More Useful Intelligence/Wisdom?

[Otogi]

Let's say I'm running a game with nerfed casting. Wizards, clerics and sorcerers all gain a downgrade. Stats are still important, and govern a lot. Strength governs melee attacks, damage and encumbrance. Dexterity gives a bonus to AC, ranged attacks, initiative and Reflex saves. Constitution doesn't seem so great, but the bonus to HP is always important.

Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma, however, kind of get the shaft. I've fixed Charisma (bartering and mercantile), but Wisdom only really controls Will saves. Is there anyway I can give it a somewhat minor bonus in addition?

Also, is there a way to do the same for Intelligence, besides skill point bonuses?

[PairO'Dice Lost]

One thing I've tried is moving Initiative over to Wisdom--yeah, your Dex lets you react to danger unconsciously, but if you want to react usefully you have to have good perception and snap judgment.

As for Int, the real way to fix it is making skills much better (using skill ranks instead of a feat tax, giving them higher-level uses, etc.) so folks will want as many skill points as possible; I can't think of a quick fix that would work all that well.

[Otogi]

Wow, that actual makes a lot more sense. Makes me wonder why the makers didn't use it themselves.

Alright, so skills points are needed. What do you mean by feat tax, by the way?

[AstralFire]

He's saying use skills more often as feat requirements. Quite a few feats are part of feat chains, not many good ones have complex skill requirements.

[Otogi]

Oh, well that shouldn't be a problem. Very few feats require another one, and none go further than just another feat. In fact, every skill has their own feat that get better with increased skill.

Does anyone know anything else that can go under Intelligence?

[Pronounceable]

Extra descriptions. Meta tips from on high.

[grautry]

Extra descriptions. Meta tips from on high.

I agree with this one.

Treat Intelligence checks as a sort of a knowledge check to give insight and clues into current situation. Give the players a chance to roll once a session or so to see if their characters figure out something if they're stumped.

One thing that also helps with making skills valuable is consolidating them. Treat, say, Climb, Jump and Swim as Athlethics, Balance/Tumble/Escape Artist as Acrobatics, Listen/Spot as Perception, Hide/Move Silently as simply Hide etc. etc. By making skills more generalized than specialized you increase the value of every skill point.

[Otogi]

I would, too. I'm not really sure what it means, though.

Actually, I have that with the Knowledge and Investigate skills, and that clue thing seems kind of useless because I give my players hints. More than I want, usually.

I put that down, too. There are only 16 skills, which seemed to be a lot less before I put this down. Huh :smallconfused:

[Devils_Advocate]

Constitution is around the third-most important stat for everyone. HP and Fort saves are a character's last line of defense against death, and the one line of defense that nothing can get around (that I can think of). Con isn't anyone's primary stat, but it's not a dump stat for anyone either.

Is there any particular reason for wanting to keep Wisdom relevant? It's already a dump stat for characters who aren't divine casters, since it only gives a flat bonus to a few things which can be boosted by feats if need be (Alertness, Iron Will, Skill Focus (Sense Motive)). If you make divine casting rarer by making it a less attractive option, it could become a dump stat for nearly everyone... but that's not necessarily a bad thing. I find it easy to see adventurers in particular as almost comically low-Wis. (Fighting dangerous monsters? Sign me up!)

I've thought about combining Cha and Wis into a single "street smarts" stat. Alternately, you could combine Wisdom with Intelligence. But that requires changing the stats of... well, every monster you include in your game. So that's more of an idea to potentially include in a complete redesign of d20 than a simple house rule.

You could just make more frequent use of Wisdom and Intelligence checks. Whenever a player decrees that her character does something dumb, roll a Wis check, and if the character passes it, tell the player "Your intuition tells you that would be a poor idea" and describe the obvious negative consequences likely to result. If the group comes across a clue, roll Int checks, and if one of the characters passes it, he recognizes its apparent relevance.

[Otogi]

That's true, but that's my point; every stat does something, but the mental stats are next to useless for non-casters.

