• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E Intelligence, the Forgotten Ability

DreamsAndPixies

First Post
I wrote an article about why I feel Intelligence is the forgotten ability of 5e, by dm and players, but mostly by designers. When you look at every other ability scores, they have some key interaction with mechanics and the system as a whole, but Intelligence just doesn't have it.

Link here.

I share some house rules that some DM use to bridge the gap between Intelligence and other abilities score (such as Intelligence to Initiative, or bonus languages/skills), and then discuss the problem with Knowledge skills. I also briefly mention how Perception is too often used in the stead of Investigation.

I would love to hear your thoughts.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Hjorimir

Adventurer
I think that's a large font! /wink

Seriously, here's how I treat knowledge skills. If you're trained, you're going to get what a 10 + your skill bonus would give you at a minimum. I have player's roll to see if they know anything extra on top of that; you once wrote a report on just this topic! That kind of thing. I try to use Int checks quite a bit. Do I know about X? Sounds like an Int check to me. I also consider the character here. Are you a fighter asking about an ancient battle but are not formally trained in History? Roll at Advantage for being a fighter, but your skill is your skill (and being unskilled means no minimal information here).

Good stuff, DAP, thanks for sharing.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
I agree with your premise. I love the investigation skill, but alone it's just insufficient to justify the use of Intelligence as a higher stat.
 

Jacob Lewis

Ye Olde GM
Love the title. Such irony. I look forward to the follow-ups, like "Strength, the Weakened Ability" and "Dexterity, the Ungraceful Ability".
 

DreamsAndPixies

First Post
I think that's a large font! /wink Seriously, here's how I treat knowledge skills. If you're trained, you're going to get what a 10 + your skill bonus would give you at a minimum. I have player's roll to see if they know anything extra on top of that; you once wrote a report on just this topic! That kind of thing. I try to use Int checks quite a bit. Do I know about X? Sounds like an Int check to me. I also consider the character here. Are you a fighter asking about an ancient battle but are not formally trained in History? Roll at Advantage for being a fighter, but your skill is your skill (and being unskilled means no minimal information here). Good stuff, DAP, thanks for sharing.
Hey thanks! For the font size, it adapts to your screen width so that there's between 60 and 80 characters per line, which is the recommended amount for single-column document. I could increase the margin slightly to improve the look maybe. I care deeply about the readability of my blog, so don't hesitate to give me feedback about it.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
I have moved every Search, Spot Hidden Object, Detect Trap check to Investigate and thus Intelligence.

Detecting an ambush remains a Dexterity (Stealt)h vs Wisdom (Perception) contest.
 

MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
It depends on the players and the DM.

I'm constantly calling for Int checks. Mostly "investigation", but "investigation" is exceptionally broad and can be applied to so many situations.

Research is one example. In my homebrew, the characters often had to hit the libraries. I love making research part of the game. It is the 4th pillar of play for me--or at least an important part of the "exploration" pillar.

Finding clues--I still use perception to notice things, but an investigation is needed to understand what you notice. This can make solving a problem or finding a trap much more collaborative. The cleric notices something unusual and calls over the wizard to come over and look at it.

Traps. Noticing traps is not the same is avoiding or disarming them. Force the investigation checks. Especially at high levels. Passive perception alone is going to have a high-level rogue noticing all but the best-hidden traps. Personally, a trap noticed by passive perception is more a "something doesn't look right." An additional perception check AND investigation check AND thieves tools check may be needed to get through more complex and difficult traps.

Finding loot. Smart foes will take care to hide their loot smartly. Perception should only get you part way there. Investigation is equally important to finding loot. Bring in other skills to help, like stone cunning, carpentry, etc. Even if using passive perception and passive investigation to avoid bogging down the game play, it still gives more important to a well-blended party.

Nature checks are also an important part of my game. Your observant character may notice tracks, but won't know what they are and needs to ask the ranger to examine. I treat survival and nature checks hand-in-hand like I do with perception and investigation. I spent a lot of my youth outdoors, including stints with the Student Conservation Corp, living 4-6 weeks in remote wilderness areas. I'm also a sucker for disaster and survival non-fiction stories (highly recommend No Mercy: True Stories of Disaster, Survival and Brutality, by Eleanor Learmonth, Jenny Tabakoff). Survivors tend to be BOTH smart AND have the mental fortitude to not give up.

To me, Wisdom (Survival) is more about observation and mental fitness. On the one hand, it is the ability to not give up, to not "lose it". On the other hand, I also use it as a kind of "nature perception": you notice the evidence of wildlife and don't overlook potential sources of water or things that may be polluting that water. If you are familiar with the area, perhaps survival is enough. But if you are in a new location--you also need to use your knowledge of nature as well. In particular, I like to reward players who have both survival and nature proficiency by giving them advantage on finding food and avoiding natural perils.

I might also use intelligence to give advantage to other skill checks. For example, if you are just trying to bribe a guard or get someone to like you, then CHA (persuasion) is enough. If, however, you have to publicly debate someone on a complicated topic, if you are "proficient" in Int, that can give an advantage to your persuasion check.

Why not call for an Int save against confusion? Say you are in a debate against a sophist. How do you avoid being made to look dumb? Think of common movie tropes: the nerd who makes the dumb jock look like an idiot, the wholesome country bumpkin who tries to make a difference but is made to look like an idiot by clever, corrupt city politicians. In the civilized world, Intelligence is used as a weapoon more more strength. Why shouldn't that dynamic be used more in our games?

Also, what about games of intellect? So many backgrounds come with various game sets--whether dice, cards, chess sets, but characters can go an entire campaign and not use them. Make them more important to social interactions.

If you ever have to beat death at a game of Chess or bet against a Sicilian when death is on the line, you'll regret making Int your dump stat.

If Int is a dump stat in your group, that's on the DM and the campaign. But for many people that's fine. They want to pound on monsters, not play detective. Just don't mistake that preference as something missing from the game.
 
Last edited:

DreamsAndPixies

First Post
The fact that you're saying it depends on the DM and the players is a good way to illustrate the problem.

No one would say that about Heavy Armor and Strength, Dexterity and Armor Class, Wisdom and Perception, or Constitution and hit points, or Charisma and social skills.

You can indeed run a game without knowledge skills, but you can't run a game without either combat or social encounters, and the vast majority of games use both.
 


Patrick McGill

First Post
I am belligerent in my opinion that Bards and Warlocks should be INT based. For one, Charisma is way overused for magic in D&D. For two, how Bards and Warlocks obtain their power seems way more in line with INT than Charisma. For three, Sorcerers being the only Charisma based mage class would feel more flavorful. (as a side note I also wish Paladins had to use WIS for their magic)
 

Remove ads

Top