PDA

View Full Version : How do you play characters dumber than yourself?



WarKitty
2010-08-16, 08:03 AM
I don't mean the really dumb I-have-3-intelligence type. I mean your academically inclined honors student trying to play an intelligence 9 character. Somehow I'm having trouble figuring out how to play someone that doesn't think of everything off the bat without making them really stupid.

apologies if the post sounds too much like bragging

DemLep
2010-08-16, 08:08 AM
Unless your in some special school or shut off from the rest of the world. Just think of the average person around. 9 int is average/slightly below average. You know stuff, but not everything. You can be rational, but probably not as a default.

WarKitty
2010-08-16, 08:10 AM
Unless your in some special school or shut off from the rest of the world. Just think of the average person around. 9 int is average/slightly below average. You know stuff, but not everything. You can be rational, but probably not as a default.

Heh. The trouble is I over-plan as a rule in RL. Seriously it doesn't shut off. I know roughly what it would be, but I'm not entirely sure how to approach a problem without the I-have-14-plans-to-deal-with-this that's my normal approach.

DemLep
2010-08-16, 08:13 AM
A C student is a 9 (about). You can plan ahead, but don't over do it. Remember you're not going to think of everything.

What are the rest of your stats? I characters action based on one stat are kind of hard to show.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-16, 08:15 AM
Don't plan too much. Try to come up with decisions in the timespan of a round or two instead of while everyone else is acting. When you see something ingeniously clever, hand it over to the guy with more int.

WarKitty
2010-08-16, 08:17 AM
A C student is a 9 (about). You can plan ahead, but don't over do it. Remember you're not going to think of everything.

What are the rest of your stats? I characters action based on one stat are kind of hard to show.

High wisdom (23) due to racial bonuses. Most eveything else is in the average range (9-11) except strength which is a 5. Playing a druid (bonus cookie to whoever can guess my race!).

Greenish
2010-08-16, 08:19 AM
I play with pointbuy, so I've never had to play a character dumper than I am. :smallwink:

[Edit]: You're a cunning anthropomorphic bat.

WarKitty
2010-08-16, 08:20 AM
I play with pointbuy, so I've never had to play a character dumper than I am. :smallwink:

You haven't had to play with more dump stats than you have in RL? :smallwink:

Kylarra
2010-08-16, 08:21 AM
Just stop thinking of new plans after the first one and refine it rather than going into contingencies.

Tengu_temp
2010-08-16, 08:23 AM
High wisdom (23) due to racial bonuses. Most eveything else is in the average range (9-11) except strength which is a 5. Playing a druid (bonus cookie to whoever can guess my race!).

Anthropomorphic Bat?

Anyway, for high wisdom but low intelligence, you think slow, but have a lot of simple, down-to-earth wisdom. You won't come up with a brilliant plan on your own, unless you have a lot of time to think about it, but you can judge whether the plan of your teammates is good or not.

DemLep
2010-08-16, 08:24 AM
Wow. Okay I'd say Snake-Aes was the right idea.

Thank being said with your ridiculously high wisdom, compared to the rest of your stats, your going to probably pick up on things. You just won't know what to do with them, or you'll be ably to use what you do know exetremely well, but when it comes to picking up new things you'll have a hard time.

You'll probably lean on your wisdom, maybe to much. You'll act on instinct because your instinct is almost always right, but you won't think ahead to often. You'll know what to do when you need to do it. Or something along that line.

That's how I would play the character, take what you want from it. Other might have other good view points as well.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-16, 08:25 AM
Anthropomorphic Bat?

Anyway, for high wisdom but low intelligence, you think slow, but have a lot of simple, down-to-earth wisdom. You won't come up with a brilliant plan on your own, unless you have a lot of time to think about it, but you can judge whether the plan of your teammates is good or not.

More importantly, it'll be able to adapt on-the-fly extremely well, but it won't come up with creative ways of using the environment on its own often.

WarKitty
2010-08-16, 08:25 AM
Anthropomorphic Bat?

Anyway, for high wisdom but low intelligence, you think slow, but have a lot of simple, down-to-earth wisdom. You won't come up with a brilliant plan on your own, unless you have a lot of time to think about it, but you can judge whether the plan of your teammates is good or not.

Have a virtual cookie. I couldn't resist a bit of optimizing on this one.

Psyx
2010-08-16, 09:53 AM
If your wisdom is high then don't participate in planning: Naysay.

