D&D 5E Making Intelligence less of a dump stat
Imaculata
Hero
As is often the case, this is mostly a case of the DM perhaps not using checks that rely on the stat enough. This was also a problem in 3rd edition, where some skills rarely were useful, because of the way the DM used them (or didn't use them). For example, sense motive, which a lot of DM's don't seem to understand. Plus charisma was often a dump stat in 3rd, for this very same reason.
I don't think adding more rules is the solution here. The DM should simply make int more useful, by making more use of checks that rely on it.
I don't think adding more rules is the solution here. The DM should simply make int more useful, by making more use of checks that rely on it.
Last edited:
Blue
Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
If you make your ability to take in a situation, formulate a plan, and act based on INT instead of how well you can juggle, I find it's a lot less of a dump stat. Making Initiative INT-based also lowers the uber-ubiquitousness of DEX which is never a bad thing.
[MENTION=45197]pming[/MENTION] – adjudication is largely irrelevant in analyzing “dump-stats”. It’s akin to having a class that underperforms in most identifiable metrics, but the DM just so happens to create situations that only that class can succeed in. It doesn’t mean the hypothetical class is good, just that they can be babied like anything else.
Your anecdote is amusing, sure, and I can’t speak to your group in particular, but in mine that type of thing would happen once and only once. The players would simply opt to write down pertinent information and we’re right back to square 1.
Unless you’re fighting them every other combat (if you run dark sun it might work I guess) then players will continue to not care. Nobody really optimizing for situations that come up as rarely as int saves, even with the inclusion of the mystic.
Agreed on the int to initiative, but the rest is completely unacceptable to me at least. If I outlined a plan for the party and the DM said “no, your character isn’t smart enough to come up with that” I’d leave the table.
@OP my only real concern with this is if you have one of the characters who naturally want int (wizards and mystics) then you’ve basically handed them all languages and tool proficiencies, since they could hammer them all out in a few scant weeks. Whether or not this is disruptive is a matter of opinion, but the wizard at least is already a strong class that doesn’t need help stepping on the toes of others.
If I were you I would look into a method of strong gains in 10-14 range, which people might be more inclined to throw a tertiary roll/buy into, and diminishing returns beyond that so naturally int-focused characters don’t steal the show.
Your anecdote is amusing, sure, and I can’t speak to your group in particular, but in mine that type of thing would happen once and only once. The players would simply opt to write down pertinent information and we’re right back to square 1.
Unless you’re fighting them every other combat (if you run dark sun it might work I guess) then players will continue to not care. Nobody really optimizing for situations that come up as rarely as int saves, even with the inclusion of the mystic.
Agreed on the int to initiative, but the rest is completely unacceptable to me at least. If I outlined a plan for the party and the DM said “no, your character isn’t smart enough to come up with that” I’d leave the table.
@OP my only real concern with this is if you have one of the characters who naturally want int (wizards and mystics) then you’ve basically handed them all languages and tool proficiencies, since they could hammer them all out in a few scant weeks. Whether or not this is disruptive is a matter of opinion, but the wizard at least is already a strong class that doesn’t need help stepping on the toes of others.
If I were you I would look into a method of strong gains in 10-14 range, which people might be more inclined to throw a tertiary roll/buy into, and diminishing returns beyond that so naturally int-focused characters don’t steal the show.
pming
Legend
Hiya!
I'm not going to presume what both @Wulffolk and @Blue would say on this reply, but for me...
But what about "square 2"? When the players forgot to write down the colour of the flower that some little girl that delivered a message to the PC's as they walked down the street a few days ago, and some other detail? If I, as DM (obviously) describe the girl as "A cute little human girl, maybe 10 years of age with long, blond, braided hair with a yellow flower in it. She wears a plain brown dress, but with a thin blue trim along the bottom. She smiles and you can tell she is happy by the look in her big blue eyes. 'Sirs and madames, I was paid a silver coin to deliver this message to you'. She then hands you a small piece of paper and stands there smiling, obviously expecting and answer or something...". What part of that scene is "important"? Age? Hair colour? Sytle? The blue trimmed dress? The flower? Her eye colour? Unless your players are going to write down every little thing you describe...there could very well come a time when they need to remember some detail.
