Wis is paranoia. The degree to which a character is constantly alert for ambushes, distrusting of what others tell him, concerned that at any moment he might be in an illusion, or that the thoughts in his head were placed there by magic.
Considering Paranoia is a type of insanity...that lowers your Will saves...and insanity is caused by excessive Wis damage...
Yeah it's pretty safe to say Paranoia (and other types of Insanity) are as close as you can get to the literal opposite of Wis in this game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wis is paranoia. The degree to which a character is constantly alert for ambushes, distrusting of what others tell him, concerned that at any moment he might be in an illusion, or that the thoughts in his head were placed there by magic.
And fittingly it's the prime stat for Inquisitors.
"An open mind is a fortress with its gates unbarred and left open"
And yet when you look at what the stat actually does (allow you to see ambushes and traps, see through illusions, identify lies, and break out of mind control) the stat represents paranoia better than the insanity rules do.
I'm not sure I would classify situational awareness and strong intuition as paranoia.
It's not paranoia if people really are trying to ambush you, lie to you, or control your mind.
To each his or her own opinion. But I have found that this mitigates against excessive min-maxing, while at the same time aids role playing.
But the Stormwind Fallacy is just a strawman, and nobody actually believes that.
Wis is paranoia. The degree to which a character is constantly alert for ambushes, distrusting of what others tell him, concerned that at any moment he might be in an illusion, or that the thoughts in his head were placed there by magic.
I'd interpret "paranoia" as higher Int than Wis. Paranoiacs have lots of elaborate leaps of logic based around an extremely narrow, almost tunnel-vision view of the world. They have no sense of scale or context.
|
And yet when you look at what the stat actually does (allow you to see ambushes and traps, see through illusions, identify lies, and break out of mind control) the stat represents paranoia better than the insanity rules do.I'm not sure I would classify situational awareness and strong intuition as paranoia.
It's not paranoia if people really are trying to ambush you, lie to you, or control your mind.
That's what they want you to think....!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If Paizo lowered the minimum point buy stat to 6 maybe everybody could agree that dumping to 7 is OK
Honestly the only times it bugs me is when the player consistently does it as some reverse synthesist summoner where only the character's physical stats matter as he just uses the players mental stats anyway.
But i do not see that as a stat dumping problem, more of a metagame problem, same as that player who automatically pulls out a torch whenever a troll comes up regardless of whether that character even ever heard of what a troll is before.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Intelligence: Knowing a tomato is a fruit.
\begin{offtopic-nitpick}
It's also a vegetable. "Fruit" and "vegetable" are used in different meanings in different contexts. There's the botanical concept of fruit (which includes tomatoes), a certain part of a flowering plant. There's the culinary concept of fruit (which does not include tomatoes) based on flavor and use in cooking. There's also the culinary concept of vegetable (which includes tomatoes) also based on flavor and use in cooking. It's silly to say that the botanical usage of "fruit" is more true or real than the culinary usage.tl;dr: look at this cool venn diagram I found on wikipedia!
\end{offtopic-nitpick}
Is there an actual TeX package with an "offtopic-nitpick" environment? Someone should write one:P\begin{offtopic-nitpick}
\end{offtopic-nitpick}
I'd have it just pass to the comment environment, if I were writing the package. :P
I'd have it just pass to the comment environment, if I were writing the package. :PIs there an actual TeX package with an "offtopic-nitpick" environment? Someone should write one:P\begin{offtopic-nitpick}
\end{offtopic-nitpick}
I just decided to create a new theorem environment, and have the numbering go off of sections. So, I now have Off-Topic Nitpick 7.4.1 in my thesis >_>.
On topic: People who role-play a low stat incorrectly are badwrongfun?
Skipped to the end because I don't read fast enough to catch up.
My problem with a 7 Int fighter or 7 Str wizard is this...
Yes, a big dumb fighter is a trope, and can make a great character. Same with a physically wimpy wizard. But a smart fighter is also a trope and a moderately strong wizard would be a nice change. The problem is in the points.
A -7 is only a -2 penalty. That's only 10%, right? So a smart fighter with a +2 bonus, is also just 10% off the average. And it helps him very little. A human fighter with 7 Int will have 3 skill points. A human fighter with 14 Int will have 5 skill points (he put his favored class bonus in HP because he needs to). But that is effectively 9 attribute points the fighter can not use to be a good fighter because he wanted to role-play a smart fighter (and have the stat to back him up).
It is even worse for a strong wizard. He gets absolutely nothing for wanting to role-play a strong wizard other than being able to carry more junk. And for this he has 9 less build points? Yea role-playing!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But a smart fighter is also a trope
Tell that to Paizo. Maybe they'll try supporting it at some point.
He gets absolutely nothing for wanting to role-play a strong wizard other than being able to carry more junk. And for this he has 9 less build points? Yea role-playing!