Alright, you caught me. This whole thing is for a game I'm making myself. I want to make all stats more potent and useful so everyone can play an archetypal to their full potential, sort of like a d20 modern. I also wanted the stats to mean something (since the system uses point buy) so players would have to decide where to put their points instead of just sinking everything into one and leave others (often more roleplay stats) at their absolute lowest. "Dumb/charmless fighters" always got to me, and sometimes it just got in the way of roleplaying. Low stat characters (weak/stupid/absent-minded/etc.) are still viable and may make make your concept more ideal, but it also discourages min-maxing and munchkining.

/overly long rant and thesis-level read over/

I thought about combing them (much easier to do), but two important elements are to connected to each of them. And, of course, I have a heart for d20:smallwink:.

[Xenre]

The main problem with the mental stats isn't actually the stats at all. It's an experience problem. In Dungeons and Dragons the ONLY thing xp is awarded for is killing monsters. Oh, sure they tell you to offer "good roleplaying" awards and "good judgement" bonuses but how much do you give and how often do you award it? See? D&D has no guidelines for that.

If you were to set up some sort of system that would allow gaining of XP above and beyond just slaughtering monsters, then your stats would become - at least a little - more important all across the board.

If you got some XP for using class features, or successful skill checks or the like, people would stop min/maxing their stats in favor of a better chance at more XP.

[Knaight]

You can replace the experience system with Keys from The Shadow of Yesteday. You get experience points for character traits you declare important to the character, as well as failing to live up to those traits and changing as a character. Its a very interesting system, also seen in Lady Blackbird, which is free legally. The rest of TSoY is useless crap(well it has a good die system, but they stole it from Fudge anyways, which is free). Keys are hard to get used to, but they work really well.

[Otogi]

If you were to set up some sort of system that would allow gaining of XP above and beyond just slaughtering monsters, then your stats would become - at least a little - more important all across the board.


Alright, I'll see what I can do. Before I do, though, do you have an ideas on how to improve the Int/Wis without changing XP?

[AgentPaper]

Personally, if anything I would keep initiative on dexterity, and move spot and listen over to dex as well. Wisdom helping you see better is just plan ridiculous. (Yes, yes, I know, wisdom is supposed to help you make sense of what you're seeing better. Which is why wisdom boosts things like sense motive and intelligence boosts things like knowledge checks) Things just make so much more sense when the rogue and the ranger have the best eyes and ears, instead of the cleric and druid. And when vision degrades as you get older instead of getting sharper. :smallyuk:

As for making int and wis more useful, I would suggest adding feats and such that have int and/or wis as a pre-requisite.

[Otogi]

Well, I did rename the stats, and Wisdom became "Aware", so altogether I think it fits. That does make sense in a d20 homebrew, though; Intelligence makes a lot more sense to me.

I'm actually working on that, but I still want it to be more about the stats than what you can get with the stats (if that makes any sense).

[PairO'Dice Lost]

He's saying use skills more often as feat requirements. Quite a few feats are part of feat chains, not many good ones have complex skill requirements.

Actually, by "feat tax" I meant feats that exist only to remove entirely arbitrary limitations--such as all the combat maneuvers provoking an AoO and having an Improved X feat that removes it; if your martial character is so incompetent as to provoke an AoO just for swinging at an enemy's feet (trip) or sword (sunder) instead of his body, they could at least make all of those into just one Improved Maneuvers feat to remove the penalty. (There are many other abilities like this as well, but the combat maneuvers one is a pet peeve of mine.)

Instead, make skills replace these redundant feats, something like "Using [combat maneuver] provokes an attack of opportunity unless you have X ranks in Tumble" or "You can track creatures if you possess Y ranks in Survival" or the like. If a martial character can avoid wasting a half-dozen feats slots on those and actually get worthwhile feats by assigning a better roll to Int, I'm sure you'd see much fewer Big Stupid Fighter types.

[Otogi]

Hmm, like a Tactics skill? I've seen weapon and attack skills, but I've never seen that. I'll try it out.

[lesser_minion]

I was considering creating a Tactics skill and a Command skill for doing things like improving flanking bonuses, granting or removing morale bonuses, and other related cool things.

A Tactics check might allow you to move characters around in the initiative order, give an ally flanking without a partner, and possibly do a few related minor tricks.

