Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
So 5 Intelligence Huh
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6841471" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>This is false for the 1st ed AD&D PHB and DMG. I've quoted the relevant paragraphs upthread.</p><p></p><p>They say that INT "is quite similar to" or "roughly corresponds to" IQ, but (i) they don't give any metric for that similarity or rough correspondence, and (ii) they both say that INT also includes/assumes things that IQ doesn't. <em>Similarity to</em> and <em>roughly corresponding to</em> are not identical to or synonyms of <em>equals</em> or even <em>uniformly correlates with</em>.</p><p></p><p>It doesn't suggest anything of that sort. For all we know, the relevant function could be 50 + INT *5. The only suggestion of *10 is the mention of 80 IQ in the discussion of languages.</p><p></p><p>And you still haven't addressed Moldvay Basic, which has an INT chart which has nothing to say about IQ and is all about literacy and language use.</p><p></p><p>No one is treating INT differently for animals - as for humans, so for them it confers certain bonuses or penalties on checks that involve reasoning, memory etc.</p><p></p><p>But INT doesn't exhaust cognitive, linguistic etc abilities in 5e. Sufficient proof of this is that (unlike Moldvay Basic and AD&D) language learning is completely divorced from INT.</p><p></p><p>And the most fundamental issue is this: where, in 1st ed AD&D, do the rules say that having a particular INT score must serve as a limit on a player's action declaration for his/her PC? I don't see that written anywhere. And in the only discussion of roleplaying in the book - which is the closing section on <strong>SUCCESSFUL ADVENTURES</strong> - Gygax assumes that each player will do his/her best to bring his/her own intelligence to bear upon the game. The notion that <em>playing</em> a character means pretending to have the mental abilities of that character is nowhere to be found in the 1st ed AD&D core rules. (Of course the DMG mentions that principle in many places as applying to the GM, but the GM is not <em>playing</em> NPCs/monsters in the way that <em>players</em> are playing their PCs.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6841471, member: 42582"] This is false for the 1st ed AD&D PHB and DMG. I've quoted the relevant paragraphs upthread. They say that INT "is quite similar to" or "roughly corresponds to" IQ, but (i) they don't give any metric for that similarity or rough correspondence, and (ii) they both say that INT also includes/assumes things that IQ doesn't. [I]Similarity to[/I] and [I]roughly corresponding to[/I] are not identical to or synonyms of [I]equals[/I] or even [I]uniformly correlates with[/I]. It doesn't suggest anything of that sort. For all we know, the relevant function could be 50 + INT *5. The only suggestion of *10 is the mention of 80 IQ in the discussion of languages. And you still haven't addressed Moldvay Basic, which has an INT chart which has nothing to say about IQ and is all about literacy and language use. No one is treating INT differently for animals - as for humans, so for them it confers certain bonuses or penalties on checks that involve reasoning, memory etc. But INT doesn't exhaust cognitive, linguistic etc abilities in 5e. Sufficient proof of this is that (unlike Moldvay Basic and AD&D) language learning is completely divorced from INT. And the most fundamental issue is this: where, in 1st ed AD&D, do the rules say that having a particular INT score must serve as a limit on a player's action declaration for his/her PC? I don't see that written anywhere. And in the only discussion of roleplaying in the book - which is the closing section on [B]SUCCESSFUL ADVENTURES[/B] - Gygax assumes that each player will do his/her best to bring his/her own intelligence to bear upon the game. The notion that [I]playing[/I] a character means pretending to have the mental abilities of that character is nowhere to be found in the 1st ed AD&D core rules. (Of course the DMG mentions that principle in many places as applying to the GM, but the GM is not [I]playing[/I] NPCs/monsters in the way that [I]players[/I] are playing their PCs.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
So 5 Intelligence Huh
Top