DM intervention

[Li Shenron]

How do you DM's handle players with super genius minds? Do you let them receive extra information, or sometimes give them obvious hints?

This has been a problem I have experienced since the very beginning of RPGing... I was playing a low-Int warrior in OD&D and the DM kept making notes that I was RPGing very badly because I was acting much more smart than my PC was supposed to be. I was being morally forced to make occasional tactic mistakes

I think the DM ruled very badly himself, because as a matter of fact I wasn't playing very smart at all, just normally... but in his opinion an Int 6 had to be played sub-normal (which I think it's very untrue).

However this was not a real problem after all, and I accepted to play as the DM wanted and the other players felt too that it was my duty. The real problem came when everyone realized that another player in the group was playing a high-Int wizard and was barely able to get how the rules worked... While it was possible to play a character dumber than you, it was impossible to play a character smarter than you, what a surprise...

In 3rd edition there are many places where your PC's Int score matters, for example all those skills, and if you want to make it matter more often you can more often call for simple Int checks (or untrained knowledge checks for example!).
I have used this occasionally, and it rewards the player who put a high score in Int or Wis (depending on the circumstances).

Two simple examples that occurred to me:

- A riddle on a door, which was supposed to be solved by the players. However, it turned out that after almost an hour (basically we took a break for food and drink) of OOC discussion, they hadn't find the solution, but they wanted to go on with the game - unfortunately there wasn't much else to do to get past that door. So I had their PC make an Int check, and gave the solution out*. The cost for the players is that they didn't get the XP reward planned for that riddle.

*actually they didn't succeed at first try, so they camped outside the entrance, and I let the PCs roll again after a few hours of study of the riddle

- A sealed letter found in someone's pocket. The letter was an important clue for the story, but no one got the bit which was the real hint to the writer. I didn't exactly tell that directly, but I granted them a couple of Int and Wis checks (basically they could have been Craft(Calligraphy) and Profession(Scribe) checks if they had those skills trained) to get clues about the paper, the seal or the handwriting to identify the writer from the tools he used instead from the content of the letter.

One important thing I want to suggest is NOT to give these checks immediately! Only grant them if the players don't come up themselves with the solution, and even in that case grant them only occasionally. Often there should be a few other ways to solve a problem, and if they don't get one they'll get another, without real help needed.

By the way, I think in your case if you grant a Spellcraft check that is enough, but if you want you can also let them roll a Wis check to sense that something's up... But in general I don't see such a need for tactical decisions. And if the foe killed him in one round, perhaps it would have killed him anyway!

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

This has been a problem I have experienced since the very beginning of RPGing... I was playing a low-Int warrior in OD&D and the DM kept making notes that I was RPGing very badly because I was acting much more smart than my PC was supposed to be. I was being morally forced to make occasional tactic mistakes

I think the DM ruled very badly himself, because as a matter of fact I wasn't playing very smart at all, just normally... but in his opinion an Int 6 had to be played sub-normal (which I think it's very untrue).

It is untrue. I expect that a player with a low intelligence character will not necessarily have to make tactical mistakes. You can have different kinds of intelligence and with the whole survival of the fittest, I'd say that a low Int character can hold his or her own in combat, or the character never would have made it that far. Where I would make the distinction is I would expect the player to play the character in a more instinctual manner. The character would be very poor and explaining tactics to others and directing others in combat, but would be allowed to see a great opportunity and take it - just not understanding why it is so smart. I also expect low Int characters to not be the first to jump in solving puzzles and complex problems. If the player has figured out the solution, I expect him to wait for a while and if the smart characters have not figured it out, the player can have his character suddenly say "Isn't the answer 42?" or whatever is appropriate. When quizzed by his fellows he cannot explain it, he just thinks for some reason it is the right answer.

Getting back to the original topic of a high Int character, my expectations are similar to the low Int characters. High Int (and while a 19 is high, I am of the opinion it is not anywhere near a super-intelligence) does not mean you would not make a tactical error, especially in combat. The character is not omniscient so if the player does not ask for a skill check or something, for the most part they make their own mistakes. One exception to that rule is if the situation is one very similar to something they have seen before, but the players don't remember. In that case I might DM intervene by calling for an Int check and if they make a decent roll, remind the player of the previous incident.

 

[DragonLancer]

I don't have this problem.
In my group a high Int means that a wizards gets a few more spells, and Int based skills are better. Thats it. We don't worry about whether the character is a genius or not.

 

[Vrecknidj]

If a character has a really high Int score in my campaign, and it's obvious that it's going to come into play with something like this, I give that character the benefit of the doubt by doing two things.

1) I give the player a bit more time to decide what that character will do than I give other players.

2) I let the other players give input. I figure one guy with a 19 Int might be able to think of as much as 5 guys all with 12 to 14 Ints.

That's about all the extra lee-way I give.

Dave

 

[Munin]

A recent Sage Advice gave the rule of thumb for intelligence scores as 10 points of IQ per point of Intelligence.
So the wizard with the INT of 19 would be around the 190 mark for IQ, and the fighter mentioned earlier would be around 60.

