D&D 5E The Int 8 Party: A Solution?

[Shadowdweller00]

Ways in which the DM can use Intelligence-based checks WITHOUT rewriting the rules, imposing unwritten penalties, or adding superfluous mechanical benefits:

* Recognize that the snake-person attacking the party is a MEDUSA rather than a YUAN-TI
* Decipher fragments of the ritual that the BBEG is working on so as to know where to go an what to do against it. (1 check per month of study, during which time the BBEG advances his or her goals).
* Differentiate between an historical inscription, a warding designed to protect the dungeon from decay, and a magical trap. (One SINGLE check, only allowed for a character with relevant skills and/or proficiencies)
* Infer whether the holes in the wall are a trap or merely part of the hypocaust (one check per character that vocalizes that they are investigating the holes, made in secret by the DM; failure might trigger the trap or cause burns from the hypocaust)
* Learn what potion was being produced in a wizard's lab; as well as, with a sufficiently high check, how to produce it yourself. (One check per character, if proficient with an herbalist's kit or alchemist's tools).
* Recall stories about lycanthropes being immune to normal weapons but susceptible to silver. (One check per martial-type character, made secretly by the DM)
* Understand the subtext of what the sketchy thieves' guild member is trying to communicate to you.
* Recognize the coat of arms born by the pompous rich man insulting the barbarian, so as to discern whether he is merely a minor noble, or actually the prince himself.
* Remember details about the individual who built a ruined structure; details that provide clues as the purpose, layout, and potential threats present in said ruin. (One check per character who explicitly asks about it, provided proficiency in History).
* Recognize the wooden paneling as a secret door (One check made in secret by the DM on behalf of anyone who passes within 5 feet of the door's location).
* Remember that openly carrying any weapon larger than a knife in Springport is against the law; and is punishable by confiscation of the weapon.
* Realize that the dragon's horn structure looks more like a green dragon rather than a black dragon, in spite of the apparent color. (One check per character trained in arcana, made secretly by the DM)
* Figure out how to use the bizarre illithid device (one check per character who spends 8 hours studying the item; failure breaks the item).
* Discern clues as to the function of the mechanical device sitting in a dungeon room. (One check per character who investigates the item, made in secret by the DM; failure might provide false information, injure the investigator on some gears, or even activate the thing)

 

[MichaelSomething]

How about just lying to characters if they have low Int? The lying would simulate the character understanding something wrong

 

[Dualazi]

I'm afraid that statement is outright, objectively wrong. The amount of information or other benefit the DM provides on a successful Int check is entirely DM-dependent. The difficulty of that check is entirely DM-dependent. The importance of that benefit is also DM dependent. Getting the idea? The importance of Intelligence (or any other stat) is subjective. This is like saying that the color red is the worst of all colors, bar none.

The validity of my statement remains completely intact, actually. This isn’t the first time this thread has been had, either around here or elsewhere, as people try and keep houseruling ways for int to not suck. Frankly, your incredibly tiresome assertion that the DM can put amusingly undue importance on int checks to save them from being useless is the same drivel we got in 3e when people complained about wizards being overpowered. If the DM has to address an entire sub-system, class, or ability score, that’s a tacit admission that there’s a problem.

Additionally, as stated up thread there’s no reason to prioritize it even if it WOULD be valuable, because either 5 PCs can roll (and one of them will likely hit the desired DC, unless all knowledge in your campaign is locked behind 20+ barriers), or the PCs just use a spell that answers the question for them, of which there are many.

You could go further as well, and look at released adventure paths for what the “estimated” use of knowledge skills are, since those are likely to have the greatest volume of players simply by nature of the AL, and can loosely be interpreted as how the game is ‘meant’ to be played, or at least the default assumption.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Two personal examples of Intelligence having a substantial effect, just from my first 5e campaign (Lost Mine of Phandelver - spoilers):

1) The party didn't know how to keep the flameskull dead. They couldn't puzzle it from what they did know, but had they made a better check, they could have figured it out. This caused them to take a trip to Neverwinter to try to get info.

2) The party also wasn't sure how to deal with the spectator. I don't remember if they got to this point before heading back to Neverwinter, or if they had to make two trips.

So the party ends up taking two or three sessions, and over a week in game (with random encounters) traveling to and from the city to find someone more knowledgeable than themselves to help them deal with some situations. Now, this was fun (like it's supposed to be), but the fact remains that the Intelligence stat could have bypassed that entire detour scenario.

