We here about CHA all the times and the issues that tend to pop up when a less than charsmatic player plays a face character, but what about the other mental stats?
Reading the Riddle thread got me thinking about how the mental stats are inherently difficult to RP at all beyond your own capabilities. If you have a super intelligent character, how do you roleplay the ability to think so must faster and efficiently than even yourself? You have to somehow pretend to think like Einstein and then even beyond that. Most people can't begin to comprehend that intellect. Or what about Wisdom? How do you roleplay being wise and perceptive when you are naturally forgetful and such?
I feel like ALL the mental stats are just inherently broken when it comes to RP due to limitations of the players themselves.
What do you all think?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mental ability scores >14 or 15 (Int and Wis especially) lend themselves to metagaming quite nicely.
The thing is, a character of Int/Wis of upwards of 22 can actually figure things out that you can't hope to figure out without a stroke of luck. How you can think at a higher intelligence than your own is naturally, impossible.
We here about CHA all the times and the issues that tend to pop up when a less than charsmatic player plays a face character, but what about the other mental stats?
Reading the Riddle thread got me thinking about how the mental stats are inherently difficult to RP at all beyond your own capabilities. If you have a super intelligent character, how do you roleplay the ability to think so must faster and efficiently than even yourself? You have to somehow pretend to think like Einstein and then even beyond that. Most people can't begin to comprehend that intellect. Or what about Wisdom? How do you roleplay being wise and perceptive when you are naturally forgetful and such?
I feel like ALL the mental stats are just inherently broken when it comes to RP due to limitations of the players themselves.
What do you all think?
Well, to roleplay a high Int character we could just spend 10 minutes before declaring any action: acting in a round, for example, would compress the time that us, players, use, by a factor of 100; that's something possible for a random Int 24 level 10 wizard.
High Wis? Ask the GM to show the scenarios as simpler as possible and then let the NPCs wonder about your mastermind brain while they are blind to the obvious.DM: "As you enter the door, you immediately notice the murder profile of that person. For you, he's certainly the assassin. He's confident about his ability to conceal his true personality at everyone, but at your eyes, he's naked."
Player, pointing at that guy: "He's guilty, catch him now!"
Everybody looks at the guy and, 2 second later, he begins to run.
The thing is, a character of Int/Wis of upwards of 22 can actually figure things out that you can't hope to figure out without a stroke of luck. How you can think at a higher intelligence than your own is naturally, impossible.
Here's the thing about intelligence: It (generally speaking) only measures how easily you can memorize stuff, how quickly you can recall stuff you've memorized, and what your overall "processing speed" is.
So (again generally speaking) having the GM or notecards remind you of past events, or taking longer to think of something your character gets instantly give syou a good approximation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, to roleplay a high Int character we could just spend 10 minutes before declaring any action: acting in a round, for example, would compress the time that us, players, use, by a factor of 100; that's something possible for a random Int 24 level 10 wizard.
High Wis? Ask the GM to show the scenarios as simpler as possible and then let the NPCs wonder about your mastermind brain while they are blind to the obvious.DM: "As you enter the door, you immediately notice the murder profile of that person. For you, he's certainly the assassin. He's confident about his ability to conceal his true personality at everyone, but at your eyes, he's naked."
Player, pointing at that guy: "He's guilty, catch him now!"
Everybody looks at the guy and, 2 second later, he begins to run.
"Kill that guy!!"
*STABSCHLORPSKEWERSTABSTAB*
"Now, why'd we kill him?"
*explanation follows*
But see, the problem with the thinking about things and such is that, generally speaking, it is common for EVERYONE to do that. So then how do you get a person to RP the idiot when you also have the 24 int wizard without breaking the 8 int RP?
Award traits or something similar (hero points, w/e works for you) to reward RP if that's your thing. As you say, everyone tends to play to the best of their ability. GMs get stuck with asking " how do you justify your 8 INT character [insert highbrow thinking here]?". ;)
But see, the problem with the thinking about things and such is that, generally speaking, it is common for EVERYONE to do that. So then how do you get a person to RP the idiot when you also have the 24 int wizard without breaking the 8 int RP?
Can you rephrase that in a way that makes sense?
