Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 6871714" data-attributes="member: 23751">And yet codes and languages have been broken without such knowledge.  Sure it is.  Gygax got it wrong.There is no such thing as a world history genius.  There are only geniuses, some of which decide to learn about world history.  Genius develops at a very early age.  And yes, the same is true of chemistry and biology.It's absolutely consistent with genius in the real world.  A real world genius born to a lost tribe in the Amazon is not going to know squat about history, physics, and so on.  It takes learning + genius to shine in a field.  Otherwise, that genius will be able to figure out some things, but not others.  Even a moderate physics challenge may not be figured out by that primitive genius.Yes, absolutely.  It has nothing to do with them being geniuses, though.  They were all geniuses prior to any training in those fields, and had probably worked out some of those things themselves.  The easy stuff and about half of the moderate stuff <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />A +5 is higher than +2 or +3.  That untrained genius is superior to the average trained person.I model it by just handing out a lot of info without rolls.  If something isn't critical to the story or intended to be a challenge, there's no point in making a genius with training in the field roll.  I also model it by only allowing those PCs rolls to get information in a field that they are untrained in, that less intelligent PCs would have no change of knowing.</blockquote>

Verification