'll do it later.

But the premise is that when leveling up you follow the same order as the chapter order in the PHB, as in, first you choose your new class, then the skill points this class gives you, then feats, then spells. So having a feat that requires skills is ok by this logic.

Note: I could very well be talking crazy here

Now if you're remembering correctly that means one can take a feat with a caster level requirement but not a 'can cast spells of level X' feat. Because caster level would happen at the beginning during the class choice step, but the ability to cast spells of a level would only be fufilled once you have the spells which is after feat choosing.

I'm afb too, but if that's correct it's a pretty good candidate for the dysfunction thread.

[zergling.exe]

Considering you may only purchase one skill trick at any given level, you are assuming that they actually intended a single skill trick to be worth an entire level's worth of skill ranks.

Since there is a perfectly reasonable way to read it that doesn't draw such an extreme and counter-intuitive conclusion, I'll just go with that instead.

By the way, page 4 of the player's handbook states "Your character might be a strong fighter or a clever rogue, a devout cleric or a powerful wizard." Note that not only is there no mention of any other class - so no paladins, druids, barbarians, bards, sorcerers, rangers, or monks - but the fighter you play must be strong, the rogue clever, the cleric devout, and the wizard powerful. After all, that is the most RAW way to read it.

I'm not saying that it's a good way to read it, just that the RAW is clear on the matter and thus following the RAW in this case is idiotic. You may get a skill trick INSTEAD OF any skill ranks, RAW, full stop. Any other reading is RAI or a houserule. Much better ways to read it, but still not the RAW reading of it. Unless you can explain how "instead of purchasing ranks in skills" can be read in some other way without voiding some part of the sentence?

[Doctor Awkward]

I'm not saying that it's a good way to read it, just that the RAW is clear on the matter and thus following the RAW in this case is idiotic. You may get a skill trick INSTEAD OF any skill ranks, RAW, full stop. Any other reading is RAI or a houserule. Much better ways to read it, but still not the RAW reading of it. Unless you can explain how "instead of purchasing ranks in skills" can be read in some other way without voiding some part of the sentence?

So if you get eight skill points when you level up, and choose to buy a skill trick what happens to the rest of your skill points?

They don't vanish, you cannot purchase more than one skill trick, and you cannot continue to level up until you have spent them.

[KillianHawkeye]

This is not what's written, though.

Usually, whenever you read something, there's this part in the middle of that process where you have to use your brain to understand the meaning of the words you're reading. Not merely the literal interpretation of the words, but their true meaning.

[BowStreetRunner]

I'm not saying that it's a good way to read it, just that the RAW is clear on the matter and thus following the RAW in this case is idiotic. You may get a skill trick INSTEAD OF any skill ranks, RAW, full stop. Any other reading is RAI or a houserule. Much better ways to read it, but still not the RAW reading of it. Unless you can explain how "instead of purchasing ranks in skills" can be read in some other way without voiding some part of the sentence?Please spare me the fallacious reasoning. The rules for advancing a level state that when your character attains a new level, make these changes. It then goes on to list the changes. It never says make these changes in this order. Numbering the items in a list does not explicitly require following that order - it may be considered implicit that they do so, but that would be considered RAI (if you accept it to be true) not RAW. For it to be raw it has to be explicitly stated. Just because you want to read it that way doesn't mean it's explicit.

Furthermore, the rules for gaining skill tricks state that when you acquire skill points you can choose to spend them on a skill trick instead of skill ranks. It doesn't state that you have to spend them in a certain order. It doesn't state that you can't spend some on skill tricks and some on skill ranks. None of that is explicitly stated, so any interpretations that conclude that is the meaning would again be considered RAI and not RAW.

And if you are still planning on arguing that you read it differently and that your interpretation is explicit, then please look up the word explict. (Here, I'll save you the effort: "stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt.") Anything that is RAW is explicit. Anything that is RAI is implicit ("implied though not plainly expressed."). I just want to make sure we are using these terms in the same way. I've seen too many people argue that their interpretation is explicit. Makes me want to whack them over the head with a dictionary in the hopes they will learn the terms through sudden osmosis.

As for spending the skill points on a skill trick instead of skill ranks, it doesn't say you can't spend the rest of your skill points on skill ranks. It's just those two points that are spent on the one instead of the other. No doubling up and buying a skill trick and two ranks with the same two points.