Why does the RP of the 24 Int Wizard affect the RP of the 8 Int character at all?
|
I think it's easy. For playing low int/wis/cha character's just reduce yourself back to when you were younger and act how you would think in that situation. For highter int than myself, I tend to go with simply asking the DM if I can make an Int roll or something every once in a while for something my character would know(or if I'm the DM, I point out to the smart character stuff that they would think about). For higher wisdom I tend to do something similar such as looking up advice from wise people in real life and giving it to other characters throughout play. For higher charisma, my DM's tend to let me take back stuff if others react negatively a couple times per session(or I let them do this if I am the DM). Conversely to get people to roleplay their character's better I tend to intterupt them by saying they get distracted/forget stuff/mix up their words etc. to balance out their naturally higher abilities than their character if they go overboard.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution values are also difficult to roleplay accurately because most people without those scores have no idea what certain people are capable of.
All of roleplaying is a give and take of verisimilitude. If the other players believe your portrayal, you've succeeded. It doesn't matter how actually accurate that portrayal is.
Relax and solve your puzzles, make your tactical moves, be as charming or abrasive as you like, and let the group's general reaction guide you in the future.
|
If the point of the exercise is a bit of escapism, it shouldn't be prohibitively difficult for me to play someone smarter or more charming than I am in real life. If I can play someone significantly stronger than I am, smarter should also be on the table.
On the other hand, how you go about playing that in Pathfinder is a bit complicated, if for no other reason than the game requires you to begin stitching on some of the additional rules systems they've crafted before mental and social skills are represented by anything more than a handful of pass/fail die rolls. For me, I'm with Turin - higher mental stats should permit a bit more metagaming as your character makes leaps of logic and reasoning.
Social skills are their own problem, as the most charming people in the world are limited when an individual is determined to exercise their own agency. Then again, that's what dominate person is for.
|
What do you all think?
I think it doesn't really make a difference over all. I throw my PCs a bone now and then when something is in question by saying 'yeah, he is too wise to make that boneheaded of a move, go ahead and retcon that' and the like. But I don't worry about players fulfilling the promise of their stats all the time.
We here about CHA all the times and the issues that tend to pop up when a less than charsmatic player plays a face character, but what about the other mental stats?
Reading the Riddle thread got me thinking about how the mental stats are inherently difficult to RP at all beyond your own capabilities. If you have a super intelligent character, how do you roleplay the ability to think so must faster and efficiently than even yourself? You have to somehow pretend to think like Einstein and then even beyond that. Most people can't begin to comprehend that intellect. Or what about Wisdom? How do you roleplay being wise and perceptive when you are naturally forgetful and such?
I feel like ALL the mental stats are just inherently broken when it comes to RP due to limitations of the players themselves.
What do you all think?
They can vary greatly within the same number and they don't have hard stats that you can measure like you can with strength, but I dont know if that makes it broken. I know you can be int 3 and learn a class. Even within the game you can have a 6 with no point buy dumping, and that 6 can be relatively common.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What do you all think?
I don't think there's any difference between mental stats and physical stats. When I DM for a player who's got a barbarian and he asks if his character can lift a door, I ask for a Strength check. When I DM for a player who's got a wizard and he asks if his character can figure out a puzzle, I ask for an Intelligence check.
Ability scores belong to the character, not the player. As a DM, I have to keep that in mind. It's kind of my job. So when the PCs encounter a situation the players don't KNOW how to handle, I'll let them work on it a bit, then if stumped ask for appropriate rolls.
You don't need to be a 200 IQ player to play a high-Intelligence PC any more than you need to be a body-builder to play a high-Strength PC. Just recognize when it's time to use those numbers on your character sheet. Sometimes you're asking for a Dex check to untie a tricky knot, sometimes you're asking for a Cha check to talk someone into a discount.
As long as you don't ignore the stats line on your character sheet and pretend for some ludicrous reason that you have to role-play half of it, you'll be fine. And yes, if my players running a high-Int PC suggest something truly out-of-character dumb, I'll ask for a check so they realize it. The DM feeds the players the world, it's our job.
Are PC characters in a story or avatars for players?
Those two have very different results on how games behave.
In a PbP, things are a bit easier -- unless you are playing over live chat, for playing superintelligence, you CAN take the time to use Google and/or its competitors to look up stuff (DON'T use this to look ahead in the campaign, if it is a published one). Likewise, for playing supercharisma, you can take the time to compose a good speech. For superwisdom, just play up high willpower and depend upon the GM to let your character notice stuff that other people would be unlikely to pick up.
For playing low mental stats: Just think: What would Homer Simpson do?