This is why Intelligence isn't a weak stat if applied to lore. Knowing or not knowing something can change the way the adventure plays out, just like defeating a foe or fleeing from it can change it.

Additionally, as stated up thread there’s no reason to prioritize it even if it WOULD be valuable, because either 5 PCs can roll (and one of them will likely hit the desired DC, unless all knowledge in your campaign is locked behind 20+ barriers), or the PCs just use a spell that answers the question for them, of which there are many.

Now this is a good criticism. But the issue here isn't Intelligence specific. It's a failure of the system to present fully satisfying rules in situations where everyone in the party can roll, but the success or failure of the entire party can be ensured or ruined by one character's roll.

My personal solution is not to let more than one character roll (or two if more than one have proficiency) and just randomly assign each additional character to use one of those d20 results (applying their own modifier to it).

Again, the point is that it isn't Intelligence that is the problem there, but some less than ideal party success/failure design.

 

[Dualazi]

* Recognize that the snake-person attacking the party is a MEDUSA rather than a YUAN-TI

Only relevant if medusas are largely unknown in your campaign, and will only matter until the first gaze attack goes off.

* Decipher fragments of the ritual that the BBEG is working on so as to know where to go an what to do against it. (1 check per month of study, during which time the BBEG advances his or her goals).

Or they could just skip it (a recurring theme in int checks) and go after the big bad himself.

* Differentiate between an historical inscription, a warding designed to protect the dungeon from decay, and a magical trap. (One SINGLE check, only allowed for a character with relevant skills and/or proficiencies)

Here we go, already starting with arbitrary proficiency locking. Also trap detection falls under perception/wisdom so it only applies to if you care about the first two.

* Infer whether the holes in the wall are a trap or merely part of the hypocaust (one check per character that vocalizes that they are investigating the holes, made in secret by the DM; failure might trigger the trap or cause burns from the hypocaust)

Again, traps are wisdom (perception) checks. Int doesn’t help here.

* Learn what potion was being produced in a wizard's lab; as well as, with a sufficiently high check, how to produce it yourself. (One check per character, if proficient with an herbalist's kit or alchemist's tools).

I can dig it up later but I’m pretty sure the section on identifying items stipulates anyone can do so with a sip, which doesn’t activate the effect of the potions. So no, the all int 8 party is quite able to tell what’s being made.

* Recall stories about lycanthropes being immune to normal weapons but susceptible to silver. (One check per martial-type character, made secretly by the DM)

Probably one of the closest to being legitimate, but only tenuously, since either the player will be in combat and the check doesn’t help (assuming they don’t have the necessary weapons) or it’s noncombat and group research attempts can discover it through volume of rolls. It’s also worth noting that magic items of any stripe bypass the damage immunity, so this check only matters at levels where players don’t have any.

* Understand the subtext of what the sketchy thieves' guild member is trying to communicate to you.

You mean like insight? Yeah we have that skill already, it’s under wisdom.

* Recognize the coat of arms born by the pompous rich man insulting the barbarian, so as to discern whether he is merely a minor noble, or actually the prince himself.

Assuming you’ve engineered a situation like this that occurs immediately after entering another country (because even 8 int characters are unlikely to not know the royal crest), yet again you can simply have all group members roll for this.

* Remember details about the individual who built a ruined structure; details that provide clues as the purpose, layout, and potential threats present in said ruin. (One check per character who explicitly asks about it, provided proficiency in History).

This one is fine aside from arbitrary restrictions on proficiency, but it’s also the most textbook use of history and none of that info is particularly vital.

* Recognize the wooden paneling as a secret door (One check made in secret by the DM on behalf of anyone who passes within 5 feet of the door's location).

This one is chalked up to wizards not being anywhere near clear enough as to the intent and use of investigation vs. perception, but even the basic rules use a hidden door as an example of perception applying. Since wis is vastly more useful than Int, that is going to be the stat used for this more often than not.

* Remember that openly carrying any weapon larger than a knife in Springport is against the law; and is punishable by confiscation of the weapon.

Would no one else have mentioned this? No captain giving them passage or guard at the gate? I guess this one applies, but it seems more like a temporary gotcha because I’m not sure the PC’s behavior would change much as a result.

