D&D 5E Making Intelligence Less of a Dump Stat

[CleverNickName]

A lot of folks have suggested wrapping Investigation into Perception, as a way of making Intelligence more important. It's a good idea...in fact, my gaming group and I have kind of accidentally been doing that since the first days of 5E. We treat Perception like the Spot skill in 3.x, and we treat Investigation like we treated Search. (And in case you were wondering, we use Insight in 5E like we used Sense Motive back in the day.)

Noticing something - Perception
Finding something - Investigation
Inferring something - Insight

Even so, every character in our party has an 8 in Intelligence except for the wizard, who has a 17. It just feels cheesy and lame, ya know?

 

[Blue]

If you look at it in a vacuum, Intelligence is a dump stat. But if you look at all of them together, some stats are underpowered and some stats are overpowered. In the context, providing balance means taking from the highest and giving to the lowest - which is most economical if we can find the same "something" that we can take and give.

In that context, I like to move Initiative from quick of reflex to quick thinking. Have it based on INT instead of DEX.

 

[Syntallah]

Rather than dump Investigation as a skill... give it a subset of what they currently use Perception for:

Perception is to find hidden creatures... things that move around and leave tracks / scent / movement.
Investigation is to find hidden inanimate objects... things like secret doors and traps.

You do that and immediately you nerf Perception like it really needs to be, and Intelligence now jumps up for those PCs that are going to be searching for stuff. If you are a Rogue you absolutely can't dump Intelligence, not if you want to search for traps.

Option 2: Use the Variant Rule that does not assign specific ability scores to specific skills. When a check needs to be made, you decide which ability score applies and then the player can offer up a proficiency they might have that could possibly apply. So you thus can end up with things like INT (Perception) or INT (Survival) or INT (Persuasion) etc.

This also thus can be used to simulate other kinds of "skills" without needing to add them to the skill list. Combat Tactics? That's an INT (Insight) check as the PC tries to glean what they can from what they know of the opposing side's thought processes and then develop strategies to counter them. Engineering questions? That's INT (Tinkering Tools) or INT (Thieve's Tools) depending on the kind of engineering problems you come across. Like you've found the trap... but how does it work so that you can disarm it? INT (Thieve's Tools). Then you follow it up with a DEX (Thieve's Tools) check to disarm it, with bonuses or penalties depending on the INT check.


Finnaly, the Extreme option: Make all ability checks using 2d10 rather than 1d20. That brings the average rolls back down to the middle of the pack (8s to 12s mainly) and thus ability modifiers and proficiency bonus have a much greater impact on all your checks. If you have a -1 INT mod... you are much less likely to hit DC 15 skill checks when you are rolling 2d10 - 1, rather than 1d20 - 1.

I've been doing something like this for a while now (based on a long ago post by you, I do believe...). I use Perception to find living things (e.g. orcs hiding in ambush), and Investigation to find inanimate objects (e.g. traps, hidden doors). I then break it down further: I use Wisdom for passive checks, and Intelligence for active checks. So...

...as you stand at the edge of a clearing scanning the other side for any signs of an ambushing foe, I'll call for an Intelligence (Perception) check. As you move down the street, I'll check your Passive Wisdom (Perception) to see if you notice that half-orc scoundrel eyeballing that nice new sword you just bought...

...when you are about to enter the ancient tomb, I'll call for an Intelligence (Investigation) check when you search for traps on the tiled floor. As you make your way down the hall, I'll check your Passive Wisdom (Investigation) to see if you notice the secret door to your left... And so on.

 

[mellored]

IMO: Reduce it to 3 stats.


Power = Str/Con, Damage and HP, Intimidation.
Subterfuge = Dex, Deception, Stealth.
Magic = Int/Wis, Spells, Persuasion.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

Yeah, I can create traps and monsters and stuff to "zing" the players for dumping Intelligence. (Or any stat, for that matter.) But that's not really what I'm going for here.

Don't invalidate the players' choices. Just because every player at the table decided to short themselves on INT, you should not stop giving them challenges that require INT to solve. The players made a choice; now they have to live with the consequences. They have to get creative and find different ways to solve the issues, give one or two characters at the table a high INT, or just resign themselves that there are some challenges they always going to fail.

It's not "zinging" - it's making choices matter.

However, you shouldn't ever have a table where everyone has low INT, because INT is required for two tasks, both of which are pretty important to PCs: arcane spellcasting (obviously) and investigating and (sometimes) disarming traps.

 

[Li Shenron]

Rather than dump Investigation as a skill... give it a subset of what they currently use Perception for:

Perception is to find hidden creatures... things that move around and leave tracks / scent / movement.
Investigation is to find hidden inanimate objects... things like secret doors and traps.