In a PbP, things are a bit easier -- unless you are playing over live chat, for playing superintelligence, you CAN take the time to use Google and/or its competitors to look up stuff (DON'T use this to look ahead in the campaign, if it is a published one). Likewise, for playing supercharisma, you can take the time to compose a good speech. For superwisdom, just play up high willpower and depend upon the GM to let your character notice stuff that other people would be unlikely to pick up.
For playing low mental stats: Just think: What would Homer Simpson do?
If the puzzle is difficult enough or rare enough, all the time in the world spent with Google will not help me solve it.
Either:
- the puzzle itself really is difficult enough to challenge your (far more intelligent) character, in which case it is absolutely too hard for the player no matter what resources you give them
- or the puzzle is solvable by the player, in which case it is no longer a character challenge
As for charisma, the same issue exists. If I don't have the skill, you could give me all the time in the world and I won't be able to put together a compelling speech or argument.
The thing is, if you want to include puzzles to challenge your players (NOT the characters) then if that makes the game better for your group, more power to you. But I personally dislike such challenges because I'm not there to simulate myself, I'm there to simulate my character.
If you ask me to solve a puzzle while I'm playing my low-Int barbarian, vs. someone next to me who is, let's say, not as capable mentally, but is playing a high-Int wizard, and the result is that whichever character solves the puzzle receives a bonus of some kind, that would be no different than pointing to the floor and dictating that the first person to pound out 100 push-ups due to a Str test (instead of an Int test) is earning a bonus for their character. It does not accurately reflect the likelihood that my character would succeed in that test.
And yes, it is possible that I roll a 20 on my Int test with my barbarian while my less intellectual friend rolls a 1 for his high Int wizard, and now my barbarian has solved a puzzle the wizard missed on. You know what? I'm okay with that because I know that in the end if we run into enough of these the outcome will match expectation. With the players participating that isn't likely to be the case.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
As a GM, I try to make sure that the game statistics don't interfere with the role-playing aspect of the game. So I let players be as clever / foolish as they want to be.
Intelligence is restricted to the ability for a character to remember huge amounts of information. If you're playing a high INT character, you get clues in the form of background information.
Wisdom is restrictedto Willpower and Perception.
Charisma is related to how well you can sell yourself and your message.
The thing is, a character of Int/Wis of upwards of 22 can actually figure things out that you can't hope to figure out without a stroke of luck. How you can think at a higher intelligence than your own is naturally, impossible.Here's the thing about intelligence: It (generally speaking) only measures how easily you can memorize stuff, how quickly you can recall stuff you've memorized, and what your overall "processing speed" is.
So (again generally speaking) having the GM or notecards remind you of past events, or taking longer to think of something your character gets instantly give syou a good approximation.
Exactly, and also pattern recognition (in how we percieve intelligence in real life, at least). It's also not so simple as high intelligence equals having high in all these things etc; I made extensive professional IQ tests during my mental evaluation (I am an autistic person with ADHD, formalized as of the day before yesterday) and the primary parts of the intelligence tests where pattern recognition, processing speed of logic, work memory and to some degree general knowledge.
replace the mental stats with observable phenomena like strength or dexterity.
charisma -> force of will/personality -> offensive mental stat, put your mind onto the environment
wisdom -> mental dexterity -> defensive/reactionary mental stat, yours minds ability to defend itself and it's body from harm (perception, will save)
Intelligence -> education/knowledge base -> defensive/passive mental stat, long term mental defense, learning from mistakes and remembering details about enemies.
Exactly, and also pattern recognition (in how we percieve intelligence in real life, at least). It's also not so simple as high intelligence equals having high in all these things etc; I made extensive professional IQ tests during my mental evaluation (I am an autistic person with ADHD, formalized as of the day before yesterday) and the primary parts of the intelligence tests where pattern recognition, processing speed of logic, work memory and to some degree general knowledge.The thing is, a character of Int/Wis of upwards of 22 can actually figure things out that you can't hope to figure out without a stroke of luck. How you can think at a higher intelligence than your own is naturally, impossible.Here's the thing about intelligence: It (generally speaking) only measures how easily you can memorize stuff, how quickly you can recall stuff you've memorized, and what your overall "processing speed" is.
So (again generally speaking) having the GM or notecards remind you of past events, or taking longer to think of something your character gets instantly give syou a good approximation.
pattern recognition is handled by wisdom (perception and sense motive)
pattern recognition is handled by wisdom (perception and sense motive)
Well, pattern recognition is different from the typical description of the perception or sense motive checks. While using wisdom for pattern recognition is surely a valid way to go, there's no rules support either way and IRL it is considered a part of intelligence, so there can be an argument for intelligence in the game to represent that too.
|
What do you all think?
