Hi Everyone,

We're still working on converting our ArM4 library to Fifth Edition, and I just discovered a rather unsettling point - Study Totals in ArM5 don't seem to include INT.

Am I misreading this? If so, that is good.

If not, can anyone explain why a character with a +5 INT (2x Minor virtue) gets the same benefit as a character with a -5 INT(2x Minor Flaw - described in the text as slack-jawed stupidity)?

Also, is the only way to increase your Study Total from books through Virtues like Affinity with [Art] or Book Learner?

Thanks in advance for your comments.

You are not mistaken. INT is no longer included in the study calculation. At first I thought as you did, that a more intelligent wizard should get a greater benefit than a less intelligent one, but then I thought that their rationale might be that if INT is a factor in the study total, then characters are rewarded or penalized twice... once while studying (i.e. getting a greater or a lesser number of XP), and then again when using INT in a die roll that involves the studied score.

In that case, a stupid person not only gains the XP slower, and thus has a lower score, but he then still receives his negative modifier to his rolls involving that lower score.

>Am I misreading this?

No.

>Also, is the only way to increase your Study Total from books through Virtues like Affinity with [Art] or Book Learner?

Yes.

I see your point, but why shouldn't the maga with a higher INT reap the benefit twice?

It does logically follow that a smarter person will not only learn faster, but be able to use that knowledge more efficiently.

I perused the text some more, but I couldn't find any explanation of why INT was dropped.

Has there been any "official" justification of the new INT-less Study Total (pun intended)?

Vaya con Queso,
Valdemar

This is fine logic, but you are trying to apply the "real world" observation to a game mechanic.

In essence, this already happens. The greater you increase your score, the greater the impact a positive or negative attribute modifier technically has.

For example: Two magi, one with INT +2 and one with INT -2, both begin studying Magic Theory. The earn 30 XP, getting them to a score of 3. Now, in practice, the more intelligent magus acts as if he has a score of 5 (a 45 XP positive differential), whereas the dumb magus acts as if he has a score of 1 (a 25 XP negative differential). If the magi then continue to study and increase their score to 5 (75 XP total), the differential becomes even greater. The smart magus now acts with a score of 7 (now a 65 XP positive differential), whereas the idiot mage acts with a score of 3 (now a 45 XP negative differential).

As both magi continue to learn, the penalty and benefit each receives, respectively, becomes even more significant. I think this more than reflects that a smarter magus learns and applies his knowledge far better than a dumber magus.

They didn't really offer an explanation for many of the changes provided. The understood explanation was that 5th edition tightened up the system in general, and also pulled the reins back on what many saw as Magi getting runaway power levels in a short period of time. That's probably the best explanation for the change, and I agree with it. With Int+Concentration being added to the Study quality, people were getting very high scoes in rather short amounts of time, the only limit was that an Art couldn't be raised more than 3 points in one Season, and Abilities had a similar limit, but I can't remember what it was. Now there is no limit to how much you can gain in a Season, but the xp/quality is generally lower, and its one number regardless of who studies it (barring Virtues and Flaws).

I'm in favor of the change, and as someone pointed out, the smarter Magus is still receiving benefits over the dumber ones, and healthier ones (higher Sta Magi) are benefitting over frailer ones, in that Sta is the only stat used in casting spells now.