D&D 4E Obligatory dump stats in 4e: the irrelevance of Intelligence

[Spatula]

I don't think characters should be penalized for dumping INT. I do think characters should be rewarded for investing in INT, and it should be a reward that doesn't amount to dumping some other aiblity score instead.

They get a bonus to Int-related skill & ability checks.

What does a fighter get for investing in Cha? A bonus to Cha-releated skill & ability checks. What does a wizard get for investing in Str? A bonus to Str-related skill & ability checks. And so on.

 

[gribble]

I'm curious what Dexterity is useful for in a Fighter that Intelligence is not.

I think you're missing the point a bit. It's not so much that Dex is superior to Int for a fighter/rogue/ranger (which it clearly is because of the bonus to initiative), it's more that having a high Dex makes Int completely irrelevant. The converse is true for wizards/warlords/warlocks - they want a high Int, which makes Dex completely irrelevant (I'll grant that in this case there is still a minimal reason to increase Dex - initiative). The same is true for Cha/Wis - if you have one high there is little reason to have anything but an 8 in the other.
At least high Str/Con give you other bonuses not directly related to skills/hit/damage (carrying capacity and hp/healing surges) - IMO the designers dropped the ball by not doing the same for the other abilities.

This, of course, is purely from an optimisation perspective and ignores roleplaying considerations or dipping into stats for particular skills, etc.

 

[Nifft]

There are also feats which require Dexterity, which many a Wizard would want to take.

I haven't seen any Fighter-oriented feats which require Intelligence. (Wisdom, sure.)

Cheers, -- N

 

[Felon]

They get a bonus to Int-related skill & ability checks.

What does a fighter get for investing in Cha? A bonus to Cha-releated skill & ability checks. What does a wizard get for investing in Str? A bonus to Str-related skill & ability checks. And so on.

In some cases, that's a meaninful bonus. In others, not so much. Examining the class skill lists and the amount of utility a character can get out of untrained usage doesn't really do much to vindicate the Intelligence bonus. It may not do much for your other examples either, but all that does is indicate a systemic issue rather than an isolated one.

 

[mattdm]

This, of course, is purely from an optimisation perspective and ignores roleplaying considerations or dipping into stats for particular skills, etc.

Actually, I think it's exactly from a roleplaying consideration that I'm concerned. I don't want a player who chooses to be smart and fast to be penalized for choosing that over smart-strong or smart-tough. Isn't one of 4E's concepts supposed to be that there aren't hidden suboptimal choices?

So, the question to me is: what to do about it. What exactly does the smart-fast archetype look like? Can that be represented another way (high dex, high wis or cha?), and if so should it be?

Rather than repeating myself here, I'll now point out that I started a thread for further thoughts along those lines in the 4E house rules forum.

 

[Spatula]

The same is true for Cha/Wis - if you have one high there is little reason to have anything but an 8 in the other.

Depends on the class. Wizards will want at least a 13 Cha for the -2 save feat, and have feats/abilities that work off of Wisdom as well.

At least high Str/Con give you other bonuses not directly related to skills/hit/damage (carrying capacity and hp/healing surges) - IMO the designers dropped the ball by not doing the same for the other abilities.

What is a wizard or warlock carrying that they care about encumberance? Sure, a low str has an effect - it's just not an effect that has any relevance for casters, unless they need to make Athletics checks.

 

[duke_Qa]

Why doesn't Int help initiative if that is the strongest of dex/int?

As far as i can see, the same reasons that the highest of dex/int gives you a bonus to light AC and ref-defense, should apply to initiative. Having a quick wit should be just as helpful as a quick body imo.

 

[Felon]

Actually, I think it's exactly from a roleplaying consideration that I'm concerned. I don't want a player who chooses to be smart and fast to be penalized for choosing that over smart-strong or smart-tough.

This.

 

[gribble]

Actually, I think it's exactly from a roleplaying consideration that I'm concerned.

Exactly. I was referring to my points about not needing anything but the minimum in certain stats - from an optimisation perspective it's true.

From a RP perspective, the designers not giving any non skill/hit/damage bonuses for the other abilities has the consequence that unless it's a key ability for your class you'd only ever put points in those abilities for RP reasons, thereby weakening your character. It's unfortunate...

 

[Nifft]

IMHO y'all may be looking at this wrong. Perhaps there's no reason to play a smart Fighter, but is "smart Fighter" really your concept? Why must it be a Fighter rather than a Warlord, for example?

A smart Warlord who took the Fighter multi-class feat (itself a waste, but...) and then took the Kensei or Iron Vanguard paragon path would be very Fighter-ish. And his smarts would benefit his whole group.

Cheers, -- N