Keep quiet, let the plans trickle in, and then point out the obvious holes in plans, from a common sense (rather than higher learning) perspective.

Telonius
2010-08-16, 09:59 AM
23 Wis, 9 Int... As a poker player, he doesn't know any of the odds. But he has a great knack for telling how confident the other players are in their hands. This guy is the person who has great gut instincts, but isn't terribly good at proving their points in debate. "Don't bother me with the numbers, it's just not gonna happen." He's not dumb by any means, and very rarely is he taken in by a con. With that 23 Wis, he knows his own limits, and is not afraid to ask trusted experts for advice.

EDIT: When critiquing, critique in a more general way. "That seems a little complicated," rather than, "For that to work, these different things (list them), each with a 50% possibility of failure, will have to happen. We can't guarantee it; this is just too risky."

HunterOfJello
2010-08-16, 10:00 AM
How do you play characters dumber than yourself?


I would think the reverse would be more difficult.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-16, 10:02 AM
I would think the reverse would be more difficult.

Both can me emulated to a certain level. Quick-thinking is characteristic of intelligence so smarter characters should let the players muse on their round's worth of actions some more than dumber characters.

WarKitty
2010-08-16, 10:03 AM
I would think the reverse would be more difficult.

Ironically I find characters with lower stats to be challenging to play properly. I could role-play someone smarter than I am by a combination of metagaming and simply taking more time than the character has. Someone with lower stats is hard because you have to figure what they *wouldn't* think of without making them a complete idiot.

hamishspence
2010-08-16, 10:04 AM
In Star Trek- Mirror Mirror- Spock points out that it is fairly easy to masquerade as someone more barbaric than yourself, but much harder to masquerade as someone more civilized.

Maybe it's a bit like that for how to play a dumb character when you're unusually smart- all you need to do is "dumb down" a bit.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-16, 10:04 AM
Ironically I find characters with lower stats to be challenging to play properly. I could role-play someone smarter than I am by a combination of metagaming and simply taking more time than the character has. Someone with lower stats is hard because you have to figure what they *wouldn't* think of without making them a complete idiot.

I don't play dumb characters. I just can't stand not being able to come up with clever ideas without turning all of them into epiphanies.

DemLep
2010-08-16, 10:08 AM
I would think the reverse would be more difficult.

Some people are too smart to be able to think like some one less smart then themselves. No insult intended, but they probably spend to much over-thinking things from a narrow, not necessarily limited, view point. Because they lack the knowledge of how people look at things who are of less intelligence they do not know how to act as they would. That being said let me say again, I mean nothing against warkitty or people of this mind set. It is solely an observation of mine on how such a problem may come about. Okay now you can start yelling at me for whatever reason you can get out of that.

WarKitty
2010-08-16, 10:10 AM
Some people are too smart to be able to think like some one less smart then themselves. No insult intended, but they probably spend to much over-thinking things from a narrow, not necessarily limited, view point. Because they lack the knowledge of how people look at things who are of less intelligence they do not know how to act as they would. That being said let me say again, I mean nothing against warkitty or people of this mind set. It is solely an observation of mine on how such a problem may come about. Okay now you can start yelling at me for whatever reason you can get out of that.

:smalltongue: I like you. Did I mention my RL wisdom score sucks? No sense motive at all.

DemLep
2010-08-16, 10:13 AM
:smalltongue: I like you. Did I mention my RL wisdom score sucks? No sense motive at all.

Thanks. Probably what's working in my favor.:smallbiggrin:

Earthwalker
2010-08-16, 10:16 AM
In your character background give yourself some simple flaws. Not the I take this flaw for a free feat flaws. I mean just odd ways of acting and thinking. Things like

Thinks Rogues are the best class.
Hates all lizards and lizardmen.
Thinks Fire is the best damage type.

And so on, you can add to this as you go.

Now when you get into a tactical situation go thru your list and work out what to do. If the Rogue in the group is getting attacked defend the rogue, if lizards are there then attack the lizards first. Always open up with fire spells even if its not the best tactic.
Make as many of these as you like, you can develop more as you go along.
Now spend your time thinking about why your character believes these things and still acts on them (to use up your processing power so you can keep it simple)
After so long of doing this, like giving up a tactical advantage to protect the rogue your group are going to think you have low int.

valadil
2010-08-16, 10:23 AM
Make it psychological. Figure out how your character is unintelligent. Then figure out how he reacts to that. How does your character feel when he doesn't get something? How does he feel when other people imply that his plans suck? How does he feel when they talk down to him? Does he try and overcompensate for his unintelligence?