I think folks handcuff themselves to stats unnecessarily. Game works just fine if you keep them under the hood and let them do the mechanical stuff. Of course YMMV, some folks wish to play extremes and both point buy and rolling tend to support that. At my table we tend to make just above the cut heroic type characters that are not penny wise but dollar dumb, or a retarded Hercules. More often than not you come up with extreme corner cases if you lock yourself down to stats and it gets worse if you constantly compare yourselves at the table. I can only speak for myself but I have better use of my gaming time.
pattern recognition is handled by wisdom (perception and sense motive)Well, pattern recognition is different from the typical description of the perception or sense motive checks. While using wisdom for pattern recognition is surely a valid way to go, there's no rules support either way and IRL it is considered a part of intelligence, so there can be an argument for intelligence in the game to represent that too.
being able to count how many zebras are in a heard is a perception check, just saying. so is noticing the minute details to a crime scene or notice the details necessary to notice an impending ambush.
all intelligence checks are inherently internal.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're equating high Intelligence with Manga/Anime death note Int - chess match stuff.
It's not the same. Einstein was a genius. Put him on a battlefield, and he's as clueless as the next guy. He'd probably pick up stuff really fast, but he'll have no experience with tactics and strategy.
It all comes down to SKILLS.
Smart people have more skills, but the game makes no allowance for mental genius any more then it does for physical genius (i.e. someone who can perfectly mimic a motion, or Do It Right The First Time.)
You only have skills.
Int is a modifier to the roll for Int based skills, that's it. And for 'determining the murderer', unless you've a feat, that's actually a Wis-based roll (perception or sense motive, as you will).
And there are tons and tons of examples of real world geniuses who are clueless about working with their hands, doing art, any kind of social relationships, can't work in a team, and the like. Geniuses are regularly exploited by far less intelligent people who know how to manipulate others. Charismatic people browbeat intelligent people all the time.
Intelligent people who are actually lethally dangerous is actually rather rare, as smarts don't usually translate that way. Those who are, tend to be exceptional and get attention.
The intelligent person figures out the many courses of action.
The Wise or experienced person chooses the best one.
The charismatic one takes one and runs with it, and everyone follows him even if it's not the best.
That's how the world works. Natus from Fairy Tail, and Luffy from One Piece are prime examples. They both associate with much smarter people, but they determine what course of action, and frequently it is not the smart one or the best one...but everyone goes along with it, shrugging their shoulders while the smart guys fall over in the background at the idiocy of some of the things they do.
Charisma trumps smarts.
==Aelryinth
i would say the charismatic person makes it the best option by keeping everyone together on that.
but on this I mostly agree with Aelry
How can the DM roleplay an undead monster, aberration, a clever dragon, or an alien with a psychology very different from that of a human? I guess the answer is by using imagination and doing the best we can. If the player of the super smart PC isn't opposed to it maybe other players in the group could also offer ideas and advice.
I personally prefer riddles and puzzles to be problems for the players. I wouldn’t necessarily be against the idea of giving hints to a PC who rolls well on some kind of Int check though. I could even imagine that certain DMs might like to present tough riddles and puzzles to entertain the players but then use super smart PCs figuring the problem out without the players doing so as kind of a failsafe. Like maybe the DM decides that if the group can’t solve something after thinking about it for a certain amount of real time they should break out the dice. Figuring the problem out early would still be helpful since it would eliminate the chance for failure due to unlucky rolls. Just an idea...
The DM plays that stuff by metagaming. He assumes the being has information, or simply that much experience, and can make plans and deduce things from having that level of stuff, i.e. they've been in a lot of fights, seen it all, and know what to do and what their opponents can do.
==Aelryinth
I think, as other have said, the stats shouldn't constrict the way someone wants to RP a character (unless of course this player is particularly smart/wise/charismatic and takes away another player's role). If a player solves a puzzle, but their character only has 6 intelligence and this puzzle was pretty difficult, then the player can choose to keep it quiet, whisper it to the player of the intelligent character, solve the puzzle themselves, or even solve it accidentally - I personally don't think that anyone should stop the player doing any of these. I believe that, when it comes to RP, the player just has to be mature about it - if they made their character have 6 int because they wanted to play a character with 6 int, then playing a character with 6 int is the best way for them to go; similarly, if they have 6 int because of die rolls or minmaxing, then they shouldn't have their RP restricted because of that as, in the end, that would put a dampner on their fun (and that's ultimately what the game is about).