Why should get anything extra for it? Does every role playing decision need to result in some mechanical advantage or disadvantage?
Strong wizards are sub-optimal (except for very specific melee wizard builds, blah blah blah you know there's an exception to every generalization) so if you're worried about being a strong wizard, you're not going to be optimal, if you're worried about being optimal, you won't be a strong wizard. You're "penalized" for it in the same sense that in real life you're penalized as an Olympic athlete if you choose to spend your time on the couch eating chips and playing Call of Duty instead of training and working out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He gets absolutely nothing for wanting to role-play a strong wizard other than being able to carry more junk. And for this he has 9 less build points? Yea role-playing!Why should get anything extra for it? Does every role playing decision need to result in some mechanical advantage or disadvantage?
Apparently it does. If you choose weak wizard you get an advantage, if you choose strong wizard you get a disadvantage.
Strong wizards are sub-optimal (except for very specific melee wizard builds, blah blah blah you know there's an exception to every generalization) so if you're worried about being a strong wizard, you're not going to be optimal, if you're worried about being optimal, you won't be a strong wizard. You're "penalized" for it in the same sense that in real life you're penalized as an Olympic athlete if you choose to spend your time on the couch eating chips and playing Call of Duty instead of training and working out.
This is like saying if you want to be blonde you have to be dumb. It makes no sense. There is no real life equivalency here. What if my Olympic athlete studies physics and literature in his spare time? Apparently being smart would hinder my gymnastics routine. Huh?
This is like saying if you want to be blonde you have to be dumb. It makes no sense. There is no real life equivalency hear. What if my Olympic athlete studies physics and literature in his spare time? Apparently being smart would hinder my gymnastics routine. Huh?
Any examples of this?
As much as I hate to promote tropes like that... this may not be the best example. Most of the olympic athletes I've seen talk about their sport... they live eat and breath their sport. morning to night to be the best in the world...
really not enough time to get a doctorate in physics. But who knows, maybe there are some out there who DID do both, I don't spend MUCH time caring about sports... But the one's i've heard really focus on how hard they worked at it...
But, yeah... There's only so much time in a day. If you want to be super brilliant and master the secrets of the universe... you didn't join the basketball team too...
Unless your Batman. He can master gymnastics, every martial arts, and build teleportation machines all while running a business and dating supermodels ;)
Actually... I think it'd be fun to start with a ring of sustance and just say 'oh yeah... I never slept. Days I studied, nights i worked out.'
That could be kind of fun :D
Apparently it does. If you choose weak wizard you get an advantage, if you choose strong wizard you get a disadvantage.
If you create a strong wizard you get the advantages of being strong. Being strong is less synergistic with the class abilities of a wizard than a fighter, but them's the breaks. "role-playing."
This is like saying if you want to be blonde you have to be dumb. It makes no sense. There is no real life equivalency here. What if my Olympic athlete studies physics and literature in his spare time? Apparently being smart would hinder my gymnastics routine. Huh?
No, what I mean is that in both cases you have limited resources to spend (points, time/effort). If a person spends their time and effort goofing off they are not spending it on training to be an Olympian, if they spend it studying physics they are not studying Mandarin, and so forth. There is an opportunity cost involved in choosing one path over another.
Some people obviously can be both scholars and athletes but one assumes they are working off a higher point-buy ;)
I will agree that an Olympic level athlete probably sacrificed in other areas to become great. But is it a 7 in Int sacrifice? Can't some one be at least above average Int and still win a gold? Or do they have to be stupid to do it?
This gets back to an argument that I know has been mentioned in this thread before. A big dumb fighter shouldn't be encouraged to the near exclusion of everything else. But that seems to be what happens.
Either that or people just decide that stats don't matter for role-playing at all and play a 7 Int "genius", but I personally don't like that solution.
If you're going to have an INT of 7, you don't get to come up with all of the clever solutions to the problems confronting the party.Well, that's just your houserule. We know what INT does in Pathfinder, it mostly affects skill points, certain skills, and casting ability. At no point does it TAKE AWAY a player's ability to ROLE play.
We're playing a tabletop RPG, not a computer videogame where some number determines your valid dialog choices. If I wanted to ROLLplay instead of ROLEplay, I'd go play Fallout on the computer, not pathfinder with real people.
-----
Punishing low stats is pretty easy within the frameworks of the rules: ABILITY DAMAGE.
Keep reading. I wasn't done. And I'm not sure you see where I'm coming from, anyway. My eye-rolling at people who dump to 7 and then don't have their characters act like it is driven by my desire to see actual roleplay. Me asking people to at least try to keep their stats in mind when playing their character is sort of the opposite of rollplay, so I'm not sure what you intended by that.