A Command check could be used to move around morale bonuses. I was actually going to write some semblance of a morale system into the combat system to get the best use out of the skill.

[Otogi]

Awesome, any ideas on Command?

[PairO'Dice Lost]

You could pretty much take the Marshal, the Bard, and the White Raven discipline and break up their common effects into the Command or Tactics skill--a bard, a marshal, and a warblade can all grant a move action by level X? A Command check to grant a move action should be at a reasonable DC for a character with X+3 ranks.

[AceofDeath]

Personally, if anything I would keep initiative on dexterity, and move spot and listen over to dex as well. Wisdom helping you see better is just plan ridiculous. (Yes, yes, I know, wisdom is supposed to help you make sense of what you're seeing better. Which is why wisdom boosts things like sense motive and intelligence boosts things like knowledge checks) Things just make so much more sense when the rogue and the ranger have the best eyes and ears, instead of the cleric and druid. And when vision degrades as you get older instead of getting sharper. :smallyuk:


I must admit the same thing as always been on my mind ever since I started playing D'n'D. I'm always trying to make it seem less ridiculous when I'm talking to myself about, when I'm making decisions about homebrew for a scenario. If Wis really grants you a spot bonus, why isn’t it that Stat which governs you range attack too? :smallconfused:Well I guess something a just made to be simple not realistic, I guess the system would need a mental reflexes sort of stat if I ever should understand the system. Or buff wis and let Dex be the key stat for skills like spot….

[Maldraugedhen]

Awareness is not connected with physical finesse. Dexterity is supposed to represent physical finesse. Awareness should not be dependent on dexterity.

Archetypally speaking, it makes sense that the Barbarian and the Rogue would have sharper perception than the cleric (maaybe the druid, depends). That's hardly a reason on its own to change the perception skills' dependent stat, though.

I have found, in my experience, that the more mentally grounded people (which, in D&D terms, corresponds to Wisdom) are the ones who are more perceptive--they pay more attention to what they see, and can therefore realize more quickly what they're looking at.

I think it makes more sense if you think of Spot and Listen checks as being not 'do you see it or hear it' but 'do you notice it'. The same visual or aural scene is presented to all party members, but what each party member pays attention to (and therefore what's mentioned in narration) will vary depending on how much in general they pay attention, and what they usually pay attention to--a variable that, between the mental stats available, makes the most sense connected to Wisdom.

That said, if you're brewing from scratch, you could simply cap off the perception skills at a maximum modifier that changes depending on your standard activities. If you spend a lot of your time scrawling notes in a book in poorly lit dungeons, or creating bright flashes of white light using your hands every few minutes, your eyes aren't going to be as good--and so you can't notice things that require more than a certain level of detail.

I suppose the same could be done with just a scaling penalty to the check, which would be cleaner. Basically: vision damage and hearing damage, which would most be suffered by people that make things flash. Although, fighters and barbarians could very easily suffer hearing damage. A lot of things go 'CLANG' near them on a regular basis.

As to why the same stat doesn't control range attack checks--well, shooting someone doesn't require simply noticing them. It requires good control of the device you're using to shoot them, which should be dexterity.

[imp_fireball]

He's saying use skills more often as feat requirements. Quite a few feats are part of feat chains, not many good ones have complex skill requirements.

I thought he meant that there was a lot of things that require a feat to perform that really shouldn't be all that demanding. There's also the countless crappy feats that aren't worth a slot, weapon focus being one of them.

There's also WIS being used in social conventions. One houserule I was thinking of using was to use an NPC's own WIS modifier as a bonus to a PC's diplomacy check, but only if the PC had a WIS score that was identical to, or higher than, that NPC.

Ie. An NPC might have a WIS of 12 giving him a +1 modifier. Nork, the cleric, has a WIS of 13, giving him an equal modifier. Nork makes a diplomacy check to change the NPC's attitude, applying both his charisma bonus and that PC's WIS modifier (and any diplomacy ranks, etc.).

The logic behind this is that WIS allows you to discern another character's position and opinions and to better relate to them in that sense. But if said character has a lower WIS score, then there's less of a modifier since they don't realize that the PC is trying to relate to them better.

