To further add to this you must have the BASE score to multi-class which also suggests you do in fact have two scores.
Well that's kind of the problem here. The rules for multiclassing doesn't say that, they only say "ability score". It is an answer in the SAC that then says that you should use the "base" score instead of the "temporary" score and then provides a link back to a rules section that doesn't have the words "base" or "temporary" in it.
Both the SAC and JC's tweet indicates that the designers intended there to be a "base" and a "temporary" and a difference between them but never actually put it into the rules. So I guess it will be DM fiat on how to deal with these situations.
To further add to this you must have the BASE score to multi-class which also suggests you do in fact have two scores.
Well that's kind of the problem here. The rules for multiclassing doesn't say that, they only say "ability score". It is an answer in the SAC that then says that you should use the "base" score instead of the "temporary" score and then provides a link back to a rules section that doesn't have the words "base" or "temporary" in it.
Both the SAC and JC's tweet indicates that the designers intended there to be a "base" and a "temporary" and a difference between them but never actually put it into the rules. So I guess it will be DM fiat on how to deal with these situations.
Absolutely it is designed to be this way. What if someone removes/unattunes an item? Do they lose that class and abilities? It must go on the base score.
No, they'd keep the class and abilities because the stats are needed to gain the levels, not have the levels. Just as a wizard hit with Feeblemind does not lose their class or features. As others have said, if they intended it to work that way, they should have spelled it out in the rules. They haven't done that. So it falls under RAI and will be up to the DM to decide if they want to add in that rule.
Absolutely it is designed to be this way. What if someone removes/unattunes an item? Do they lose that class and abilities? It must go on the base score.
It doesn't have to go on a "base" score, the rule only says "To qualify for a new class...".
Don't get me wrong, I would absolutely require it to be the "base" score for multiclassing at tables where I get to decide. For the question this thread is about though I would not use the "base" score.
To further add to this you must have the BASE score to multi-class which also suggests you do in fact have two scores.
Can you find a rule that says this? I bet you can't . . .
This attitude that it falls on us to show you where rules are is frankly pretty lazy, so I'll say this: It has already been linked in this thread. If you feel like doing your own homework, you can go find it yourself by rereading the thread.
Hey Devin, I agree that last post was a bit lazy. I didn't have time to make a longer post at that moment. The point that I was trying to make is that this concept of a base stat is a common assumption within the playing community and yet it's homebrew. There is no such rule. No game feature interacts with a base stat and a base stat is never mentioned. When a statistic is changed, it is changed. You write a note in the margin in case you ever have to change it back, but that's just notetaking, it's not an attribute of the character.
Sigred provided a nice graphic before. But in my opinion the proper implementation is that the green section should be "grayed out" while the Gauntlets are equipped such that you cannot click into those cells to modify that data until the box is unchecked for equipping the Gauntlets.
I'm actually not sure what you are referring to when you say that a rule supporting the concept of a base stat has already been linked in this thread. No such link was provided. In one of your posts there was a link to a sage advice where there was a question and an answer that both referred to a base score. But within that answer, "base score" was given a tooltip -- if you hover over that tooltip the popup just links back to the standard definition of an ability score that is given in Chapter 7 -- Ability Scores and Modifiers.
Interestingly, this is the same bit of text that I quoted directly in an earlier post which actually shows that there is, in fact, only one score for each ability and therefore there is no such thing as a base score. It is such a common assumption that even the developers talk about it as if it exists -- but it does not.
It turns out that all of the character attributes work this way. Even for something like Armor Class, there is only one current number which applies to the character and which can be interacted with. For example, a character might use the default formula of "10 + Dex" to calculate the AC and then also equips a shield which creates a current value for AC. I'm not aware of any spell or feature that can directly modify the "10" in that equation, for example. A spell like Shield provides a bonus to AC -- it doesn't directly use the "10" in its calculation, it uses the AC. So, if the character was also wearing some gear with an attribute such as "while wearing this equipment the AC is 19" then the shield spell would not work as intended. Maybe not the greatest example but oh well.
The only attribute that might appear to address this issue of base and temporary values is the concept of Temporary HP. However, that is a whole other can of worms -- temporary HP is not HP at all and does not modify or replace HP, it has a whole bunch of separate rules that do not apply to this discussion.
Other spells which directly modify HP and max HP, such as Aid, do not create two values for max HP. The old value is noted in the margin so that we know how to perform the calculation when the duration of Aid expires, but while the spell is in effect the max HP has been changed -- there is only one max HP attribute for that character at that moment and the value for that attribute is reflected in the result / effect of the Aid spell. If another spell comes along that reduced the Max HP, the new value is interacted with -- not some sort of mysterious "base max HP". Therefore, if the Aid spell were instead written as: "Each target’s hit point maximum is 100 for the duration" then a detrimental spell attempting to reduce the max HP would have no effect since there is no such thing as the "base max HP" to interact with -- it would have to attempt to interact with the current value of 100, but would be unsuccessful due to the effect of our new Aid spell.
