GMforPowergamers
Legend
Mental stats do a lot in the game system.
Some DMs just don't like the metagaming "Let's go straight to the dice" solution for intellectual problems. The game is so much more rich if the players work as a team and kibitz solutions to problems and puzzles and it's not just the "I'm a wizard, can I roll an intelligence roll to solve this?".
yes, it can be fun if EVERYONE at the table wants it that way... more fun is making sure that you play to the players AND the characters...
That's the opposite of meta-gaming. Meta-gaming is expecting the player to do something instead of the character.
I suppose one solution is to require players to only play characters with similar mental stats, but that seems really lame if only the smart players get to play smart characters. Otherwise, you might as well dump your mental stats entirely, and just play a strong character with low Int and figure everything out anyway.
I had a DM pull that once and tell a player "Your too dumb to play a wizard" if it had been a man I would have slugged him for telling my brother in law that... but she was a bitch and we just left the game... and never looked back... the best part when she said "Come on Rob you know he's a tool"
Yes, and part of roleplaying a high perception high intelegience character is "Hey I don't get it but my character would..."When you expect the player to roleplay the character, that is not metagaming. And yes, problem/puzzle solving is roleplaying.
OK, but if a puzzle is solvable by me then Einstein should be able to too... so if the Player next to me has a 20 INt and/or Wis maybe he should get a roll... not an auto pass but a rollThe disconnect comes from the fact that the player's expectations of the mental capabilities of his PC are huge. Give a rubik's cube to Einstein and he probably won't figure it out quickly. It might take him days to work out an algorithm.
HOw about a roll for 1 clue "You notice X" then if no one gets anything after that they can ask for another roll "you figure Y" as it narrows in the players will get it..."My wizard knows Arcana, so he should know every tiny little solution to problems." No, your wizard knows Arcana, so sometimes he can make an Arcana check to have knowledge about or figure out some small piece of the problem associated with Arcana or magic, not that the DM's going to hand the entire solution to the player because of one good die roll.
agreed on no insta solve, but If any PC asked "Hey can I make a check to figure something out" I would at least let them roll for a clueHigh intelligence allows for a roll once in a while for a clue or a hint or some pertinent set of information. A clue or hint that OTHER players with lower intelligence might not get from the DM. Intelligence checks should rarely be used to insta-solve a problem or puzzle.
wait... you mean cheating?You sound like a casino owner. Heaven forbid a person uses his brains and count cards to play the best strategy.
I would... infact I do so all the time.I would never penalize a player for being smart and it is totally fine for one player to figure out a lot of stuff at the game table.
example: I set up a trap where a succubus was "captured" in chains... I described it and 3 players said... "Nope, it's a trap, we leave her" and one said "Wait she might be in trouble..." now that 4th player should have totally trigured the trap of her kiss... but I decided to reward not meta gameing the trap.
She turned out to be the daughter of a lord of hell, and WAS a prisoner... that player who "rescused" her got a whole bunch of cool albit it demonic rewards...
yea, that works well in gumshoe (PS I'm egar for my time travel stuff to start) I find that if a player is trying in D&D it is best to let the dice walk them through itMy advice is taken from GUMSHOE: be free with clues, and make sure the PCs can find them with little or no difficulties. Don't, however, normally interpret those clues for the players. Putting the clues together (as opposed to rolling for them in the first place) is the really fun part.