More to the point of the thread, I give characters with exceptionally high ability scores leeway in certain situations. More accurately, I give players who have invested skill points in different skills credit where credit is due. A player with 10 ranks of planar knowledge isn't going to have to make a roll to predict the adverse conditions one might expect on the elemental plane of fire, for example.

 

[Pielorinho]

Intelligence, some wag suggested, is knowing that those low-lying stratocumulus clouds foretell rain. Wisdom is wearing your raincoat.

I wouldn't grant him extra leeway because of his high intelligence: he got caught up in a lovely intricate plan, and wasn't wise enough to stop to think about its possible pitfalls.

However, as a DM, I give out automatic spellcraft checks and knowledge checks whenever they're appropriate, and I'd suggest you do the same in the future. And if this player is having trouble visualizing the scene, he needs to be asking you questions until he can see it. As long as he's paying attention and not goofing off, I'd suggest you keep answering those questions, drawing maps, or whatever it takes so he can become immersed in the scene.

Daniel

 

[Henry]

He says his elf would've known that these were darkness spells and if he had a clearer understanding, wouldn't have let Thoraval leave the party.

Tell him that's what the Spellcraft skill is for.

As for not knowing the darkness was magical, it's something he as a player should be sure to ask you about if he is at all unclear about a situation. If he's not playing attention, details can be missed.

OTOH, miscommunications at the game table can be common. I have had them happen before, and when they do, I tell my players to call me on it ASAP, and relate back to me what they think I just said, so we are on the same page. The same skills that work in office management training work just as well in D&D.

I have also been no stranger to ret-conning important events if someone lost something of major significance due to a mistake....

...and made a foolish decision that the PC wouldn't have made, so I let him have a free Raise Dead spell w/out the negative level.

...including using the above.

How do you DM's handle players with super genius minds? Do you let them receive extra information, or sometimes give them obvious hints?

Sometimes I do, but ONLY where straight reasoning is concerned, a la logic puzzles. Same thing for Wisdom scores - if someone has a wisdom over 16, then they should get a chance to at least FEEL like they're making a stupid mistake. Tactical to me belongs to wisdom, not intellgence, just like I wouldn't use Wisdom to solve a logic puzzle.

But where decisions directly related to skills are concerned? Don't obviate the skill. Could he have known a certain spell just by looking at it? Spellcraft. Should a character notice an obvious flaw in a box or object? Search skill. Should they KNOW how a puzzle box is put together? Perhaps Disable Device might be more appropriate than an INT check. But I always look for a specific skill first before I just say "oh, a high score should help in that."

 

[takyris]

Ditto the esteemed Henry in all relevent respects. Beyond, that, I'd add that in my games, Intelligence is generally used for planning, examinations, things that you've got time to think about, while Wisdom is used for things that you think of as being related to your wits -- adapting to changes in the situation, reacting brilliantly as a team of roc-riding ogres swoop down upon you (although if you have a minute to watch them come in, that could be Intelligence), and so forth.

As a GM, I'll play a High-Int, Low-Wis villian as somebody who comes up with a fantastic plan that takes into account all known PC abilities and fiendishly sounds the death knell for the heroes -- and who then goes all to pieces as soon as somebody does something that wasn't accounted for. A Low-Int, High-Wis villain won't plan much beyond "Hey, this looks like a pretty good rock to hide behind," but he'll adapt well to changes in the fight -- "Whoah, they're throwing fireballs, I should spread my people out and shoot a bunch of arrows at that wizard," instead of "How dare you -- I am invincible -- you will pay for this, you meddling insects!", which is what the Low-Wis guy tends to do once stuff starts going wrong.

My players are pretty good about playing their stats well. I'll suggest skill checks as Henry mentioned, but on the occasions when a flat ability check is the way to go, I'm quite happy to tell my players to play their abilities up, not down. "Okay, Int 10 isn't that dumb. Go ahead and solve the riddle, if you can."

 

[dren]

If the player didn't at least think to himself, "hey, wait a second, is this darkness behaving like normal darkness", and ask for you to roll a knowledge (arcana) check, then I think he shouldn't whine. In a magical world, there should be no assumptions. Darkness can be of many types and varieties, and the players shouldn't take anything for granted.

In the middle of combat, doing anything more than remembering your spells or combat abilities is suspect...that's why characters can't "take ten," theres a stress involved which limits your characters reasoning. Afterwards, the elf can say to himself, "of course, that was magical darkness summoned from a rod of a 13th level spellcaster who was from the city of..."

Of course, when you're dead, trivia never helps.

 

[Arnwyn]

He says his elf would've known that these were darkness spells

Then the player should have rolled a spellcraft check. That's what the skill is for. Too bad for him.

and if he had a clearer understanding, wouldn't have let Thoraval leave the party.

Then he should have asked more questions to ensure he understood the situation.

How do you DM's handle players with super genius minds? Do you let them receive extra information, or sometimes give them obvious hints?

As others have noted, high Int doesn't preclude a person from making mistakes. A high Wis combined with high Int might...

In any case, we usually don't do anything additional with such characters. Depending on the situation, extra information might be made available if it makes sense - but if it is, it's totally up to DM fiat. For our group, we heavily focus on it being "just a game", and it's up to the players to make decisions for their own characters.