D&D 4E Obligatory dump stats in 4e: the irrelevance of Intelligence

[Nifft]

Just to nitpick - your characters don't carry rope?

Nope, they're far too weak for all that heavy hemp.

Cheers, -- N

 

[FireLance]

Let's have Intelligence give a damage bonus once per encounter. Damage is cheap!

Yes, that might work nicely.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Wow, lots of snarky in this thread.

I apologize.

 

[TwoSix]

The "smart and fast" character is a pretty classic concept, and I know many folks loved that 3e gave skill-oriented a benefit for making their characters smart. Is anyone disappointed now?

Since Int now boosts AC and Reflex, a "smart and fast" character could just use Int.

 

[The Sword 88]

But then he would be no good with a bow or light thrown weapon.

 

[Ginnel]

There are no fighter class skills, or useful feats for a fighter keyed to Int in 4e. Ingoring the other advantages I've already pointed out that a high Cha gives a fighter in 3e, there is the undeniable fact that one of their class skills (Intimidate) keys off Cha. Try again.

Umm I would think again, ritual casting, extra languages.

Whats up with this? just cause you play a fighter all feats must be combat related, pfft in my opinion very closed minded

My dragonborn fighter concept is going for Str Con Dex and Int as a stat array probably 16, 16, 14, 13 to start off

Str and Con cause he is a bit of a tough guy, dex to get access to the scale armor feat, to let him move better at paragon level and int because he will be getting knowledge arcana, ritual caster and Jack of all trades (not sure if this is int linked) to represent him being a roaming sellsword picking up knowledge from around the world. If I have a feat or two free I thinking picking up 3-6 extra languages to tell the enemy your gonna cut his heart out in his own language is great.

Now this won't be an optimized character as far as most people seem to be concerned, he's doubled up on 2 of his saves neglecting his will save, the feats he has selected will not directly contribute to his combat effectiveness, however the ability to understand what the enemy is saying the ability to patch up your ritualist cleric may well prove invaluable. The varied stats also mean he can use Str/Con/Dex based powers relating to different weapon powers as he is also going to be a walking armory.

This is a concept I wouldn't be able to play with a low/dump statted int.

 

[Cadfan]

Except that Str is *strictly* worse than Con, because it doesn't add to starting hp and healing surges. There is absolutely zero mechanical reason for a wizard (or any other class who's powers aren't keyed to Str) to put points in Str instead of Con...

Its not "strictly" worse. There are skills which function based on strength. Strength also controls bonus attacks, such as opportunity attacks and free attacks granted by warlord abilities. I can see a Staff wizard who fights with Close powers wanting to have at least some strength score. Its not necessarily the Best Wizard Build EVAR, but its not worthless, and its certainly not "strictly" worse.

I did no such thing. As I stated, it was a viable (if not 100% optimal) option for a wizard in 3e. It certainly gave them something to do after their spells were used, and wasn't the total no-brainer that dumping Str is in 4e. In 3e, it was a sub-optimal choice that gave you some additional options and abilities that a wizard dumping Str didn't have.

This I can agree with. In 3e, you could run out of spells, so points in strength provided you with a low level backup. It was a long term waste of ability score points, because after a few levels running out of spells stopped being a problem, and in any case you got more out of points in dex and ranged attacks. But it did provide a distinct benefit- backup when you run out of spells. Now that you don't run out of spells, it doesn't do that anymore.

In 4e, it's totally bunk, and doesn't give you *anything* that putting those points in Con doesn't.

This statement, on the other hand, is objectively false.

Nope. A warlord is a leader, which is something this character definitely *wasn't*. He was crazy (part of the reason why he was wading into melee in the first place), and never really considered his allies or tactics beyond "blow it up"!

I am a little confused about how so many people on this forum keep insisting that they spent time in 3e playing highly intelligent fighters, but that those fighters absolutely could not be represented by warlords, because warlords are smart and tactical, and their characters were crazy lunatics who should never be trusted with authority, who rejected all tactics, and mostly just liked pretty explosions. I thought that character class was "sorcerer."

 

[AllisterH]

This may sound blasphemous but is CON really that important for a non-frontliner? I know that in 3.x, making any character with a CON of 10 would get you strange looks especially for a melee character but in 4E?

I'm not sure it is actually that NEEDED.

The difference between a 10 CON and a 16 CON for a rogue in an encounter is 6 HP and 3 healing surges (which remains constant over all levels).

The HP difference is not even one round while the healing surges only affect overall staimina for the day (even without a CON modififer, a rogue has 6 healing surges. If you're burning that much in one single encounter, there's a problem)

Maybe I'm missing something but a rogue that wants to play the well-bred, educated and disdains combat/somewhat physically weak rogue can safely have a 10 CON

Or am I totally offbase here?

 

[see]

This may sound blasphemous but is CON really that important for a non-frontliner? I know that in 3.x, making any character with a CON of 10 would get you strange looks especially for a melee character but in 4E?

Well, you need either Strength or Con, or else you're a sitting duck for attacks against your Fortitude. You can decide for yourself whether hit points and healing surges, or attacks with non-light weapons and carrying capacity, are more important. But if you don't have one of them high, you have a definite vulnerability, and monsters with ranged attacks vs. Fortitude are not rare.

 

[mattdm]

These look good. I'd allow Charisma to be added to a death save, too.

And I'd call that power Too Pretty To Die.

Dammit. I wasn't going to, but now I have to use this rule in my game.