You do that and immediately you nerf Perception like it really needs to be, and Intelligence now jumps up for those PCs that are going to be searching for stuff. If you are a Rogue you absolutely can't dump Intelligence, not if you want to search for traps.

Option 2: Use the Variant Rule that does not assign specific ability scores to specific skills. When a check needs to be made, you decide which ability score applies and then the player can offer up a proficiency they might have that could possibly apply. So you thus can end up with things like INT (Perception) or INT (Survival) or INT (Persuasion) etc.

This also thus can be used to simulate other kinds of "skills" without needing to add them to the skill list. Combat Tactics? That's an INT (Insight) check as the PC tries to glean what they can from what they know of the opposing side's thought processes and then develop strategies to counter them. Engineering questions? That's INT (Tinkering Tools) or INT (Thieve's Tools) depending on the kind of engineering problems you come across. Like you've found the trap... but how does it work so that you can disarm it? INT (Thieve's Tools). Then you follow it up with a DEX (Thieve's Tools) check to disarm it, with bonuses or penalties depending on the INT check.

Been using all these since the 5e playtest. They are good but not enough to avoid still having PCs dumping Str, Int or Cha. That's because there is a lingering problem here that all those activities can be covered by ONE character for the whole party.

The key problem eventually lies within the nature of active vs passive uses, because the latter typically cannot be avoided by a PC and the rest of the party cannot cover for you. That's why you rarely see anyone dumping Con, and dumping Dex or Wis is not truly rare (low Dex to AC is irrelevant in 5e if you wear heavy armor) but definitely not nearly as common as dumping Str/Cha/Int (Strength somewhat less common since many PCs just want to swing weapons). IXMP Cha is still a bit worse than Int, because usually ONE PC in the group with good Charisma covers for everyone, while often there is both the Wizard and the Rogue who need high Int for different purposes.

In lieu of that, one more DM's idea that might help is trying to feature a lot more group checks, where success is determined by how many PCs make the check, so if you dump a stat you'll affect everyone else.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

Don't worry about it. Int is associated with lots of skills. Emphasize that more knowledgeable characters get more info on pertinent skills than those with bricks in their head.

 

[JonnyP71]

Session 0, I inform players:

- intelligent enemies will use grapple and similar tactics, especially against anyone they might perceive to be physically weak

- I never use Passive Perception in terms of locating secret doors or traps, unless the trap is something large and crude, you will need to declare specifically where you are searching, sometimes how you are searching and what you are looking for - and that requires Investigation

- intelligent enemies are unlikely to leave loot out in the open, the best stuff WILL often be hidden, and you may need to work hard to find it

- As per the PHB, I do use other stats for skills if applicable, such as Strength for Intimidation as an example.


It's amazing how, when armed with that info beforehand, some players *DO* take heed. If they don't, that's on them. My group never found a lovely cache of Dwarven armour and weapons because they didn't bother to examine a pair of statues closely... oh how the Dwarf Cleric would have benefited from that suit of Dwarven Plate.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

If you look at it in a vacuum, Intelligence is a dump stat. But if you look at all of them together, some stats are underpowered and some stats are overpowered. In the context, providing balance means taking from the highest and giving to the lowest - which is most economical if we can find the same "something" that we can take and give.

In that context, I like to move Initiative from quick of reflex to quick thinking. Have it based on INT instead of DEX.

I think Initiative based on Int is a great idea. The game would need a little tweaking to make this work with certain feats and subclass abilities but would be a good way to balance out the big advantage Dex has.

 

[77IM]

One thing you could do, instead of making Int give more bonuses, require Int to do more things.

For example, here's a rule I just thunk up:

Comprehending Magic Items
To use a magic item, you first need to comprehend how to use it. You can't use a magic item you can't comprehend. If you comprehend an item, you also comprehend every item with the same name as it -- for example, if you comprehend one ring of protection, you can automatically comprehend every ring of protection you can find, but not a cloak of protection or a ring of warmth.

Every character comprehends all potions automatically. A spellcaster automatically comprehends a spell scroll containing a spell that they can cast or which is on their class list.

For other items, you must make an Intelligence (Arcana) check, with a DC based on the item's rarity:

DC: Rarity
10: Common
12: Uncommon
14: Rare
16: Very rare
18: Legendary
20: Artifact

Making this check requires you to spend an hour fiddling with the item. If you succeed, you comprehend it. If you fail, you just can't figure it out, and you can't retry unless someone teaches you about it.

For every 5 points by which you succeed, you may teach someone else about the item. This takes an hour, and it entitles your pupil to retry their comprehend check, with advantage. You can only teach each person once; if their retry fails, someone else will have to teach them.
​

Now this isn't a great rule in may ways and I wouldn't use it. My point is to illustrate how, instead of giving extra attunement slots to people with high Int, you instead require reasonable Int in order to even use magic items.