[animewatcha]

Since we are going into silliness of RAW and such, there any gods/goddesses in any of the pantheons of any of the settings ( eberron, faerun, etc. ) that have skill tricks in their stat block. If not, then by RAW mortals can do things that gods/goddesses cannot.

[Troacctid]

Since we are going into silliness of RAW and such, there any gods/goddesses in any of the pantheons of any of the settings ( eberron, faerun, etc. ) that have skill tricks in their stat block. If not, then by RAW mortals can do things that gods/goddesses cannot.
Don't see how that would follow. It just means they chose not to take skill tricks.

[heavyfuel]

Usually, whenever you read something, there's this part in the middle of that process where you have to use your brain to understand the meaning of the words you're reading. Not merely the literal interpretation of the words, but their true meaning.

This is a discussion about RAW. Drowning someone to bring them from the brink of death clearly isn't what's intended, it doesn't stop it from being part of the rules. Having skill points isn't the same as acquiring them. If you rule it that way, it's fine ruling, but ruling it is.

[Doctor Awkward]

This is a discussion about RAW. Drowning someone to bring them from the brink of death clearly isn't what's intended, it doesn't stop it from being part of the rules. Having skill points isn't the same as acquiring them. If you rule it that way, it's fine ruling, but ruling it is.

Drowning to heal isn't part of the game rules.

Your HP "drops" to -1 in the second round of drowning. "Drops" in this instance means to "fall" or "reduce". You cannot "reduce" your HP it -1 if it is already lower than -1. What you are asking is for the DM to adjudicate on a circumstance not covered by the rules. Regardless of which way he goes, he is house-ruling.

There is nothing about "drown healing" that follows the rules as written.

[heavyfuel]

Drowning to heal isn't part of the game rules.

Your HP "drops" to -1 in the second round of drowning. "Drops" in this instance means to "fall" or "reduce". You cannot "reduce" your HP it -1 if it is already lower than -1. What you are asking is for the DM to adjudicate on a circumstance not covered by the rules. Regardless of which way he goes, he is house-ruling.

There is nothing about "drown healing" that follows the rules as written.

Fine, then take any of the dozens if not hundreds of examples of RAW dysfunction. The point is, this is a discussion on RAW, not on RATSB (Rules as they should be)

[skunk3]

To say that you can only pick a skill trick or apply ranks to skills is totally absurd, especially given the fact that skill tricks were introduced in a book that is mostly about Rogues, a class that gets tons of skill points per level. A skill trick only costs 2 points to purchase, so you're just supposed to throw the rest of those points away? Come on, that's retarded. When you level up you can choose to invest those points into skill ranks AND a skill trick if you so desire and meet the requirements.

(quote)
Learning Skill Tricks

Learning a skill trick costs 2 skill points. Whenever you acquire skill points, you can choose to spend skill points to acquire a skill trick instead of purchasing ranks in skills.
You can learn any skill trick, as long as you meet prerequisite and can afford to expend 2 skill points. If you later no longer meet the prerequisite for a skill trick, you can't use it again until you once more qualify.

You can't learn more than one skill trick at any given level, and your total skill tricks cannot exceed one-half your character level (rounded up). Certain feats a prestige class features allow a character to exceed these limits. If you use the retraining rules in Player's Handbook II you can choose to unlearn any one skill trick when you attain a new level, assigning the reclaimed skill points as you wish (either to buy skill ranks or to learn a different skill trick).

You can learn a skill trick only once; you either know it or you don't.

Obviously what the text states is that you can spend your skill points on a skill trick whenever you acquire those points, not that you MUST choose between one or the other. It is very clear that you can only learn one per level and that the total number of tricks you know cannot exceed half of your character level, rounded up. If you level up and get 6 skill points, you can spend 2 on a skill trick and the other 4 on skill ranks. End of story.

[heavyfuel]

I don't think anyone is arguing that a single skill trick instead of all your skill points isn't stupid.

The argument is that this is RAW (which is often stupid).

How it should work really isn't the point of this thread

[Mordaedil]

Since Skill Tricks are considered at the same point as when you assign your skillpoints, I always interpreted that as meaning you could gain them on the same level as you get the skill points required as they aren't really feats or feat-replacements and are in fact a fair bit weaker than feats for that purpose.

But I realize that is just because I consider these things from a video-game basis perspective.