Now what do you say of characters who have 7 intelligence, but say 14 Wisdom? Are they not allowed to be clever?For me it's not the people who drop their INT to 7. It's the people who drop their INT to 7, but then don't play their character that way.
If you're going to have an INT of 7, you don't get to come up with all of the clever solutions to the problems confronting the party.
I didn't say a character can't ever be clever. I didn't say a character can't ever solve any problems.
But it's clearly not playing the stats on the page (which indicate that your character is appreciably and noticeably less intelligent than average) if that character is the one figuring everything out, which is how some people (some, not all, not even most I would venture) play. That's the only time I roll my eyes at it. That's when it feels munchkinny, rather than optimizy.
Also, note that I never made mention of prohibiting players from doing whatever they want with their stats. Houserules are irrelevant here. I never said players can't do whatever they want. I simply responded to a post about why people view dumping to 8 and dumping to 7 differently.
That doesn't mean having a 7 is verboten. That doesn't mean that everybody dumping to 7 is cheesing. I mean hell, I've got a PFS Tiefling Ranger with a 6 Charisma (of course, that's 8 before racial). I wanted him to be gruff and off-putting to strangers and I try to play him that way. So my social skills are terribad. But Handle Animal is at least decent because I've invested in it (Urban Ranger with a trait to make it a class skill and skill points to make up for the deficit). I've got a Battle Oracle with an 8 in Int and Wis because outside of combat, he's a complete follower. He's not particularly bright and probably relatively easily manipulated. Generally he stays quiet, but give him a polearm and he'll be the first one to lead the charge. His social skills also suck, despite a good Charisma score, because I didn't invest in them. That's not rollplay.
I'm not opposed to people having 7s. I'm not even opposed to people min/maxing their 7s. I just find it irksome when people drop to 7, then hand-wave that stat away whenever it may come up in roleplay situations.
|
How many of the "village idiot" strongman fighters we've all seen at the table would have existed if there was no mechanical benefit to dumping Int?
How many of the "rude bastard" characters we've all seen at the table would have existed if there was no mechanical benefit to dumping Cha?
How many of the "can't lift a dagger" genius wizards we've all see at the table would have existed if there was no mechanical benefit to dumping Str?
If someone has a character concept, great. But honestly I as a DM don't want my players being morons. I don't want them being uncivil, even "in character". I also don't want them jacking a primary stat higher than the game expect by sacrificing "useless stuff".
I allow 25-point build, but I stipulate I don't want to see negatives. I also don't want to see a pair of 16s (before racial adjustment). I give those bonus points so my players can make well-rounded and interesting characters that are multifaceted.
The gentleman barbarian. The sorcerer who looks like a wrestler. The tactician fighter. I like to see clever, like-able, able characters, so I empower my players to do that.
Now, final comment. If we're talking 15-point build... that's a horse of a different colour. It's difficult to make some classes work at that level. Say... a monk, or a paladin. Any MAD class. If you don't have the points to spread over a few abilities, dumping is a necessary evil.
i love playing as "the sorcerer who looks like a wrestler"
My friend (username icehawk) likes the "tactician fighter" and my other friend (username magic ) has once played a gentlemen barbarian (though his mace was smarter than him and I convinced him to take an oracle dip for rage prophet, he was originally a fighter/barbarian gestalt, and though his to hit/damage was insane, he didn't have much utility for a gestalt character)I play sorcerers most of the time (second most common is oracle followed my magus) I hate dumping str and I never dump cha
I also see nothing wrong with a 7 in a stat really. I had a human witch with a 7 in Str, but that was because she was tiny. She was 4'11" and 90lbs (based on my wife). I would say even if I didn't get points for it I would have dropped her Str. As it was the points went into Wis and Cha anyway.
I also had a player that really wanted a big dumb barbarian. He made a Half Orc and dropped his Int to 5. I let him take a racial penalty to Int for a bonus to Con in addition to the +2 he put on Str. This actually made him super optimal, but he was so happy with that character and had a blast making some things difficult for the other characters by being so stupid. The other players were on board, so it was all good.
So a low stat can be good. I just don't want to feel like I am being forced into it. I finally made a house rule that allows a player to add 7 points to a dumped stat. So far everyone has taken it, all of them in Cha. I think that is mostly because they liked the idea of riding into town and looking like heroes instead of the murder-hobos they actually are. ;)
I play sorcerers most of the time (second most common is oracle followed my magus) I hate dumping str and I never dump cha
Probably a good plan. Dumping Charisma as a sorcerer or oracle generally seems like a really bad idea. ;)
|
|
I play sorcerers most of the time (second most common is oracle followed my magus) I hate dumping str and I never dump chaProbably a good plan. Dumping Charisma as a sorcerer or oracle generally seems like a really bad idea. ;)
i also don't dump it as a magus or monk
But freqeuntly I'll have str 16 dex 9 cha 19 sorcerers
I play sorcerers most of the time (second most common is oracle followed my magus) I hate dumping str and I never dump chaProbably a good plan. Dumping Charisma as a sorcerer or oracle generally seems like a really bad idea. ;)
well, for sorcerers
there is the sage bloodline and the empyreal bloodline, both of which, remove any penalties for a low charisma by making everything ride on intelligence and wisdom respectively. except skills.
