Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 7072104" data-attributes="member: 6677017">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.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.</blockquote>

Verification