Basically you should get so wrapped up in the psychology of your character that you don't have time to think about planning.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-08-16, 10:42 AM
The RP advice given thus far has been pretty solid, but I think it needs to be said that you shouldn't be trying to play off of "intelligence" at all. Instead, come up with a persona who does things in a "less smart" fashion and go with it.

Let's say you consider yourself highly intelligent and like to plan out every little detail. Fine; when you're playing a "less intelligent" character, do the opposite. Don't sweat the small stuff; don't plan out every details; don't spend all your time asking questions about ancillary issues. You can do this with any mental stat.

EXAMPLE
I may not consider myself to have a very high WIS but I am currently playing a low WIS, high INT barbarian. Since I am trying to play a low WIS character, I consider what I'd think a high WIS character would do - and I do the opposite. If deliberations have been going on for awhile, or a NPC is giving us the run-around, I interrupt and speak bluntly on what needs to be done.

Person_Man
2010-08-16, 10:48 AM
You may be over analyzing the situation a bit. Most actions are a result of social conditioning, not intelligence.

Think about how you spend your day. Waking up, getting dressed, driving to work, surfing the internet, attending a meeting, having lunch, surfing the internet, writing something, surfing the internet, driving home, cooking dinner, spending time with your spouse or friends, surfing the internet, watching tv, going to bed. How many decisions did you make where your relative level of intelligence actually means anything?

You may argue that people who are more intelligent say and do different things then less intelligent people. For example, and intelligent person might discuss books, computers, and history, whereas a less intelligent person might discuss celebrities, tv, and hair products. But that's largely about cultural tastes, not intelligence. There are plenty of geniuses who obsess about lolcats, whereas my illiterate barber can speak 4 languages and articulately discuss the global economic crisis.

Intelligence is largely about how good your memory is, how quickly you learn new things, and your reasoning/problem solving skills. Memory in D&D is largely handled by the Knowledge Skills and how well the player takes notes while the DM describes things. Learning new things is handled by leveling up and learning new Skills. Reason/problem solving is easy to tone down - just don't be the first person to jump on a riddle or puzzle.

So I really don't see what the issue is.

Greenish
2010-08-16, 10:52 AM
illiterate barberHe misread the class description?

WarKitty
2010-08-16, 11:16 AM
In your character background give yourself some simple flaws. Not the I take this flaw for a free feat flaws. I mean just odd ways of acting and thinking. Things like

Thinks Rogues are the best class.
Hates all lizards and lizardmen.
Thinks Fire is the best damage type.

And so on, you can add to this as you go.

Now when you get into a tactical situation go thru your list and work out what to do. If the Rogue in the group is getting attacked defend the rogue, if lizards are there then attack the lizards first. Always open up with fire spells even if its not the best tactic.
Make as many of these as you like, you can develop more as you go along.
Now spend your time thinking about why your character believes these things and still acts on them (to use up your processing power so you can keep it simple)
After so long of doing this, like giving up a tactical advantage to protect the rogue your group are going to think you have low int.


Make it psychological. Figure out how your character is unintelligent. Then figure out how he reacts to that. How does your character feel when he doesn't get something? How does he feel when other people imply that his plans suck? How does he feel when they talk down to him? Does he try and overcompensate for his unintelligence?

Basically you should get so wrapped up in the psychology of your character that you don't have time to think about planning.

The trouble is that sounds like a *really* stupid character. I'm playing a character on the slightly low end of average; I don't want to make her into a complete idiot but I don't want to have a "has a plan for everything" like my last character (16 int).

valadil
2010-08-16, 11:35 AM
The trouble is that sounds like a *really* stupid character. I'm playing a character on the slightly low end of average; I don't want to make her into a complete idiot but I don't want to have a "has a plan for everything" like my last character (16 int).

Heh. I'm so used to D&D with its point buy that I figured all characters either had 18 int or 8.

Anyway, for an average int character I think you need to be asking questions instead of providing answers. But if you pick the right questions, the other characters will pick up on your idea.

For instance, let's say your mission is to infiltrate the local thieves guild. The group has already decided they'll try and befriend a thief and then get into the guild from there. But you're stuck on how to find that first thief.

