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

[Felon]

Is there any way to learn more than your beginning languages other than Linguist?

IIRC, four of the races (human, half-elf, halfling, and tiefling) receive a bonus language. Otherwise, I think not.

It's a not-terrible option for the guy who already has both a good INT modifier and CHA skills (like the warlord or warlock).

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

No. But Linguist does give you three languages.

So:

i) You need an Intelligence of X to gain the Linguist feat, and the Linguist feat is the only way ever(*) of learning new languages?

What is X btw? 11, 13, 15 Int?

(*) At least until splat books come out.

 

[The Little Raven]

i) You need an Intelligence of X to gain the Linguist feat, and the Linguist feat is the only way ever(*) of learning new languages?

Yes, and it's 13.

With the +1 to all ability scores at 11 and 21, it's reasonable that anyone who really wants to learn more languages will be able to do so at some point. It's just a matter of priorities.

 

[Leatherhead]

Play a warlord.

Batman isn't a warlord, he can barely keep tabs on one sidekick!

Seriously though, mechanically speaking warlords attacks require STR rather than DEX, or do they not?

 

[Felon]

I'm not aware of getting a boost from Int being a "real crowd-pleaser". So far, I see maybe half a dozen people yowling about it being taken away.

Sure, and a half-dozen people shrugging and dismissing the issue. In other words, business as usual.

You can still play a smart guy in 4E. You _have_ to play a smart guy to take best advantage of certain classes (wiz, warlord). You may not be playing the exact same smart guys in 4E as in 3E, but that's by the by.

You can still play a smart guy in 4e, it's just prescribed which smart guy you ought to be playing. That's not an incidental matter to some folks.

 

[Aldarc]

So why not just allow players to gain an additional number of languages learned equal to their Int modifier?

 

[hong]

Sure, and a half-dozen people shrugging and dismissing the issue. In other words, business as usual.

It's par for the course amid all the other stuff that people are yowling about.

You can still play a smart guy in 4e, it's just prescribed which smart guy you ought to be playing.

... just like in 3E.

 

[hong]

Seriously though, mechanically speaking warlords attacks require STR rather than DEX, or do they not?

Do you want to play a smart guy, or a fast guy?

 

[Felon]

... just like in 3E.

How so? In 3e, everyone who invested in INT got skill points and could find a place to put'em. There was a reasonable incentive to invest or not invest, because it provided some general utility for virtually every class. Some guys really needed it, while for other guys it was a luxury, but everyone who invested saw a return. That's an ideal way for ability scores to work. If an ability score only provides class-specific benefits, that begs the question of why there's an ability score for it in the first place. Might as well just roll the benefits into the class.

 

[Leatherhead]

Do you want to play a smart guy, or a fast guy?

Why should I have to chose?