It's a little complicated, but it should do the trick. Somewhat. :smalleek:

Also note that it was never intended to be a diplomacy fix. Consult the giant's article for that one. :smallwink:


Things just make so much more sense when the rogue and the ranger have the best eyes and ears, instead of the cleric and druid

Actually, rangers are supposed to use WIS as well. It's for their spells. Jeeze.

Also, why are you taking the Giant's joke all that seriously? Clearly, it's GM discretion what happens when you get older. Old people get wiser, and that's a FACT, but there's no reason why you shouldn't implement other things like the affects of alzheimers or some physical deficiency beyond -3 STR - which is very little compared to what can actually happen when you reach venerable in real life... I don't imagine that I could lift even a tenth of what I can lift right now at age 20 when I'm 80 (unless I were some hard ass like Chuck Norris; also remember that D&D characters never get fat or slim down or go to bathroom. Ever.).


Although, fighters and barbarians could very easily suffer hearing damage. A lot of things go 'CLANG' near them on a regular basis.

But adventurers are supposed to all be bad ass wisecracking dealers of justice, so they shouldn't all risk deafness. Deafness could be wholly possible, but it should be somewhat assumed that martial characters have 'tougher ears/eyes' or whatever.

I mean, eventually you'd get to the point where every soldier returning home from WW2 is deaf and blind and has an STD (reference to that list rules that made mundane STDs more dangerous than a dozen knife wounds).

[Ichneumon]

Depending on your setting you could also use the "mind combat", optional rules from Oriental Advetures, from while to while. That would also increase the necessity of having certain high mental scores.

[Jane_Smith]

Small little improvement; but its an idea...

Int: Typically when your intelligence bonus permenantly increases, your bonus skill points from previous levels are unaffected. A small improvement would be to make your bonus skill points retroactive - thus if you start the game with 17 intelligence, and wait until level 8 to get up to 18 intelligence, on 8th level you would get 11 bonus skill points (1st to 8th level) in addition to your normally gained. You could explain this as 'suddenly growing new awareness of previously known facts', etc.

[lesser_minion]

I half-agree on the skill points thing - while it's more realistic for int-derived skill points to not be retroactive, you really end up with a rule that creates a metagame advantage (like switching in Warhammer) for certain characters. A solution could be to give characters a 'skill points limit' based on Intelligence and level, and require (or assume) IC effort to gain the actual skill points.

It might be worth looking for new ways to determine skill point allocation by character, however.

Some other changes to skills which might be interesting:

Talents. Give players something every few ranks they gain in a class skill. Makes a nice replacement for doubling the cost of certain skills, and you can limit the number of talents a player may take as well. Don't quadruple skill points at 1st level, and set the limit on how many points you may spend on a skill to the lower value out of 4 or character level. This allows characters to 'grow' a little more into their roles as they gain levels. Morale scores could be based on one of the mental stats. Then have consequences for being reduced to half or zero morale points. And allow Command to be used to increase a character's morale.

[Otogi]

Thanks, guys, I have all the stats planned out now. Take a look and tell me if you think their balanced and if I can improve them.

Strength is used for melee attacks and damage, along with encumbrance and Fortitude rolls if higher than Constitution.

Agility is used for ranged attacks, a bonus to AC while in light armor if higher than Intelligence, and Reflex rolls if higher than Intelligence.

Constitution is used for determining the bonus to HP, some Mutations (just like d20 future/apocalypse) and Fortitude rolls if higher than Strength.

Intelligence is used to determine your bonus to Tech (gadgets usable once per encounter), a bonus to AC while in light armor if higher than Dexterity, bonus skill points and for Reflex rolls if higher than Dexterity.

Wisdom is used to determine to bonus to Psionics (psychic powers usable once per encounter), damage healed by the First Aid and Repair skill, initiative checks and for Will rolls if higher than Charisma.

Charm is used to determine the bonus discount on bartering as well as Will rolls if higher than Wisdom.

Luck is used to determine the amount and bonus to survivor points (like action points, but less powerful and use once per day).

How does that look?

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Wisdom is used to determine[...]damage healed by the First Aid and Repair skill

First Aid makes sense for Wisdom, but Repair seems like more of an Intelligence thing to me.


