Timeline for Can a changeling increase their Charisma by +3 at character creation?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 9, 2020 at 3:43 | comment | added | V2Blast | Note that this has been changed to no longer work, as of the 2020 errata to E:RftLW: "Changeling Traits (p. 18). In Ability Score Increase, “one ability score of your choice” has been changed to “one other ability score of your choice.”" The trait now reads: "Your Charisma score increases by 2. In addition, one other ability score of your choice increases by 1." This change makes it so Charisma can't be chosen for the +1. | |
| Aug 4, 2020 at 15:11 | comment | added | Caleth | @HellSaint The question starts "Is it intentional" and the answer is affirmative. So I would say that tweet is very strong evidence that it is intentional | |
| Jul 4, 2020 at 13:11 | vote | accept | NathanS | ||
| Jul 3, 2020 at 17:05 | comment | added | HellSaint | @Pleasestopbeingevil You are, though, strongly claiming that it is not a typo, but intentional, and the only evidence you have is that tweet. I would put a likely in that sentence just so you are actually careful on your statement. :P | |
| Jul 3, 2020 at 15:44 | comment | added | Please stop being evil | Crawford's claim that this is RAW is, in fact, evidence that it is intended and, I think, it's better evidence that it is intentional than that it is the RAW, though in this case it happens to be RAW as well. That's why I used such careful language around what the quote shows: I say it evidences that this is intentional, not that he says it's intentional, nor that it "proves" that or anything like that. | |
| Jul 3, 2020 at 15:42 | comment | added | Please stop being evil | @AlexMillette You would be absolutely correct about that, but Crawford's answers and what is taken from them are often at odds in this manner and I'm trying not to draw attention to it because it makes people upset and isn't really relevant to this question. Furthermore, Crawford's claims as to what the rules are, as written, correspond much better to a model of what the developers might have wanted the rules to be, than the actuality of the text. | |
| Jul 3, 2020 at 15:20 | history | edited | doppelgreener | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 264 characters in body
|
| Jul 3, 2020 at 12:47 | comment | added | Freefly | I would argue that Crawford didn't confirmed that it was intentional, only that the RAW supports this interpretation. | |
| Jul 3, 2020 at 6:30 | history | answered | Please stop being evil | CC BY-SA 4.0 |