DM: You find yourself brought, tied at the wrists and ankles, before Black Dougal, Master Thief of the Westington City Thieves guild. 'So, you may be assassins. We know you got a message to find this place...but we don't know if it was from one of our members who thought you could help...or if it was by our rivals and you were sent here to kill us. I'll ask you two questions about the girl that delivered it to you. If you get it correct, we know it was from one of our girls...wrong, and we know it was from our rivals little rats! So...the girl was wearing a flower in her hair. What colour was it? Second, her dress...what colour were her short sleeves?" (NOTE: 2nd is a trick question...just her trim on the dress was blue... thieves and assassins are tricksey that way!
).
THIS is where an "Int check" would come into play. I'm not sure about your game, but in mine, as I said, I don't point out the "important" information about most things...especially if they would be seen as "regular, everyday stuff' that the PC's would encounter. So while I do expect my players to make copious notes about what they think is important...they can't write down everything, and they can't remember everything themselves (especially if it happened two or three sessions ago). This is where I use Int saves/checks. And, as you may have guessed, it happens about as frequently as many other skill checks.
This was directed at Blue, but I'll just add in my own 2¢. I don't think his interpretation or use of Int in this way is inappropriate at all, and certainly no reason to just up and leave the game. At least not any more so than a player saying "I'll hold the door while Bill can get the potions out!"...and the DM saying "Uh, you're a gnome with a 6 strength... I don't think you have much of a chance to hold the door closed on an ogre. But...go ahead and make a Str Save against what the Ogre gets for Athletics/Strength....". If you would 'up and leave' if the DM asked you to do that, well, uh, I don't know what to say. A DM asking a player to make an Int save for his Int 6 character to come up with a complicated plan involving timing, motion, predictive movement/tactics, etc., really isn't any difference from my point of view. *shrug* Luckily for me, my players RP their characters pretty well overall, so I rarely have to do this kind of thing; they'll just come up with 'stupid' or completely impractical plans if their character has a low Int or Wis...and watching them play a character with a really low Cha is both amazing, and cringe-worthy!
^_^
Paul L. Ming
I'm not going to presume what both @Wulffolk and @Blue would say on this reply, but for me...
But what about "square 2"? When the players forgot to write down the colour of the flower that some little girl that delivered a message to the PC's as they walked down the street a few days ago, and some other detail? If I, as DM (obviously) describe the girl as "A cute little human girl, maybe 10 years of age with long, blond, braided hair with a yellow flower in it. She wears a plain brown dress, but with a thin blue trim along the bottom. She smiles and you can tell she is happy by the look in her big blue eyes. 'Sirs and madames, I was paid a silver coin to deliver this message to you'. She then hands you a small piece of paper and stands there smiling, obviously expecting and answer or something...". What part of that scene is "important"? Age? Hair colour? Sytle? The blue trimmed dress? The flower? Her eye colour? Unless your players are going to write down every little thing you describe...there could very well come a time when they need to remember some detail.
DM: You find yourself brought, tied at the wrists and ankles, before Black Dougal, Master Thief of the Westington City Thieves guild. 'So, you may be assassins. We know you got a message to find this place...but we don't know if it was from one of our members who thought you could help...or if it was by our rivals and you were sent here to kill us. I'll ask you two questions about the girl that delivered it to you. If you get it correct, we know it was from one of our girls...wrong, and we know it was from our rivals little rats! So...the girl was wearing a flower in her hair. What colour was it? Second, her dress...what colour were her short sleeves?" (NOTE: 2nd is a trick question...just her trim on the dress was blue... thieves and assassins are tricksey that way!
).THIS is where an "Int check" would come into play. I'm not sure about your game, but in mine, as I said, I don't point out the "important" information about most things...especially if they would be seen as "regular, everyday stuff' that the PC's would encounter. So while I do expect my players to make copious notes about what they think is important...they can't write down everything, and they can't remember everything themselves (especially if it happened two or three sessions ago). This is where I use Int saves/checks. And, as you may have guessed, it happens about as frequently as many other skill checks.
Dualazi said:
This was directed at Blue, but I'll just add in my own 2¢.
