I believe that intelligence is more important over lengths of game time greater than 6 years. Just getting things done one season earlier every so often and not needing to get those last few levels in an art really do pay off.
Depending upon the game, communication can be more important as well. A character who can write well will always be able to produce things of value to any other magus. They can trade for what they want when they want it. In a game where the characters are not rich and the order is strong this is a huge advantage.
Presence also has a roll to play with mystery initiation but I can't think of a style of game where it becomes more important than stamina.
Stamina will probably be the most important magus stat in some games but stamina in fifth edition is much less central than intellegence was in previous editions.
The only change between editions was the inclusion of stamina in spontaneous totals, while spontaneous magic totals might be the most frequently used roll/total it's still only one area and if it doesn't use stamina or intellegence then what? Presence? (that's not actually such a bad idea if the power of stamina bothers you).
Are you listening? I will explain this only one more time, then you are on your own.
Intellect does effect learning - learning intellectual things.
Magii SPtW and BoH BlaBS both need a Philosophy score of 6 for some reason.
There are two copies of a magnificent Philosophy summa L10 Q10, so they both start reading.
Magus SptW reads for three seasons, gets 30xp and has a score of 6+DR. (30xp = ability 3 + stat 3)
Magus BoH BlaBS reads for twenty three seasons and has a score of 6+DR. (230xp = ability 9 (+5xp) + Stat -3)
Its a real shame that Intelligence has no effect on learning...
Now for another type of example.
Magus Stephanus Hawkingus with his Mythic Intelligence of 6 and Palsied Hands wishes to learn Craft: Pottery. Oddly enough, despite his astounding Intellect, progress is slow...
Meanwhile, the village idiot with Int -6 who is unable to eat or dress himself is fascinated by the spinning wheel and the feel of the clay under his hands and is churning out some amazing work - (provided someone else does everything except the actual hands on clay, and probably mixed in with some rubbish work, but that gets folded back into a lump and started again ).
Note that the Stat for Craft: Pottery is most likely Dex, which the Village idiot has (what else is he gonna use all those points from the negative Int on), though rarely uses.
The lesson? Stats do affect their respective items (just not in the way that you seem to want). What is more, they affect their items in a clean, simple uncomplicated fashion that is consistant throughout the rules.
Yes, both do have equal application. So what are you complaining about?
And what is with the Lab work red herring? Lab Work is not learning (not directly), it is application of knowledge. Thus INT is used.
Hey, you brought up the sickly but powerful mage thing.
Did you actually read anything that anyone wrote?
Stamina is not necessarily more useful than other stats, even for a Mage. It is differently useful. Reread my earlier post with the various Mages and their capabilities to see why and how. It is most definitely not a "must have" stat. It is a very, very nice to have stat for magi, but then so are Intelligence and Communication, and to a lesser extent (depending on personal preferences) Presence
Besides which, the bonuses and penalties pale in comparison to those given by virtues and flaws
I think not, you can have Int -5 and still have those learning speed virtues.
Anyway, if learning speed would be represented by having a virtue or flaw, then the book's Intelligence description shouldn't state that it affects the learning speed. Since Int is now only in Lab Totals, the only learning it speeds up is spells learning. That's why I agree with Int should be used to improve learning.
I agree with that. Sta is not only physical, but willpower too, so it should weight on the character's dedication to study, but not to how much it learns from exposure. Some characteristics should weight too depending on the source (Per to exposure, adventure, maybe vis; Sta to Practice, Training, Teaching and Book-learning) but Int is supposed to affect learning not only because of speed, but because of high learning making things easier to understand.
I agree with that in the sense that simple adding intelligence it's too much. However, since 1 more point in a stat means about a 10% more change to success in rolls, why not make this a 10% per point? That would make anyone, even an Int -5, to be able to learn from Exposure (the less effective way), only real slow
[size=150]( 5 years and 100 days later[/size]... ...if not the worst threadomancy we've seen, then a damn good stab at it... )
(I knew there had to be a reason why this 3-page thread didn't look particularly familiar...)
Welcome to the boards, WA.
If Searching for a topic, check the date before responding. This one was posted back in '06, not all that long after 5th ed first came out, when people were still opining about and adjusting to the new system and the changes. For that matter, many older posts on these boards are 4th ed questions - don't want to go too far back. But don't stress about it - no harm done, and as I hinted above, hardly the first time anyone's gone there. (And it's interesting to look back and see what most of us now accept as standard.)
Not all subjects of study depend equally on "Intelligence" for fast progress, undeniable.
Meanwhile, different Sagas, different groups of Players have different needs for "study". If the seasons are going by very slowly irl, then higher Study Totals give more a feeling of growth to the characters during long RL game time - and vice versa.
So, bottom line, tweaking something like this has many possibilities, and many pro and con points, and each SG/Troupe will have to weigh them for themselves and their own needs before varying their own saga.
(And since we're taking a trip down memory lane anyway... when did 5th ed first ship? Just curious what the actual cutpoint would be...)
If you want a way for it to affect learning without making it excessive, the model i´ve used is that a character XP per year is modified by Int. If you have +5 you get +1XP three seasons and +2 in one season(and of course loose XP with negative Int).
Makes for a small but still noticeable addition and makes it much more useful to actually get +4 or +5 Int.
as a house rule, we still add int and concentration into study total
why concentration? because more you can concentration, more you learn and memorise from your book... did you ever tried to read when you are very tired and not concentrated? it is very difficult, specially in middle age when all was hand written...
So I find it is a pity not to add concentration any more
and INT is natural to add as more you are intelligent more you learn from what you read
Another way to do it might be to restrict the maximum XP you can gain in a season to, for exemple, Int + Concentration + 06 (or more, whatever).
That way, you don't imbalance things too much for the Int/Conc munchkins (+5 in both gives you a whole +40XP per year!!!), but gives them an interest, since only the more intelligent and concentrated people can benefit fully from a great book or teacher.
So, basically if a character has Int -5 and 0 Conc, they´re beyond royally screwed and doesn´t even have any real chance at getting better at all since they´re basically capped at getting 1XP per season. Spend 10 seasons just to be able to get 3XP per season, oh joy.
And, for a character who really wants high Conc anyway, and has high Int, there essentially is no cap, except with highend primers, which of course becomes completely useless because barely noone will EVER get 20+ in Int+Conc.
Less imbalanced, IMO, than adjusting by Int+Conc for XP, which, aside from the munckinism, also implies that, without concentration, Int -2 and less people can't benefit from exposure XP, and that Int -4 people can't use practice, which is often the primary source of XP for lower tier characters... I consider 1XP per season to be better than 0.
The +x is variable, I did not look at the number, just the principle (and I specified this...). You could set it higher. At +9, this means your case get no more than 4 XP/season, while Int 5 Conc 7 (with specialty) people get a max of 21XP. Satisfied?
The high-Int, high conc people are often magi, which are also those with the better access to the better sources of XP. IMO, this is a feature, not a bug.
You could set a minimum XP if this specific borderline case bothers you, like 3.
The fact that the dumbest people ever with absolutely no concentration are awfully slwo to learn might very well be a welcome feature for those who want Int+Conc to influence XP.
Just as players where Int and Con affect XP always take at least some Conc, I guess you can expect players under such a system to always have at least Conc 1-2 (meaning at most 3-4 XP per season, if taking the appropriate specialty)
For the record, this is a quick alternative on the fly. I don't use it.
Please, next time, before jumping on the numbers, would you consider the idea behind them?
...if not the worst threadomancy we've seen, then a damn good stab at it... 
)