Charm is used to determine the bonus discount on bartering as well as Will rolls if higher than Wisdom.

Luck is used to determine the amount and bonus to survivor points (like action points, but less powerful and use once per day).

These both seem to do less than the other abilities, so might I suggest combining them into Heroism? Highly Heroic characters develop a good reputation that gets them better goods and lodging, have a strong sense of courage/destiny/whatever that lets them resist anything that would sway them from their path, and are favored by fate and/or luck. Un-Heroic characters are shunned by merchants as dishonorable or untrustworthy, have easily-swayed opinions, and are fairly unexceptional.

This wouldn't be a hero vs. antihero divide, or even good guy vs. bad guy, but more of a PC vs. NPC--the PCs are the protagonists and tend to have high Heroism, while NPCs are the background and don't. If you want to play a rags-to-riches character, he can be unHeroic while still being a PC; if you want to have a legendary NPC who strongly influenced the world, he can be Heroic just fine.

[Otogi]

First Aid makes sense for Wisdom, but Repair seems like more of an Intelligence thing to me.



Yeah, I know, but there are mechanical characters and I wanted it to be an all around heal stats.

These both seem to do less than the other abilities, so might I suggest combining them into Heroism? Highly Heroic characters develop a good reputation that gets them better goods and lodging, have a strong sense of courage/destiny/whatever that lets them resist anything that would sway them from their path, and are favored by fate and/or luck. Un-Heroic characters are shunned by merchants as dishonorable or untrustworthy, have easily-swayed opinions, and are fairly unexceptional.

This wouldn't be a hero vs. antihero divide, or even good guy vs. bad guy, but more of a PC vs. NPC--the PCs are the protagonists and tend to have high Heroism, while NPCs are the background and don't. If you want to play a rags-to-riches character, he can be unHeroic while still being a PC; if you want to have a legendary NPC who strongly influenced the world, he can be Heroic just fine.[/QUOTE]

Their not as low as you think, really. You gain a 5% discount for every modifier of Charisma (which are also linked to feats that give a companion, buff and leadership abilities) and action points replenish each day and pretty much do the same thing (and this is a 3d6 system, which is pretty powerful). Still, I see the point with dabbling into abilities instead of specializing in them, but the game is post-apocalyptic and Gamma World in flavor at that, so I don't know if it would fit. It also might be more powerful (don't know how much more) than all the other stats. It's a good idea, especially for low to mid-fantasy games, but it feels out of place to me.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Their not as low as you think, really. You gain a 5% discount for every modifier of Charisma (which are also linked to feats that give a companion, buff and leadership abilities) and action points replenish each day and pretty much do the same thing (and this is a 3d6 system, which is pretty powerful). Still, I see the point with dabbling into abilities instead of specializing in them, but the game is post-apocalyptic and Gamma World in flavor at that, so I don't know if it would fit. It also might be more powerful (don't know how much more) than all the other stats. It's a good idea, especially for low to mid-fantasy games, but it feels out of place to me.

It's not so much the power level as the number of uses. If you decide "Hey, I can deal with market price," you can pretty much dump Charm, but you have to say yes to "I don't really care about ranged attacks," "I'll worry about my AC some other way," and "I don't need good reflexes" to dump Agility--and while Int subs for some of Agility's uses, you can't dump both, which encourages you not to dump either one.

Now, if companions/mounts/cohorts/etc. are going to be a major part of the game, that might make Charm worth splitting off into its own stat, since even a single cohort makes a good stat worthwhile. Likewise, when you said action points "use once per day," I thought you meant that you have X and can use 1 each day, but if you have X and they regenerate each day, that might be enough to split off into its own stat.

Basically, the point I'm trying to convey here is that the fewer uses each ability has, the better those uses have to be to prevent dumping. With the additional uses you just mentioned, they might be worth keeping apart, but of course without us knowing the exact details you'd have to decide that for yourself.