The way that mental stats have been given as numerical values, however, allows players to use their character's intelligence/wisdom/charisma for stat based skill checks. In the above example of a character with 6 int trying to solve a puzzle, if the player didn't know, then rolling an int check probably wouldn't tell them either; conversely, if another player with a character who had 20 int rolled an int check, they would likely discover the puzzle's solution. Also, no matter how intelligent the player is, their character won't gain any more skill points.
If someone is playing a high intelligence character, and the player doesn't have something like 29 int, then the GM could ask the player if they'd like to be given hints that their character would notice because of their smarts; the player would still have their high knowledge checks to fall back on, but they'd have something to augment their RP as well.
When I play a character, I prefer to RP the way their mental stats would suggest, but I won't lock myself in a box.
The DM plays that stuff by metagaming. He assumes the being has information, or simply that much experience, and can make plans and deduce things from having that level of stuff, i.e. they've been in a lot of fights, seen it all, and know what to do and what their opponents can do.
==Aelryinth
This reminded me of how I changed how knowledge skills work.
If the PCs barely beat the DC they get vague folklore(not wrong, but vague, incomplete and misleading). The more they beat it by, the more detailed and reliable the info is. Beat the DC on a monster knowledge check by 20 and I will actually give them numbers. Heck, if it's a stock monster from the bestiary I will hand over a copy of the sheet. This simulates just how much knowledge people who can get a result of 35 on knowledge checks have.
The DM plays that stuff by metagaming. He assumes the being has information, or simply that much experience, and can make plans and deduce things from having that level of stuff, i.e. they've been in a lot of fights, seen it all, and know what to do and what their opponents can do.
==Aelryinth
This reminded me of how I changed how knowledge skills work.
If the PCs barely beat the DC they get vague folklore(not wrong, but vague, incomplete and misleading). The more they beat it by, the more detailed and reliable the info is. Beat the DC on a monster knowledge check by 20 and I will actually give them numbers. Heck, if it's a stock monster from the bestiary I will hand over a copy of the sheet. This simulates just how much knowledge people who can get a result of 35 on knowledge checks have.
Well the knowledge skills where dif = 10+CR is borked. It's just there to be usable.
In all likelihood, any professional is going to memorize the most powerful creatures first, simply because they are the most interesting. Seriously, it's like all us people shouldn't know what Godzilla is and does, when it truth the instant he pops up on the scene everyone is going to want to know everything about him.
THe only alternative, however, is a mixed CR/rarity combination, which would help you determine how well known something actually is, and you could actually have a category "Completely unknown. You can tell it's an aberration, however." and things like that, even with +50 on the check...if it's absolutely the first of its kind, no way you should be able to just past a CR and know everything about it.
Meh. It's the game.
==Aelryinth
Wizards are almost the only high INT class around, and to play the wizard some RL intelligence is needed (that's actual criticism leveled at PF and D&D by some), given the demands of handling the spell list. Intelligent people playing intelligent characters is not entirely unexpected in PF.
The alchemist, investigator and witch all snarl at you!!! And the archivist from 3.5, but he just lurks.
==Aelryinth
being able to count how many zebras are in a heard is a perception check, just saying. so is noticing the minute details to a crime scene or notice the details necessary to notice an impending ambush.
Sorry if I used the wrong term, English isn't my native language - what I meant was the kind of pattern recognition measured by tests like this - the ability to recognize a pattern and predict the next result. Not counting or noticing, which I agree are very different skillsets (I have severe issues with noticing stuff even when they're staring me in the face, but have much better pattern recognition (if that's even the term) than the average person) and which are explicitly part of perception.
all intelligence checks are inherently internal.
Depends on what you mean with "internal"; a knowledge check requires you to at some point have gathered data, just like a perception check, and using spellcraft to identify a spell as it is being cast is just as much external as using perception to realize a disguise is a disguise.
Also, notice that all craft skills are intelligence checks despite being very much external.
I'm not saying you're wrong in regarding things like pattern recognition as wisdom-based or a part of perception, I'm only saying the rules aren't explicit about it and there is an argument to be made that it might be int-based.