An intelligent character would offer up:

We'll set a trap for him. Dress Percy up in some noble's clothes with a feathered hat and expensive perfume. Send him out drinking. Percy will spend gold, making it obvious that he has more. Then he'll pass out at the bar. Gorak, you sit two tables behind Percy and watch his coin purse. When it gets stolen, we have our thief.

Whereas a reasonably intelligent but not stunningly bright one might suggest:

What if we caught one of them in the act? Like, if we knew what they were going to steal, we'd be sitting there waiting.

I guess what I'm suggesting is that a slightly less bright character can still offer up an idea, but leave the implementation to the other players. By phrasing it as a question you make it sound like you're less sure that it's a viable option.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-08-16, 11:41 AM
I guess what I'm suggesting is that a slightly less bright character can still offer up an idea, but leave the implementation to the other players. By phrasing it as a question you make it sound like you're less sure that it's a viable option.
Heh, that's a good one.

I'm constantly asking other characters to roll skill checks that my Barbarian simply isn't trained in.

"Hey, Ms. Spot-Check, do you see any traps on that door?"
"Gee Mr. Wizard, do you think those runes over there are important?"

The one thing you can't do that on is Social Skill Checks - which made my low CHA character a little awkward to play :smalltongue:

WarKitty
2010-08-16, 11:44 AM
Heh, that's a good one.

I'm constantly asking other characters to roll skill checks that my Barbarian simply isn't trained in.

"Hey, Ms. Spot-Check, do you see any traps on that door?"
"Gee Mr. Wizard, do you think those runes over there are important?"

The one thing you can't do that on is Social Skill Checks - which made my low CHA character a little awkward to play :smalltongue:

Which is the one thing that *isn't* a problem - as the high wisdom person I'm the designated Roller of Sense Motive, complete with a to be determined system of communicating to the designated Roller of Diplomacy.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-16, 11:48 AM
An intelligent character would offer up:

We'll set a trap for him. Dress Percy up in some noble's clothes with a feathered hat and expensive perfume. Send him out drinking. Percy will spend gold, making it obvious that he has more. Then he'll pass out at the bar. Gorak, you sit two tables behind Percy and watch his coin purse. When it gets stolen, we have our thief.

And this, sir, is the ultimate example of a high int low wis setup. Befriending a thief by catching him in the middle of his job is very likely to send him panicked, and very very suspicious of "those guys who suddenly ganged on me"

Weimann
2010-08-16, 12:02 PM
I'd think the reverse would be more problematic, in fact :P

It can't be that hard to just hold back, right? Just stop thiunking about a problem, or at least don't annonce your ideas after the first one.

WarKitty
2010-08-16, 12:04 PM
I'd think the reverse would be more problematic, in fact :P

It can't be that hard to just hold back, right? Just stop thiunking about a problem, or at least don't annonce your ideas after the first one.

It's the just hold back without holding too much back that's the challenge. An INT of 3 to 5 is easy to play...it's the character that's not that intelligent but isn't stupid either that is the problem.

Acero
2010-08-16, 12:16 PM
Grammer goes a long way. Just don't be as verbose

Cyrion
2010-08-16, 12:21 PM
One of the differences between high and low Int will also be breadth of expertise. High int people tend to dabble in lots of things and apply a little bit of knowledge with a lot of leverage. Low int people can be very, very good at some things, but they tend not to have the breadth. Think Durnik the smith from Eddings' Belgariad.

Also, focus on your strength- Wisdom. In addition to what others have said, remember that Wisdom is a measure of will. When you decide to do something, you're going to have the will power to see it through.

WarKitty
2010-08-16, 12:42 PM
Grammer goes a long way. Just don't be as verbose

You've never seen my high-int characters. They don't talk more than the necessary minimum.

chiasaur11
2010-08-16, 12:57 PM
Simple.

Ask yourself "What would Scott Pilgrim do".

Book Pilgrim, that is.

Film Pilgrim is notably more intelligent.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-08-16, 01:01 PM
You've never seen my high-int characters. They don't talk more than the necessary minimum.
...so, are you still having trouble figuring out how to do this?

If you play a lot of high-Int characters, then play the low-Int one with an "opposite" persona. Be verbose where you would normally be laconic, act when you'd normally stop-and-think, etc.