I don't think his interpretation or use of Int in this way is inappropriate at all, and certainly no reason to just up and leave the game. At least not any more so than a player saying "I'll hold the door while Bill can get the potions out!"...and the DM saying "Uh, you're a gnome with a 6 strength... I don't think you have much of a chance to hold the door closed on an ogre. But...go ahead and make a Str Save against what the Ogre gets for Athletics/Strength....". If you would 'up and leave' if the DM asked you to do that, well, uh, I don't know what to say. A DM asking a player to make an Int save for his Int 6 character to come up with a complicated plan involving timing, motion, predictive movement/tactics, etc., really isn't any difference from my point of view. *shrug* Luckily for me, my players RP their characters pretty well overall, so I rarely have to do this kind of thing; they'll just come up with 'stupid' or completely impractical plans if their character has a low Int or Wis...and watching them play a character with a really low Cha is both amazing, and cringe-worthy! ^_^
Paul L. Ming
Last edited:
rollingForInit
First Post
The issue would still remain the same, because any ability score can become really important if the DM uses a lot of checks to it. That's not unique. A lot of people are going to make builds that are min/maxed, and among those who don't outright dump a stat, there's still going to be one, or maybe two, that are lower than the rest. Intelligence is the stat with the fewest uses in the game, in total. It has 5 skills tied to it, one of which is kind of broadly contested by Perception, or at least confused with it often enough. There's 1 class that has it as a main stat for multiclassing purposes. There are two archtypes that rely on in to some extent (but is by no means necessary).
The other weak stat would be Charisma, with 4 skills, but there's a whopping 4 classes that has it as one primary stat. Having a somewhat higher Charisma opens up more multiclassing options. There are also feats with direct mechanical options tied to it (Actor, Inspiring Leader).
Meanwhile, Strength always determines your carrying capacity, and is a universal attack stat. Constitution is always important. Dexterity determines Initiative and AC (unless you go with heavy armor), is one of the most common saving throws against damage, and is also a universal attack stat, especially for ranged attacks. Wisdom typically considered very important because it determines Perception (which is probably one of the most commonly used skills), and a broad range of other skills. It's also the main stat of two classes, and a minor of the Ranger.
Intelligence will always offer less than the rest in a general, non-campaign specific sense. Perhaps that'll change with the Mystic.
Personally, I liked the playtest idea that was discarded: bonus languages based on Intelligence Score. That was a nice benefit, a little comparable to how Strength determines carrying capacity.
ppaladin123
Adventurer
In the early days of playtesting someone suggested mental saving throws be divided up like this:
Charm/deception: wisdom
Illusions/confusion: intelligence
Domination/fear: charisma
5e is very inconsistent with this sort of thinb but dumps most mental saves into wisdom. I'd make switch up the saving throws for monster spells/abilities as above to make both intelligence and charisma more valuable.
Charm/deception: wisdom
Illusions/confusion: intelligence
Domination/fear: charisma
5e is very inconsistent with this sort of thinb but dumps most mental saves into wisdom. I'd make switch up the saving throws for monster spells/abilities as above to make both intelligence and charisma more valuable.
In general, every mental stat is a dump stat in 5E (but Wis is -less- of a dump stat because of Surprise and the prevalence of Wisdom saves).
In general, I don't mind stats being dump stats; part of the design of D&D is that every stat should be takeble as a dump stat (except Con, and frankly the game would be better if you could plausibly play a low con without handicapping too, for a sickly-but-capable character). But taking the odd "Smart Fighter" or "Charismatic Monk" should provide some side benefits, rather than a skill bonus that could be more easily replicated with a feat. I like the idea of having Int provide extra proficiencies, probably extra tool/language proficiencies and spreading the saves around a bit more, but providing extra bonuses for Cha is more a matter of DMing, for the most part (ie, NPCs like you better by default if you have a high Cha).
In general, I don't mind stats being dump stats; part of the design of D&D is that every stat should be takeble as a dump stat (except Con, and frankly the game would be better if you could plausibly play a low con without handicapping too, for a sickly-but-capable character). But taking the odd "Smart Fighter" or "Charismatic Monk" should provide some side benefits, rather than a skill bonus that could be more easily replicated with a feat. I like the idea of having Int provide extra proficiencies, probably extra tool/language proficiencies and spreading the saves around a bit more, but providing extra bonuses for Cha is more a matter of DMing, for the most part (ie, NPCs like you better by default if you have a high Cha).
I do the exact same thing in my games.
I'd also agree that 14 days should be the lowest. I can see a super genius picking up a new language or craft in two weeks of intense study, but not in a single day.
Similar Threads