I would definitely be fine with playing in games where various features and spells can interact with a base stat, but that would not be a game that follows the rules as written.
No that is not from a D&D character sheet, that's from the DDB character builder.
The fact that the DDB database needs it sorted like that so it can keep all info recorded and then display what is needed depending on a characters choices (equipment, features and such) has no relevance to how the rules says ability scores work.
Exactly my thoughts.
To further add to this you must have the BASE score to multi-class which also suggests you do in fact have two scores.
RAW does not actually say that.
It says "To qualify for a new class, you must meet the ability score prerequisites for both your current class and your new one, as shown in the Multiclassing Prerequisites table. For example, a barbarian who decides to multiclass into the druid class must have both Strength and Wisdom scores of 13 or higher."
RAW only requires that the strength score must meet the ability score prerequisites for multi-classing.
The clarification that a base score is needed is in the Sage Advice Compendium. Which are official rulings but not rules. "Official rulings on how to interpret rules are made here in the Sage Advice Compendium."
"Would a temporary stat bump fulfill a multiclass prerequisite, or does the base score have to meet the requirement?
Your base score, not a temporary score, has to meet a multiclassing prerequisite."
So, the intent appears to be that the unmodified score needs to be high enough to permit multiclassing. However, the rules themselves only refer to the score being high enough so RAW, Gauntlets of Ogre Power do satisfy the multiclassing requirement and I am sure that lots of folks played that way before the SAC revision was published since that is what the rules actually say.
------
In the end, a DM can choose to run it however they wish, while wearing the gloves a character's strength is fortified and always 19. Whether that magic prevents strength loss to the shade or not is a DM call but RAW, since the score is always 19 and the underlying stat does not exist, except if the character removed the gauntlets, then it is quite possible that the magic of the gauntlets prevents the magical strength loss of the shadow. Or the DM could rule otherwise. The only clear statement from the rules as written is that there is one ability score, there is no mention of base score, modified score, temporary score ... there is only the ability score that the character has at the moment.
If we are going to have discussions about written rules in a very technical rules channel, then we need to come to an agreement about whether we consider the sage advice compendium to be authoritative in here. I have always operated under the understanding that SAC is RAW in this channel, and I have argued points as being official based on the contents of SAC. Maybe we need a moderator or an admin to take a position on whether we should or should not consider SAC to be RAW when making our points, so at least we are all making our case from the same collection of "official" rules.
Many consider SAC to be RAW as it is a published rules source, although free and digital-only, unlike most other sources. That said, it's as RAW as the extra rules in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. Not everybody uses it.
For the purposes of this section of the forum (regarding whether it is on topic per the site rules), SAC is as valid a rules source as any other official source.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
Can you find a rule that says this? I bet you can't . . .
Well that's kind of the problem here. The rules for multiclassing doesn't say that, they only say "ability score". It is an answer in the SAC that then says that you should use the "base" score instead of the "temporary" score and then provides a link back to a rules section that doesn't have the words "base" or "temporary" in it.
Both the SAC and JC's tweet indicates that the designers intended there to be a "base" and a "temporary" and a difference between them but never actually put it into the rules. So I guess it will be DM fiat on how to deal with these situations.
See below as the designers have said it is this way.
Absolutely it is designed to be this way. What if someone removes/unattunes an item? Do they lose that class and abilities? It must go on the base score.
No, they'd keep the class and abilities because the stats are needed to gain the levels, not have the levels. Just as a wizard hit with Feeblemind does not lose their class or features. As others have said, if they intended it to work that way, they should have spelled it out in the rules. They haven't done that. So it falls under RAI and will be up to the DM to decide if they want to add in that rule.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
It doesn't have to go on a "base" score, the rule only says "To qualify for a new class...".
Don't get me wrong, I would absolutely require it to be the "base" score for multiclassing at tables where I get to decide. For the question this thread is about though I would not use the "base" score.
This attitude that it falls on us to show you where rules are is frankly pretty lazy, so I'll say this: It has already been linked in this thread. If you feel like doing your own homework, you can go find it yourself by rereading the thread.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Hey Devin, I agree that last post was a bit lazy. I didn't have time to make a longer post at that moment. The point that I was trying to make is that this concept of a base stat is a common assumption within the playing community and yet it's homebrew. There is no such rule. No game feature interacts with a base stat and a base stat is never mentioned. When a statistic is changed, it is changed. You write a note in the margin in case you ever have to change it back, but that's just notetaking, it's not an attribute of the character.
Sigred provided a nice graphic before. But in my opinion the proper implementation is that the green section should be "grayed out" while the Gauntlets are equipped such that you cannot click into those cells to modify that data until the box is unchecked for equipping the Gauntlets.