Wizards are almost the only high INT class around, and to play the wizard some RL intelligence is needed (that's actual criticism leveled at PF and D&D by some), given the demands of handling the spell list. Intelligent people playing intelligent characters is not entirely unexpected in PF.The alchemist, investigator and witch all snarl at you!!! And the archivist from 3.5, but he just lurks.
==Aelryinth
And the Magus... and the Sage Sorcerer...and the Arcanist....
There are a couple of ways to handle it. One way is for the GM to cut the player with the high mental stats some slack on things. If the character has high enough stats that he should be able to deal with the situation and the player is about to mess up as a GM I simply ask is that what you really want to do, and then give him some time to think it over. Another way is to get the rest of the table involved. If the character has much higher stats than the player I allow the player to get advice from the other players. I use both but prefer the second way because it gets everyone involved.
In a PbP, things are a bit easier -- unless you are playing over live chat, for playing superintelligence, you CAN take the time to use Google and/or its competitors to look up stuff (DON'T use this to look ahead in the campaign, if it is a published one). Likewise, for playing supercharisma, you can take the time to compose a good speech. For superwisdom, just play up high willpower and depend upon the GM to let your character notice stuff that other people would be unlikely to pick up.
For playing low mental stats: Just think: What would Homer Simpson do?
If the puzzle is difficult enough or rare enough, all the time in the world spent with Google will not help me solve it.
{. . .}
If a puzzle requires Intelligence 24 to be 50% solvable and the player (not PC) has an Intelligence of 6, then you're probably right. But if a puzzle requires Intelligence 18 to be 50% solvable and the player has an Intelligence of 12 and access to Google/Yahoo/whatever, then the player has a chance.
Same deal with Charisma and speech writing.
|
|
In my experience it's very possible to play characters smarter than you, just a lot of work. What you do is prepare. Work out contingency plans, research details of how their capabilities work, and come up with long-term and short-term ways to use those to your advantage.
Meanwhile, in-character, the character in question came up with those plans you spent all that effort on on the spur of the moment.
The fact that we often have 10 minutes to think through what our characters only have 6 seconds to think through definitely helps in the same way. If playing a low-Int character, you shouldn't take that time making complex tactical plans, as a rule, if you're playing as someone with Int 24, you likely should.
The rules also help a little with knowing things specifically, via Knowledge checks and such.
High Wisdom is pretty easy to roleplay as being strong-willed and perceptive, since those have mechanics that govern them almost completely. The 'common sense' part is harder, but talk to your GM, they may be willing to advise you to rethink terrible ideas if you point this out.
High Charisma is hard to actively portray if you don't have at least some in real life...but not impossible, and the rules do a lot of that work for you anyway, given how social skills work. Yeah, you may not be the best talker in the world in real life, but put a bit of effort in and a 38 on Diplomacy ought to help with that.
And finally, this one may just be me, but I doubt I'm unique in this, and just trying to roleplay someone who's better than me at something actually helps me perform better at that task. Obviously, this is purely a psychological thing, not an actual change in my capabilities...but I can get seriously 'in the zone' on my cunning plans or charming banter if playing the right character. Heck, I've learned at least one real-world skill permanently from playing a character in a LARP.
My orc Fighter is an Evil genius. He had Int 14 to start since 13+ Int and Combat Expertise were a prereq for kicking people in the nuts or spitting hot peppers in their eyes with Greater Dirty Trick. After finding a headband his Int is 16.
Unfortunately his Wisdom and Charisma are low, very low, so low that it if I were very serious about roleplaying the PC "properly" I might not know quite what to do. Instead I go for fun and roleplay him as extremely abrasive (low Cha) and moderately insane (low Wis) though also quite knowledgeable in certain narrow fields of study. It seems like the PC should be smart enough to know how the world works and act accordingly, but I choose to play him as moderately insane, out of touch with reality, and unable to participate effectively in social situations except via threats and insults (the Intimidate skill).
The fact that the DM is resistant to using Background Skills also keeps the PC's areas of expertise relatively few though his skill in those areas is often quite high. On the other hand, he put a rank or two into Sleight of Hand early on because he thought learning stage magic would help him learn arcane magic. Whether that was an appropriate misconception for somebody with 14 Int but 5 Wis is not something I'd claim to be sure about, but it seemed amusing to me at the time. Eventually the PC realized that so called "stage magic" wouldn't help him in his quest for magical power, and that realization plus the vague sense that others thought he was a fool became another nail in his coffin of bitterness and Evil - soon they'll all see, soon they'll all pay...
being able to count how many zebras are in a heard is a perception check, just saying. so is noticing the minute details to a crime scene or notice the details necessary to notice an impending ambush.