Lord Raziere
2010-08-16, 01:01 PM
I know how.

just go "eh, I don't feel like thinking right now, I'm just gonna do this."
people who plan less tend to act more cause they spend less time thinking about said plans, keep yourself in the moment, spend little time thinking about the consequences of your actions and just let go and do things.

valadil
2010-08-16, 02:01 PM
Another option that I haven't seen yet, but that caters more to your style would be to over plan. Play a character who absolutely has to work out the details in advance. Over engineer your plans to the point of ridicule. Make up dumb contingencies (and how dumb these are can vary with the character (ie, int 8 might make a separate plan for each color the king's cape could be. Int 11 might have a contingency for what to do if the wine gets too warm and nobody will want to drink it, so you have to get a tiny ice elemental to chill it, making the wine drinkable enough that your victim will get a full dose of the poison in it)). Basically you'll be putting your brain power to problems that don't exist yet. And sabotaging yourself by making plans that are too dependent on certain events, and actually end up crumbling when the enemy comes close. You still get to think with this character, you just won't be doing so in an organized or effective manner.

WarKitty
2010-08-16, 02:50 PM
...so, are you still having trouble figuring out how to do this?

If you play a lot of high-Int characters, then play the low-Int one with an "opposite" persona. Be verbose where you would normally be laconic, act when you'd normally stop-and-think, etc.

The main problem is not playing TOO stupid. Which I've said at least 5 times in this thread. An opposites approach would work for a severely low-int character, but I don't see how it would work with a low-ish but not too far out character.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-08-16, 03:09 PM
The main problem is not playing TOO stupid. Which I've said at least 5 times in this thread. An opposites approach would work for a severely low-int character, but I don't see how it would work with a low-ish but not too far out character.
I'm not sure you're following me.

Acting in an opposite fashion is not the same to thinking in an opposite fashion. As you've noted, it's very hard to stop thinking as "intelligently" as you believe you are; however it is quite easy to start acting against your initial instincts.

I've taken as given that your laconic, plan-everything character is how you envision a "smart" character acting. He is not thinking any more intelligently than you, as a player - but he is acting as you believe an intelligent person should.

Now, consider trying to act in an opposite fashion - verbose and act-first. You'll still be as smart as ever, but your character will be taking actions in a fashion that seems "un-intelligent" to you. Good! Will those actions be moronic? They'll still be planned by the same mind as your "intelligent" character's, won't they?

Gnaeus
2010-08-16, 03:30 PM
In my experience, the more fully you get into character the easier this will be. Try to pick out a couple of good models from books or film that you feel accurately reflect the intelligence of your character, and ask yourself what that person would do. If you can, adopt a distinctive accent that demonstrates your characters low level of education. If appropriate to the gaming group, use mannerisms or dress that help you get into the character. When you think of some brilliant strategy, if you can't wrap your head around how your guy would express it, it probably isn't in character for him.

Ormur
2010-08-16, 04:35 PM
If you already don't talk much as high int characters just don't come up with elaborate plans and don't use the knowledge skills very much. It's not like 8 or 9 int people can't function in most scenarios it's just that talking to them about complex issues might not be very fun.

Knaight
2010-08-16, 04:58 PM
A simple solution is simply not to play up the intelligence. This character has very good common sense, and is somewhat charismatic, it wouldn't be unbelievable for them to place a lot of trust in intuition. They would be somewhat impulsive, not think things through well, have minimal trust in statistics, and other such things, while not actually stupid.

In short, simulate low intelligence by ignoring it, simulate extremely low intelligence by focusing on stupidity.

Curmudgeon
2010-08-16, 06:50 PM
Heh. I'm so used to D&D with its point buy that I figured all characters either had 18 int or 8.
All the characters I play use point buy and have a starting INT of 14 without racial adjustments (and usually 16 with). Skill points aren't retroactive with INT gains, so you've got to get the right start.

(And no, I generally don't play INT-based spellcasters.)

As an aid in playing characters below your player INT, I recommend lack of sleep. This works very well at gaming conventions. :smallbiggrin:

Lycar
2010-08-16, 07:10 PM
Personally I have so far avoided playing 'dumb(er)' characters.

Mostly because I'm addicted to skill points but also because I'm not confident I could pull it off convincingly. Yeah so I'm a coward... :smalltongue:

At first I though of a not-so-smart person as someone who steps off the cliff with a 'I'll do something now. I'll worry about the ground when it comes up' mindset. Although that might be more a function of wisdom really.

Maybe chess is a good analogy: To be a really good player, you have to be able to think several turns ahead and figure out what options your own moves open up to your opponent and which of those he is likely to use.

