Should Insightful players have an advantage?

[Dannyalcatraz]

I tend to see low mental stats as *permission* to play dumb (or foolish, or uncharismatic), not as a forced hindrance, though.

Ditto: Johnny Bones, a 3Ed human Ftr/Th, was Str15 Dex15 Con13 Int12 Wis8 Cha6*. He was extremely effective at his job...but he was reckless and a boorish thug & bully. He caused interparty friction- favorite victim, the scrawny Mage- and sometimes got the party in trouble. It was only the fact that he was an efficient killer and had a nose for secrets that the party kept him on.

And even as a killer, he was flawed. With the exception of knowing he needed to maneuver to get his backstabs in, his tactics were pretty much limited to charge in and kill or run for the hills.








* 4d6 drop lowest, rolled in order.

 

[nedjer]

Looks to be down to whether or not options are explained before a PC is rolled. Few insightful players are going to use Intelligence as a dump stat if they're told it will lead to extra checks and limits - unless they're setting out to play a grunt. In which case they know what they're doing.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

The thing that I always try to bear in mind is that sometimes it is the low stats that bring the best fun.

My first 3e character had an 18 Intelligence, an 18 Charisma... and an 8 Strength and a 7 Wisdom. A bit of a con man, a big-ideas-at-the-spur-of-a-moment man, but no foresight whatsoever, and falling for every sob story that came along. His life was all about getting into and out of trouble. A chaotic good rogue, with a dabbling of wizard (it was going to be sorcerer, but....)

But really, what was fun was getting into the trouble to begin with.

The Auld Grump

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But really, what was fun was getting into the trouble to begin with.

Yep- you're basically a plot engine for your GM. And that's a good thing.