[Otogi]

You're absolutely right! I wanted to make players think twice about dumping stats, but the limited use of Charisma is assuring it's already targeted as a dump stat. Again! How could I have been so foolish!? /melodrama

The first time I made them, they were based on astral constructs with a menu of abilities, and were as broken as your hip in the next 40 years after being tackled by a cybernetic gorilla. Now I'm scaling it down to be like a druid's animal companion, or maybe more like a ranger's. I've seen a homebrew where you make a Charisma check every time you meet an NPC and it effects their attitude toward you (and only you, not your party). I think with a little more work, I can make it more concrete and make Charisma more worth while.

That's exactly what Luck does, now that I think about it. Does that sound alright?

Thanks a lot, Dice. Maybe you can help me through messages and we can edit it to look and play a lot better. :smallbiggrin:

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Now I'm scaling it down to be like a druid's animal companion, or maybe more like a ranger's.

[...]

That's exactly what Luck does, now that I think about it. Does that sound alright?

Looks good from the description, though as I said we'd have to see exact mechanics for a final judgment.


Thanks a lot, Dice. Maybe you can help me through messages and we can edit it to look and play a lot better. :smallbiggrin:

Certainly. I'm working on some ability use tweaks of my own right now, so we'd both benefit from collaboration.

[imp_fireball]

but Repair seems like more of an Intelligence thing to me.

Actually when you look at a machine in all its greasiness, you can't expect to take fact to working with your hands. You've gotta be aware of all the little things involved in repair. If you repair one thing you might break something else. You gotta be careful not to lose things as well. Wis is also used for profession, where you have to keep track of all the little things involved in running a business. It's all the same. After all, we're only talking about ability modifiers here.

You could equally argue that first aid requires intelligence because doctors are intelligent and have to study biology and first aid is dirived from those scientific principles.

[lesser_minion]

Personally, I would consider using Intelligence for repair simply because of the need to analyse what is going on - Intelligence lets you analyse things more than an awareness or perception stat would.

The problem with having Repair as a 'heal' skill for constructs is really that they are unlikely to actually be at the level of sophistication of the human body. Shoot a construct, and you might punch into some ablative armour (hitpoint damage). Actual damage to internal components is likely to necessitate the replacement of those components - before you can revive the construct from some kind of 'emergency shutdown'. Basically, there is likely to be little or no internal damage until the robot hits the negatives (you could, of course, damage the mechanical components).

So the question is: how do you field repair ablative armour plating? It gets easier if you have smart armour plating (it could be designed to deform into a particular shape when heat, electrical current or magnetic flux is applied), or science-fiction nanomachines (reconstructs the damaged component). Otherwise all you can do is pop out the damaged plates and replace them.

To revive a construct from shutdown, you would presumably have to mess around with circuit boards and soldering irons for a while.

Not all of those are absolutely necessary, and many of them are extremely small and light, so you could easily offer an 'emergency construct repair unit' with 2-3 uses.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Actually when you look at a machine in all its greasiness, you can't expect to take fact to working with your hands. You've gotta be aware of all the little things involved in repair. If you repair one thing you might break something else. You gotta be careful not to lose things as well. Wis is also used for profession, where you have to keep track of all the little things involved in running a business. It's all the same. After all, we're only talking about ability modifiers here.

This is true, but since Int is associated with things like Appraise and Disable Device, it makes the most sense to associate Int with Repair, if only so someone whose schtick is "good with machinery" doesn't suffer by splitting his stats to cover two bases.


You could equally argue that first aid requires intelligence because doctors are intelligent and have to study biology and first aid is dirived from those scientific principles.

Very true. It's based on Wis mostly for two reasons, I think: first, ancient medicines were more homeopathic and/or based on humors or other not-exactly-accurate concepts, so it wasn't exactly a practice of studying diseases and deriving cures methodically but rather "Hey, this thing cured him, let's keep using it and try to guess why," which is more intuitive. Second is, of course, the metagame issue--divine casters are the best magical healers, so it would make sense that they be the best mundane healers.

[imp_fireball]

I was also thinking that a medic would be more aware of when a person is paralyzed or has a broken arm or whatever (or something new altogether); that takes wisdom and instinct, not books.

Also, in a modern game, if you had a wise doctor, it'd be interesting to be able to deal with diseases (or even new ones) quickly using technology instead of just 'cure disease' every day.