The smarter someone is, the more steps they will think ahead. And the wiser he is, the better he will be at correctly predicting his opponent's moves. If he is not so smart, he won't plan that many moves ahead but with wisdom, he will still be able to make most of it.

As for the example about trying to befriend a thief by catching him 'in the act': Wisdom will tell you that that might not be a good idea. Wisdom might tell you that you might need to stage a situation where one of the party helps the thief escape, say, the wrath of authority. Intelligence then helps making a detailed plan. As in: The smarter you are, the faster the pieces fall into place. Others can come up with a good plan too but they will need longer. This could also be because they follow paths of thought, only to find them a dead end that another person would have dismissed from the start.

So maybe, if you think you have a good idea, hold it back and present some bad ones first and then move your way up. It's supposed to work for committees after all. :smallwink:

Lycar

Edhelras
2010-08-17, 04:50 AM
Like many others, I find it harder to play a low-INT character than an intelligent one. Maybe this is because I, like probably most of those interested in DND style games, have mental qualities similar to those built into the INT ability. Which does NOT necessarily translate into being a very bright, likeable and highly functional human being - there's a reason the mental abilities are divided into 3 aspects - characters or live persons who min-max INT, WIS and CHA to fit a particular class would often struggle in RL, in my experience.
The main reason I prefer moderat-to-high-INT characters is that I have an unsatiable need for skill points. Thus I would rarely play with less than INT 14, so the problem with playing dumb characters isn't that big for me.

It's quite easy to play a HIGH-INT character: Mostly by benefitting from 1) access to all the rules and options, by owning or searching the web for rulebooks and other source material. An intelligent character will be able to see a lot of options in any given situation, and calculate the best solution. With my books, I can supplement my own mental faculties, and for instance use lists of spells that do this or that sort of damage. 2) One aspect of high intelligence is being able to produce the answer quickly. But in a turn-based game, and with separate sessisons, I can compensate for my slower thinking by spending more time on decision-making.

A low-INT character (i.e., lower INT than myself), on the other hand, would neither have access to so much information, so many options, nor would he be able to retrieve or produce that information quickly enough to use it when in a tight spot. So, this would be a way to play dumber-than-yourself:

1) Leggo of all your sourcebooks. Don't spend so much time looking up fancy spells or other rules that might enhance your performance. If your character is physically strong and able, of course you should study rules concerning purely physical prowess.
2) Allow yourself less time to think when at the gaming table. You might even impose on yourself concrete time limitations (using one of those chess watches?). You might still surprise yourself with ingenious solutions to complicated problems, but it would be more a result of luck than the product of intelligent deliberation.

My favorite example of a high-INT character would be Araevin, the sun elf wizard protagonist of Richard Bakers "The Last Mythal" series. In many and any situations, he carefully studies and reflects, using his own knowledge and searching other sources of knowledge to produce the best solution. This thoughtfulness is something I associate with high INT.
As for low-INT characters... well, the Belkster surely qualifies?

A high WIS character, IMO, would mostly play with a lot of Sense Motive checks, untrained and automatically successful, if need be. He should be very good at sensing other people's feelings, and intuitively feel that "something is going on".
The classical high WIS character might be someone like the Empath (Forrester Whitaker's character in the movie Species) who can establish almost a psionic link to other creatures. I also think that Inspector Colombo in the TV series might be a High-WIS character, the way he notices small things in the behaviour of the people he interrogates, to reach conclusions that might seem intellectually implausible.
A high-WIS person should as well have well-tuned physical senses, like vision and hearing, and should for instance be good at noticing the natural conditions, predicting weather and such. So you might well throw in comments on the weather, the condition of the trees, the abscence of animals, the beauty of the scenery, the condition of the farm buildings etc.

I guess a typical low-INT low-WIS (and low-CHA, for that sake) character might be Gimli the Dwarf in LOTR (at least the film version of him), walking along rarely noticing his surroundings, and displaying little thoughtfulness or deliberation, preferring to charge ahead with his only attack option.

Telonius
2010-08-17, 07:18 AM
I also think that Inspector Colombo in the TV series might be a High-WIS character, the way he notices small things in the behaviour of the people he interrogates, to reach conclusions that might seem intellectually implausible.

Colombo's definitely high-wis, but he's also very high-int. I believe there was one episode where he basically aced the MENSA (or fictionalized equivalent) test.