I'm actually not sure what you are referring to when you say that a rule supporting the concept of a base stat has already been linked in this thread. No such link was provided. In one of your posts there was a link to a sage advice where there was a question and an answer that both referred to a base score. But within that answer, "base score" was given a tooltip -- if you hover over that tooltip the popup just links back to the standard definition of an ability score that is given in Chapter 7 -- Ability Scores and Modifiers.
Interestingly, this is the same bit of text that I quoted directly in an earlier post which actually shows that there is, in fact, only one score for each ability and therefore there is no such thing as a base score. It is such a common assumption that even the developers talk about it as if it exists -- but it does not.
It turns out that all of the character attributes work this way. Even for something like Armor Class, there is only one current number which applies to the character and which can be interacted with. For example, a character might use the default formula of "10 + Dex" to calculate the AC and then also equips a shield which creates a current value for AC. I'm not aware of any spell or feature that can directly modify the "10" in that equation, for example. A spell like Shield provides a bonus to AC -- it doesn't directly use the "10" in its calculation, it uses the AC. So, if the character was also wearing some gear with an attribute such as "while wearing this equipment the AC is 19" then the shield spell would not work as intended. Maybe not the greatest example but oh well.
The only attribute that might appear to address this issue of base and temporary values is the concept of Temporary HP. However, that is a whole other can of worms -- temporary HP is not HP at all and does not modify or replace HP, it has a whole bunch of separate rules that do not apply to this discussion.
Other spells which directly modify HP and max HP, such as Aid, do not create two values for max HP. The old value is noted in the margin so that we know how to perform the calculation when the duration of Aid expires, but while the spell is in effect the max HP has been changed -- there is only one max HP attribute for that character at that moment and the value for that attribute is reflected in the result / effect of the Aid spell. If another spell comes along that reduced the Max HP, the new value is interacted with -- not some sort of mysterious "base max HP". Therefore, if the Aid spell were instead written as: "Each target’s hit point maximum is 100 for the duration" then a detrimental spell attempting to reduce the max HP would have no effect since there is no such thing as the "base max HP" to interact with -- it would have to attempt to interact with the current value of 100, but would be unsuccessful due to the effect of our new Aid spell.
I would definitely be fine with playing in games where various features and spells can interact with a base stat, but that would not be a game that follows the rules as written.
RAW does not actually say that.
It says "To qualify for a new class, you must meet the ability score prerequisites for both your current class and your new one, as shown in the Multiclassing Prerequisites table. For example, a barbarian who decides to multiclass into the druid class must have both Strength and Wisdom scores of 13 or higher."
RAW only requires that the strength score must meet the ability score prerequisites for multi-classing.
The clarification that a base score is needed is in the Sage Advice Compendium. Which are official rulings but not rules. "Official rulings on how to interpret rules are made here in the Sage Advice Compendium."
"Would a temporary stat bump fulfill a multiclass prerequisite, or does the base score have to meet the requirement?
Your base score, not a temporary score, has to meet a multiclassing prerequisite."
So, the intent appears to be that the unmodified score needs to be high enough to permit multiclassing. However, the rules themselves only refer to the score being high enough so RAW, Gauntlets of Ogre Power do satisfy the multiclassing requirement and I am sure that lots of folks played that way before the SAC revision was published since that is what the rules actually say.
------
In the end, a DM can choose to run it however they wish, while wearing the gloves a character's strength is fortified and always 19. Whether that magic prevents strength loss to the shade or not is a DM call but RAW, since the score is always 19 and the underlying stat does not exist, except if the character removed the gauntlets, then it is quite possible that the magic of the gauntlets prevents the magical strength loss of the shadow. Or the DM could rule otherwise. The only clear statement from the rules as written is that there is one ability score, there is no mention of base score, modified score, temporary score ... there is only the ability score that the character has at the moment.
If we are going to have discussions about written rules in a very technical rules channel, then we need to come to an agreement about whether we consider the sage advice compendium to be authoritative in here. I have always operated under the understanding that SAC is RAW in this channel, and I have argued points as being official based on the contents of SAC. Maybe we need a moderator or an admin to take a position on whether we should or should not consider SAC to be RAW when making our points, so at least we are all making our case from the same collection of "official" rules.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorMany consider SAC to be RAW as it is a published rules source, although free and digital-only, unlike most other sources. That said, it's as RAW as the extra rules in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. Not everybody uses it.
For the purposes of this section of the forum (regarding whether it is on topic per the site rules), SAC is as valid a rules source as any other official source.
Homebrew Rules || Homebrew FAQ || Snippet Codes || Tooltips
DDB Guides & FAQs, Class Guides, Character Builds, Game Guides, Useful Websites, and WOTC Resources