Sage comes with wizard-esque skill points, amazing knowledge, spellcraft and linguistics, and decent crafting
empyreal comes with clericesque perception and will saves, an amazing sense motive, decent heal, and excellent profession bonuses
the charisma sorcerer merely has a better diplomacy, UMD, bluff, intimidate, disguise, handle animal, and planar binding ability, the last of which is spell specific and the others can all be replaced by feats or skill ranks. the Wis Sorc has amazing will saves and saves feats on perception and the Int Sorc will have double, possible triple or even quadruple the normal amount of skill points a Sorc would normally have
i dont presume to come into an argument this developed and A.) know what has already been said (no, i didnt read all... what, 20 pages? or B.) have the be-all end-all last word that settles the argument, so dont crucify me if i say something thats already been discussed, that out of the way:
In regards to the original post, people get upset by a 7 in a stat because people are people, and people get upset over anything. to avoid rhetoric, you cannot please everyone. i wish everybody would understand that something that is legal in the rules is legal, whether you say so or not, unless you're then GM, in which case please please oh please dont drop rocks on me, i didnt mean it.
MY PERSONAL OPINION ON DUMP STATS:
Dump stats are just that, stats that your character doesnt need, and as such may dump, or otherwise reduce. upon dumping a stat you agree, as a player, that your character is hindered in some way, and that there is a chance that this flaw will be exploited. (see, low will save, inability to convince shop-clerks to sell to you, or unconsciousness due to 0 int((note: as of pathfinder the only ability that kills you upon hitting 0 is con, thank the makers!)))furthermore, upon dumping a stat you agree to play the character to that stat, as well as possible within your ability. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT A CHARACTER WITH 7 INT CANNOT POINT OUT THE SOLUTION TO A PUZZLE, NOR DOES IT MEAN THAT A CHARACTER WITH 7 CHARISMA CANNOT CONVINCE A SHOP CLERK TO GIVE THEM A DISCOUNT. occasionally, even the blind squirrel finds a nut, and occasionally 20's happen. if a pc with 7 charisma is attempting to convince an NPC to help the party in some way and makes a diplomacy check that BEATS THE DC OF THE CHECK he has successfully convinced that NPC. END OF STORY. in fact, ive even given conditional bonus' to charisma checks (in the form of a slightly lowered dc) if the pc says something rational to an nuetral or friendly npc capable of understanding the rationality of the statement (however if the npc has a stat block, and also has a low stat in the skill in question, he may not understand the logic put forth fully, and may take a negative in the form of a tougher DC. it is a double edged sword) dumped stats do not mean that a character is useless in that stat, just that it is harder for them to mechanically use said stat. i do on occasion get upset with a pc with 7 int that is consistently solving my puzzles because the player himself is smart, and have asked players to allow their companions time to think about it, or have given them additional clues based on their characters respective abilities to give them an advantage with the puzzle. i have a friend who is frankly, not the most logically gifted player, and has played wizards with a 20 int, these things happen, particularly in fantasy game, after all fantasy is about being things that you cannot be yourself, and i have found myself asking him if a character that intelligent would really be walking up to something that could more than 1shot him during his movement phase. im a bit of a fatty myself, and i cant roll through the legs of a huge black dragon avoiding its razor-toothed maw to stab it in the belly with my daggers for sneak attack damage, but ill be damned if i havent tried that on my rogue, you gonna sue me?
i suppose what im getting at is theres a bit of a double standard in the community about the way stats are meant to be played, but if you're a min maxer more power to you. in fact i just recently made a pfs character with 10 int and 7 cha, so that he could have 22 starting dex, suck it.
i can also say that he wont be the one attempting to talk to every npc, and i might occasionally say EXACTLY the wrong thing, because thats what the character would do. however that doesnt mean that when my group is struggling to convince someone of something i wont say my tuppence to attempt to convince them logically.
furthermore, im currently playing a life oracle wih 8 str and 8 dex but 20 charisma, shes dual cursed with clouded vision and deafness, and she talks to npc's with her 20 cha and 20+ diplomacy check using a wizards spellbook and a quill because she cannot speak. ive also had combats where wolves tripped me and were dragging me out of the camp, and i told my fellow players they couldnt come save me until they realized what was happening due to the fact that i couldnt shout out for them. OH but she isnt min/maxed because i didnt take her to 7 so its a moot point.