Sorry if I used the wrong term, English isn't my native language - what I meant was the kind of pattern recognition measured by tests like this - the ability to recognize a pattern and predict the next result. Not counting or noticing, which I agree are very different skillsets (I have severe issues with noticing stuff even when they're staring me in the face, but have much better pattern recognition (if that's even the term) than the average person) and which are explicitly part of perception.
all intelligence checks are inherently internal.Depends on what you mean with "internal"; a knowledge check requires you to at some point have gathered data, just like a perception check, and using spellcraft to identify a spell as it is being cast is just as much external as using perception to realize a disguise is a disguise.
Also, notice that all craft skills are intelligence checks despite being very much external.
I'm not saying you're wrong in regarding things like pattern recognition as wisdom-based or a part of perception, I'm only saying the rules aren't explicit about it and there is an argument to be made that it might be int-based.
not really. Spellcraft to identify a spell isn't the same as noticing a trap, in pathfinder it is really hard to hide what you are doing when casting a spell, so it would be like the person having billboard in some weird language over their head saying what spell they'redoing, you just have to read the language.
also, for craft and what not, the actual difficult part, determining what goes where happens internally, then you just make it.
I'm curious about the symbol puzzle though, I think the answer is D or maybe C. I've never understood how those puzzles work
So, basically, if there's going to be a puzzle in the game, the GM should let a high-Int character's player know way ahead of time so that player can have time to research and prepare his answer to be delivered "on the spot" by the character.
{. . .}
Actually, that's a good idea, especially for a tabletop game (where you aren't having to deal with PbP lag anyway).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would roleplay my high-wisdom cleric by occasionally googling quotes for a topic that reflected a value of what was happening in the moment, such as "courage" or "bargaining", and then roleplay the quote as if I was Confucius, if only to appear sagely.
Nobody picked up what I was doing and just thought I was really clever. It was hilarious.
|
|
Unfortunately his Wisdom and Charisma are low, very low, so low that it if I were very serious about roleplaying the PC "properly" I might not know quite what to do. Instead I go for fun and roleplay him as extremely abrasive (low Cha) and moderately insane (low Wis) though also quite knowledgeable in certain narrow fields of study. It seems like the PC should be smart enough to know how the world works and act accordingly, but I choose to play him as moderately insane, out of touch with reality, and unable to participate effectively in social situations except via threats and insults (the Intimidate skill).
I play a bard with a low Wis - though solid Int & Cha both. I just play the low Wis as him not really taking danger seriously, always leading the way into dangererous situations with a laugh. In part - it's just him believing his own press as 'the greatest of all adventurers!', but he often does a bit of 'ready, fire, aim'.
"A creepy looking room full of webs? I light them on fire of course, and kill the spiders as they flee. The building is made of wood? Oops... I mean - the greatest of all adventurers doesn't worry about such petty concerns!"
My worst mental-stat roleplaying faux pas had been a D&D 3.0 elven cleric in the first-level "Burning Plague" module. The BBEG was an orc shaman on a rock in the middle of pond in a large underground cavern. But the GM had upped the challenge: the rock was a 20-foot tall rock spire and the pond was deep enough with significant current (the outlet was visible, the inlet was not) that washed our seven-foot tall barbarian off his feet.
The party was perplexed. So my cleric anchored one end of a hundred-foot rope with a piton, and walked around the pond to the opposite side so that the center of the rope pressed against the rock spire. The party's martial characters used the rope to reach the spire.
That trick was obvious to me personally, because I had seen similar solutions to math puzzles. My character had moderately good intelligence (I hate only 2 skill points per level), but no ranks in Knowledge(Engineering), so that trick should have been beyond him. After the fact I invented an explanation that he had traveled with a caravan as a child and used ropes to help wagons across rivers.
Many levels later, the cleric acquired a periapt of wisdom that boosted his Wisdom to 20. Beforehand, he had been a bigot believing in elven superiority, "It is our duty to help the lesser races." After the wisdom boost he apologized. "It was impolite to call other races 'lesser', regardless of their nature." Okay, it took a few more experiences before he acted truly wise. "Every race has their strengths. All people deserve respect." Roleplaying a flaw was unexpectedly handy because I could drop the flaw to demonstrate higher wisdom.