* Realize that the dragon's horn structure looks more like a green dragon rather than a black dragon, in spite of the apparent color. (One check per character trained in arcana, made secretly by the DM)

Arbitrary threshold and not terribly useful. Will probably allow for one better than normal breath weapon before the players adapt to it.

* Figure out how to use the bizarre illithid device (one check per character who spends 8 hours studying the item; failure breaks the item).

Why is the ‘per character’ even needed here? You get it in one shot or it breaks by your own admission.

* Discern clues as to the function of the mechanical device sitting in a dungeon room. (One check per character who investigates the item, made in secret by the DM; failure might provide false information, injure the investigator on some gears, or even activate the thing)

Volume of rolls problem is still present, since they can just compare answers if they don’t start it. This is assuming of course that the device is nonmagical and they don’t just use identify or other divination magic, or simply shrug and leave.

Basically, half of what you posted is either linked to another, better attribute, or is otherwise bypassed or ignored without significant consequence. None of these options elevate the stat above any of the others, and even if they were good uses in isolation I suspect their frequency would also be a detracting aspect of the comparison.
[MENTION=6677017]Sword of Spirit[/MENTION]
Yeah, I'm a big fan of group checks when possible, but knowledge checks are one of the times where it legitimately doesn't really make sense, since all it takes is one person shouting to use fire on the trolls or not to touch a certain rune and all benefit.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The Int 8 Party: A Solution?

Require every party to pass the ASAT (Adventuring Skill Aptitude Test) before they can become 1st level adventurers. If they fail, it's back to the family farm or whatever their background implies. Of course, since it's a written multiple-choice test, the governing check is INT.

 

[Lanefan]

Another solution, if all else fails, is for the DM - and the other players - to make it clear that a character with a low Int score is expected to be played that way; and if the player of said character can't keep quiet when out-of-character he thinks of a brilliant idea (unless it's a rare occurrence) that's on the player, and needs to be called out.

If you want to be intelligent as a player then play an intelligent character. But if you dump-stat intelligence* then yeah, you're going to have to sit there like a lump sometimes while other people do the thinking, which isn't much fun; and you've no-one to blame but yourself. And this holds true whether you're playing 5e, 1e, DCCRPG, Mutants and Masterminds, or pretty much any other system** out there.

* - assuming you have a choice; if your system doesn't allow rearranging of what you roll and your Int roll happens to suck, I have more sympathy.

** - with the possible exception of CoC, where being really dumb might turn out to be a long-term benefit.

Lanefan

 

[GameOgre]

Yes, if you have a 12 strength you must play your character like the true jock brute that he is. Make sure everything you do is focused around his strength and just realize you will be attacked first so that you don't get a chance to lay waste to the enemy.

Any character that so focused his character to this extent is pretty one dimensional.

Let's make up a slew of house rules to deal with such extreme characters.

*If you did not detect the good natured sarcasm from this post,realize that you failed your roll.

 

[Horwath]

Additionally, as stated up thread there’s no reason to prioritize it even if it WOULD be valuable, because either 5 PCs can roll (and one of them will likely hit the desired DC, unless all knowledge in your campaign is locked behind 20+ barriers), or the PCs just use a spell that answers the question for them, of which there are many.

This is not the problem of Int party, this is a problem of d20 system, where an average performance is as likely as best or worst performance ever. There is 5% chance to get 10, 5% for 1 and 5% for 20.

And that is dead wrong.

With attack rolls it is OK, as they are rolled 10-150 times per character per combat, so the luck factor of d20 evens out.

If you play with 3d6 instead of d20 for skills only you would see that hitting DC 15 with a modifier of -1(8 int) atleast once for 5 man party of dumbarses is only 21% and DC 20 is imposible.

Even if they all have trained knowledge skill of +2(5th level +3 proficiency and -1 for int), DC 20 is only little more than 2% chance across 5 man team with 8 int.

Problem here is d20, nothing else.

 

[Vulf]

They should have kept Warlock as Intelligence based.

Point buy at 31 would have helped as well. Players are forced to minmax because there is no advantage in having extraneous points in intelligence. Even Eldritch Knights dump intelligence and take spells that do not require an ability modifier like Booming Blade and Shield.



The Martial Adept feat should have had 3rd feature: Add intelligence modifier to the damage you deal with melee weapon attacks made with Martial weapons while not concentrating on a spell.

Fixes 2-weapon fighting and Intelligence is no longer automatically a dump stat, but becomes a valid build option for non-magic characters.