Do creatures in your games take actions according to their mental stats?

[GMMichael]

One word: abstraction.

GMing a supra-genius:
Loads of knowledge: sure. One advantage the GM has is that he can watch everything that the PCs do, and transfer that information to his Supra-Geniuses. He can also grant the SG knowledge about ANYTHING else that goes on in the world, since the GM controls the world. SGs deducing the past is easy. SGs deducing the future is a little trickier. Two important tricks for that: 1) fit the intelligence and facts around the policy/game, and 2) use vague terms, like Nostradamus did.

PCing a supra-genius:
Just roll your intelligence check. If your result is high enough, maybe the GM will hook you up.

GMing morons:
Well, let's be nicer. Animals are dumb, but they're smarter than PCs in one important way: they run away before they die. In general, animals use really simple tactics like "attack, attack, run" or "sniff, hump leg." In particular, animals have really good tactics that tend to work well for their species, but not other species. Brainless undead are like bugs: they're drawn to the light. Remember: morons aren't stupid! They still self-preserve, get scared, and beg for mercy if they must.

PCing morons:
You've heard of Plato? Aristotle? Socrates? No further comment.

 

[howandwhy99]

PC Mental Stats from AD&D did not include all of the derived stats NPCs did. The players were expected to do those things. That was the game. They didn't swing the swords or cast "real" spells. The players were expected to form their own memories and decipherings of the game world from their own character's perspective. Neither did they have stuff like Morale or Loyalty. Players had to determine for themselves when to cut and run, when to trust someone, and when not to.

The Supra-Genius stuff plays the same way. You play the role not the character. You do not need to seek to fail at the game if your PC mental stat rolls were all poor. A PC with Supra-Genius Int had better arcane abilities than other PCs, they learned more spells, and were better at grasping new ones. What was done with those spells and what was discovered about how they functioned by casting them in uncontrolled game situations was the player playing the magic-user game. They learned about the arcane secrets of the world from how the magic in items and their own spell effects interacted with it. But the PC was only as good as the player, just like fighter PCs where the player has to make combat decisions, but not actually carry them out.

 

[Argyle King]

Basically, in games you run or play in, do creatures act according to how "they" would act and not necessarily how the DM would act?

I know when I run games, I make creatures with a low intelligence take actions that may not always be the best. Whenever I play undead who lack intelligence, beyond basic functions, I don't use tactics.

Are creatures in your games controlled this way?

yes

 

[Derren]

Sadly D&D, or rather, the way many people run D&D, does not support super-geniuses very well.

A genius would win before combat even starts if combat is necessary at all. But many DMs do not want that, instead prefering "combat as sport" and thus play "super genius" monsters like idiot James Bond villians who are not prepared for the combat at all except for very basic precautions and also act incredibly stupid in combat to give the PCs a chance.

 

[N'raac]

Lex Luthor was a super genius. What made him a super genius was his vast knowledge of several subjects including space travel, extra-dimensional travel, biochemistry, robotics, computers, synthetic polymers, communications, mutations, transportation, holography, energy generation, spectral analysis.

I would say rather that it was his super genius which enabled him to garner vast knowledge of these subjects. He needed both his own genius and access to the knowledge base of these subjects, followed by access to the resources required to enable him to research further advances in these areas. A supra genius Dragon which has lived all its life in an underground lair served by cowed subjects from many generations of dragonkind provide food, treasure, etc. would have knowledge only of what it had access to learn. It would still be a supra-genius.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

I would say rather that it was his super genius which enabled him to garner vast knowledge of these subjects. He needed both his own genius and access to the knowledge base of these subjects, followed by access to the resources required to enable him to research further advances in these areas. A supra genius Dragon which has lived all its life in an underground lair served by cowed subjects from many generations of dragonkind provide food, treasure, etc. would have knowledge only of what it had access to learn. It would still be a supra-genius.

Dragons would venture out from their lair because they do have to eat and gather treasure. Also, with the right spells, they could leave astrally and gather information without needing to leave their lair.

 

[Lwaxy]

Yeah, I normally do, the less intelligent ones often coming out as comedy though and the not-so-common super geniuses tend to behave slightly retarded as well as I tend to portray them without too much common sense.

 

[N'raac]

Dragons would venture out from their lair because they do have to eat and gather treasure. Also, with the right spells, they could leave astrally and gather information without needing to leave their lair.

My example supposed devoted (or terrified) followers (or slaves) who just deliver the dragon more than adequate food and treasure. We can certainly add to that a supposition that he doesn't have spells that would permit him to perceive beyond his layer. His bloodline has managed just fine for many generations being served by the locals. The are suprageniuses, but in no way curious about the outside world. They have the ability to gain vast knowledge, but no drive to actually use those abilities and gain knowledge.

Beings with far less aptitude but more drive and motivation will surpass their abilities.

 

[SkidAce]

One word: abstraction.

PCing morons:
You've heard of Plato? Aristotle? Socrates? No further comment.

+1 for Princess Bride quote! Outstanding...

 

[Warbringer]

Where possible, yes.

To [MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION] point, kinda hard to act in a way you can't have knowledge to act in a way, so
To [MENTION=11821]Obryn[/MENTION] point, can only do it in retrospect.

So to that point, I use either action points (4e parlance) ... For "Fools did you ever think I would not have foreseen such an obvious tactic" to just nullify an attack, or advantage (5e parlance) to make the success of attacks far less likely when appropriate.