D&D 5E 5th Edition Intelligence

[UngeheuerLich]

A bonus proficiency would be in order I guess. A bonus language maybe too. On the other hand, Int checks are much more common than you may think. I mean, knowledge checks can lurk everywhere.

 

[jgsugden]

I don't think they'd have been poorly served to have characters generally get 2 background skills + 2 class skills + 1 additional class skill per point of intelligence bonus (certain classes getting more or less class skills by default). That'd give intelligence some real meaning...

 

[Sacrosanct]

I think intelligence does have meaning. Even if you put aside those classes that are pretty dependant on it, how important is it that you play your PC intelligently? So it's either important for mechanical reasons, or becuase that's what you want to play. What other reason is there? If you don't need it for class based reasons, and you don't care about having a smart PC, those are really the only reasons that matter. You don't need to have additional rules complexities to warrant needing it for everyone else outside of those two reasons.

Not every attribute has to be important to every class. Been that way for 40 years; don't see it changing any time soon. Nor a need to.

 

[77IM]

Not just that, but they better be forbidding their high INT characters from trying to implement dumb plans, too. I sure hope that for every "your charcter isn't smart enough to think of that, so no" they had better also be announcing "whoa, your charcter's too smart to try that, so no".

Actually, I DON'T require low-Int characters to make checks to come up with good plans, but I DO give high-Int characters a check to realize their plan is dumb. I don't forbid PCs from doing anything (this goes against my "DM Prime Directive" of letting the players play their characters) but Int checks are absolutely a fantastic way for the DM to share special knowledge or insights the players might be missing.

 

[machineelf]

So correct me if I'm wrong here, but the only uses I can find for intelligence are wizard spell saves, knowledge checks, and avoiding death by illithid. That seems pretty limited to me when compared to other stats. I've noticed that the players at my group all tend to completely tank their int scores because there's just no point in having any.

Do you guys think intelligence is okay as is, with so few uses? Has Wizards said anything about what their design goals were for intelligence?

In my game I have slightly changed rules as written to use Int Investigation checks to find traps and hidden doors. In my opinion, Wisdom Perception measures how fine-tuned a character's senses are without the need for specialized knowledge. But there are somethings that you would never notice without a specialized knowledge of the subject -- you just wouldn't know what to look for. And I rule that traps and secret doors are constructed in such a way that you wouldn't notice them unless you knew something about traps or secret doors and how they are made, so it's an intelligence roll.

I've found that this really balances out Int. and Wis. ability checks. The example I often use to explain it is that to notice footprints on the ground requires (Wis) perception; to know how many there were and how much they weigh and what race of creature they are requires (Int) investigation; and to track them to where they were going or coming from requires (Wis) survival or nature.

 

[Eric V]

I like it. Gives Rogues a reason to be smart (and therefore consistent with the lore).

 

[Sword of Spirit]

If it wasn't already mentioned, upcoming psionics rules are supposed to involve some more Intelligence saves (or at least that was the plan at one point).

For me it's a very important role-playing consideration. I expect players to role-play their stats. Now, I rule that it's pretty hard to tell whether someone has an 8 or a 13 by casual observation, but if you're rocking a 6 in Intelligence you're going to be noticeably on the low side. If a PC had an Intelligence of less than 10 though, and their player came up with some brilliant idea, I'd probably ask them, "Do you think that's something your character would have thought of?"

My players are pretty good role-players, so tanking Int hasn't been an issue. But if it were, that's how I would handle it.

 

[iserith]

If a PC had an Intelligence of less than 10 though, and their player came up with some brilliant idea, I'd probably ask them, "Do you think that's something your character would have thought of?"

"Yes. While he's not great with remembering odd lore about arcane things, nature, or religion and just as mediocre at making deductions based on clues, sometimes Simple John the Fighter comes up with a brilliant plan."

 

[Yardiff]

"Yes. While he's not great with remembering odd lore about arcane things, nature, or religion and just as mediocre at making deductions based on clues, sometimes Simple John the Fighter comes up with a brilliant plan."

Nobody is saying that 'occasionally' coming up with a 'brilliant' plan is 'bad'.

 

[iserith]

Nobody is saying that 'occasionally' coming up with a 'brilliant' plan is 'bad'.

How many times does it have to happen per campaign where it's no longer considered "occasional?" As a player, I'm going to want to have an idea of when the DM will ask me to make an Intelligence check to allow me to act and/or communicate my PC's ideas to another character so I can avoid it.