So at what intelligence am I allowed to use tactics?

[Jdvn1]

Int 10+ should allow pretty much everything, but monsters would mostly go by the moment of the situation and not think ahead too much.

Int 12+ should allow thinking ahead and taking possible outcomes into account, this ability would improve even further for higher Int scores.

Except for maybe something like Improved Disarm, which requires Int 13.

 

[Voadam]

Int 0 knocks you out. Otherwise go to it. No other guidelines based on int for players or monsters. Just mechanical effects such as wizard spell DCs, max spell level known, and certain feat prereqs.

 

[Torm]

Good point Fusangite on the low INT scores of wolves.

I've not been sure on WoTC's ideas for intelligence scores for some animals for quite a while, now. Scientific testing has determined that dogs that have regularly been around people can understand words, phrases, and even sentences as well as most 5 year old humans - that seems a bit better than a 2 Int, to me. And testing seems to indicate that dolphins are even closer to us, intelligence-wise, but they get a '2', as well....

 

[swrushing]

It may be metagaming, but I want the game to be played by the players

Where we have different approaches may well be in what "game" we are playing.

The "game" i want my guys to play is role playing their characters. If their character would approach the situation with tactics and precision, then i want them to have their character do just that. but, if their character wouldn't, i don't. "Winning" IMG should not equate to "beating the monsters and taking the least damage while doing so and expending the fewest resources."

Now to the more general point... it reads all backwards to me.


Don't play the character "less than savvy" because you have a 6 in intelligence.

GIVE the character a 6 intelligence because you want to (or plan on) play him "less than savvy."

If you don't plan on playing him "less than savvy", then don't give him a 6 int.

This is where the "just be you" thing above becomes a problem. a savvy player lowballs his int score for the character because "i can outthink" or a social player lowballs his charisma because the player can "talk his way thru a scene." The mage won't be able to lowball his spells because "i can do real magic to make up for it."

build what you plan to run.

But honestly, INT is not the only measure for this. Experience matters too. I often use profession soldier as a "battlefield experience" trait. An int 6 ogre with pro-soldier 6 because he has served in/been trained by an army would be a lot more tactically inclined than a typical run of the mill ogre whose tactics tend to be less than sterling.

At the point that you are in a "my stats won't let me" you already have a stat mismatch... your notion of "what the character is" is not in sync with the stats you gave him.

Maybe if you wanted to run a "tactically savvy" guy, you should not have sold off on intelligence for MORE STRENGTH arr arr arr.

maybe if a GM wanted to throw a murder of int 6 ogres as your party's adversaries and have them be organized and using precision tactics, he should consider...

a. using bugbears or other, more intelligent critters, leaving the ogres for his brute squad scenarios.

or

b. established these ogres as "special" by giving them backgrounds in military, giving them profession soldier to reflect this background, and writing into his local history past wars and events that show ogres led and trained... which could be foreshadowed in local history findings so the players go "ahhh, these are some of those ogres" and draw a CLUE from it, instead of having his players simply scratch their heads and wonder.

 

[Liminal Syzygy]

I see the issue of tactics as being one of training far more than intelligence. One of the posters ar RPGNet (I think his handle was Random Goblin or something like that) gave us a quick tutorial on how to apply modern small unit tactics to RPGs. They were frighteningly efficient and would probably give fits to an PC party that didn't know how to deal with them.

Interesting... Have a link?

 

[fusangite]

The "game" i want my guys to play is role playing their characters. If their character would approach the situation with tactics and precision, then i want them to have their character do just that. but, if their character wouldn't, i don't.

Fair enough. But given how small the point of intersection is between what our characters know and what we know, how best do we realistically anticipate their actions?

If we assume that our characters are basically like humans in present-day society, we can infer that the main things that affect their decision making are going to be past experience and training, not latent skill. Of course, if there existed a "Battle Tactics" skill, we would obviously utilize it.

But lacking such a skill, we can take one of two positions on this issue:
(A) D&D does not quanitfy past experiences and training in areas not represented by skill ranks
(B) as you suggest, class, level and experience points are the ways that D&D quantifies past experiences and training in areas not represented by skill ranks

Even if we accepted mental attributes as expressing knowledge of battle tactics, I see no evidence that Intelligence would be the most appropriate attribute to utilize. Pack animals, who know hunt in groups, are typically represented in the rules as having Intelligence scores of 1 or 2 and Wisdom scores of 10-16. Therefore, based on my reading of the rules, if one were to take the dubious step of correlating tactical competence with a mental attribute, Wisdom would obviously be a better choice than Intelligence.

However, I am more inclined to go with option A. I see a deliberateness to the decision not to represent any cognitive skills in the skills list. It seems to me more than a simple coincidence that skills that involve pure cognition and analysis are consistently absent from this listing. It suggest to me that such things should be employed by players unmediated by the game system.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

Interesting... Have a link?

Here's the link: http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=139661&highlight=small+unit+tactics

There's enough exmilitary and even current military types on ENWorld to have the same type of discussion here, if you're interested.

 

[RFisher]

build what you plan to run.

Ah, but that's another difference between the games we play. I tend to prefer character generation that isn't completely up to the player.

Fair enough. But given how small the point of intersection is between what our characters know and what we know, how best do we realistically anticipate their actions?

See, that's the thing. If I'm going to say that the character's use of tactics needs to be appropriate for his stats (...whether Int or a skill or his level...) then I don't want to use a tactical combat system.

If I'm using a tactical combat system, then I want the player to have nearly free reign in choosing his character's tactics.

Although, it's certainly not black & white. I've already admitted that I'll sometimes choose a tactic for my PC because its what I think the PC would do instead of what I think would really be best. I'm sure people on the other side of the argument occasionally choose tactics that are a bit out of character.

 

[Plane Sailing]

How about spring attack?

Well, Expertise is a prereq and that requires INT13+

So the only hard and fast ones in the rules that I can think of are that you need INT 13+ to use expertise, improved disarm, improved trip, spring attack, whirlwind attack...

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Um... no it isn't.

SPRING ATTACK [GENERAL]
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Dodge, Mobility, base attack bonus +4.
Benefit: When using the attack action with a melee weapon, you can move both before and after the attack, provided that your total distance moved is not greater than your speed. Moving in this way does not provoke an attack of opportunity from the defender you attack, though it might provoke attacks of opportunity from other creatures, if appropriate. You can’t use this feat if you are wearing heavy armor.
You must move at least 5 feet both before and after you make your attack in order to utilize the benefits of Spring Attack.
Special: A fighter may select Spring Attack as one of his fighter bonus feats.

It doesn't say anything about requiring Combat Expertise. Whirlwind Attack does; Spring Attack doesn't.

Well, Expertise is a prereq and that requires INT13+

So the only hard and fast ones in the rules that I can think of are that you need INT 13+ to use expertise, improved disarm, improved trip, spring attack, whirlwind attack...