[PK]

<speaking as a GM, not a line editor>

So, you want attribute levels that add to secondary characteristics and to "raw" rolls only, but not to actual skills, or their defaults? That would need to vary by attribute, of course.

No skill rolls are based on ST. So this is really a "Cannot float rolls to ST" limitation, which I'd call -5% at most. In fact, the 10 points/level for ST is really Lifting ST 1 + Striking ST 1 + HP 1, with no budget for skills, so it's most fair to call this a -0% limitation and make it a quirk.

DX costs 20/level, but 5 of that is for Basic Speed, leaving 15/level. Of that 15, it's primarily for increasing skills, though raw DX rolls do come up quite frequently, especially in unarmed combat. Many rules work like (e.g.) "Roll vs. DX or Jumping," which means a high DX can still replace quite a few skill rolls even if it doesn't add to skills. So I'd probably split it at 10/level for skills, 5/level for "other DX rolls," which works out to a net -50% limitation on DX.

HT costs 10/level, but 8 of that is for Basic Speed and FP. So that just leaves 2 points/level for general HT rolls and for skills. (And is the reason HT is arguably the most cost-effective attribute that exists, but that's a tangent.) And the thing is, the average adventurer will probably roll against HT raw more often than he ever uses HT-based skills! Thus, I can't see this being worth more than a quarter of those 2 points, which means a net -5% limitation on HT.

IQ is trickier. I think we'll have to look at its facets separately.

IQ! (that's forum shorthand for "IQ minus Will and Per") costs 10/level. Of that, it's primarily for skills, though there are many advantages that require straight IQ rolls, and many situations under which the GM will call for an IQ roll to see if the character remembers or recognizes something. So I'd probably keep the 1/3-vs-2/3 split from DX, but round more harshly and say 4 points is for raw IQ rolls and 6 points is for skills. That'd be a net -30% limitation if it didn't affect Will and Per, but if it does affect them (and their skills), read on.

For Will, there are very few Will-based skills; instead, Will is primarily a resistance attribute. I'd call it a 1/4 split and make this a -20% limitation on Will.

For Per, it's similar -- people make raw Per rolls all the time. While Per-based skills are definitely more common than Will-based ones, it's also important not to make Per too cheap in comparison to Acute Senses. Thus, I'd stick with the same -20%.

Thus, the limitation on full IQ (affecting all IQ-, Will-, and Per-based skills) would affect a net 8 (6 + 1 + 1) out of 20 points, for a -40% limitation. But when applying it to separate levels of Will and Per, it'd be -20%.

Note that under no circumstances would I let someone reverse these rulings and buy "IQ, skills only," simply because that's too abusive compared to Talents. Attributes are already the best value for raising skills; they don't need to be reduced further to assist with doing so. Similarly, this can get very broken very quickly if you let it be applied to reduced levels of the attribute -- I would only allow it to be applied to positive values, no exceptions.

</speaking as a GM, not a line editor>