The Definitive INT vs. WIS Distinction

[DrFunkenstein]

TL;DR: If an animal would be better at it than a human, it's Wisdom. If a human would be better at it than an animal, it's Intelligence.

In D&D, few things spark more debate than what is the distinction between Intelligence and Wisdom. I have found most explanations unsatisfactory, but I stumbled upon this trend when looking at the Monster Manual.

Generally, animals have above-human-average Wisdom (12+), and well-below-human-average Intelligence (4-). It follows that a human is more likely to succeed on an Intelligence check than an animal, and an animal is more likely to succeed on a Wisdom check than a human.

We can turn this into a heuristic for deciding if something falls under INT or WIS: who would be better at it? If a human would, it's an INT thing; if an animal would, it's a WIS thing.

When we look at the Skills connected to each Ability Score, this typically holds true. For WIS, Animals are generally better than humans at reading emotional states (Insight), sensing their surroundings (Perception), and surviving in the wilderness (Survival).

For INT, humans are clearly more knowledgeable of Arcana, History, and Religion than animals. Investigation hinges on reasoning and extrapolation from observations, which is clearly human. Nature is akin to the natural sciences which require human intellect to understand.

Animal Handling is an interesting toss-up, depending on how you look at it, IMHO. Meanwhile, I have always felt Medicine should be an INT skill. I suspect WotC made it WIS because Clerics are more medicinal than Wizards, and Clerics use WIS rather than INT. It's a political concession to Clerics, rather than part of a coherent simulation of reality. At my table, I let characters choose either INT or WIS for Medicine rolls, unless there's some compelling reason not to.

Thoughts?

[Theodoric]

It's pretty workable! To me Intelligence vs Wisdom was always about the difference between logical Nous and mystical Gnosis, but I guess that might be a bit too abstract for split-second adjucation at the table.

[Man_Over_Game]

I dunno, I'm personally not a fan of ambiguity, and dividing it between "instinctual" and "human" thought doesn't quite sit right with me.

Personally, I've always just chopped them up as "senses" and "thoughts".
Feel something tickle your leg? That's Wisdom.
Knowing that there are wasps in the area that try to bury their young into your leg while you're distracted? That's Intelligence.

[T.G. Oskar]

I always sum up Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma based on how you say something.

Intelligence is knowing what to say. It's the content - logic, memory, reasoning, etc. It represents "smarts".
Wisdom is knowing when to say it. Someone intelligent doesn't necessarily has good common sense, but someone wise is. It involves empathy. Someone might not be smart, but if they're wise, they can convey their message without having to use fancy words or examples.
Charisma is knowing how to say it. Even with good common sense, you can appear to be rude. Charisma allows you to be more convincing when you say things.

So, the distinction between Intelligence and Wisdom is mostly on what to say vs. when to say it. It's pretty simplistic, but I feel it sums up everything nicely.

[DrFunkenstein]

Personally, I've always just chopped them up as "senses" and "thoughts".
Feel something tickle your leg? That's Wisdom.
Knowing that there are wasps in the area that try to bury their young into your leg while you're distracted? That's Intelligence.

The Survival skill seems to buck your trend. Having spent some time in wilderness survival training, it definitely depends on both thoughts and senses (and it's probably heavier on thoughts). This seems to let the ambiguity you loathe back into the equation...

[Kobold_paladin?]

intelligence is how smart you are.
wisdom is how you use your knowledge.
to put it simply: INT: booksmart WIS: streetsmart

peace in the galax's ease, k_pal?

[Millstone85]

I believe that a character's Intelligence score mainly represents memory. You recall what you learned about Arcana, History, Nature, or Religion. Meanwhile, Investigation could be said to be about connecting the dots between things you recently learned.

Wisdom is more mixed, but I think it all revolves around attention and being able to "read" something. Perception and Survival both relate to your ability to read your environment, while Animal Handling, Insight and Medecine involve reading a creature's mental and physical state.

[DrFunkenstein]

I always sum up Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma based on how you say something.

Intelligence is knowing what to say. It's the content - logic, memory, reasoning, etc. It represents "smarts".
Wisdom is knowing when to say it. Someone intelligent doesn't necessarily has good common sense, but someone wise is. It involves empathy. Someone might not be smart, but if they're wise, they can convey their message without having to use fancy words or examples.
Charisma is knowing how to say it. Even with good common sense, you can appear to be rude. Charisma allows you to be more convincing when you say things.

So, the distinction between Intelligence and Wisdom is mostly on what to say vs. when to say it. It's pretty simplistic, but I feel it sums up everything nicely.

So then, why do animals have a higher WIS than humans? Are they better at knowing when to say something?

[MoiMagnus]

Meanwhile, I have always felt Medicine should be an INT skill.

1) First aid looks to me more like Wis than Int, to be honest. There is a lot of "remain grounded and don't panic" in it.
2) Real life medecine is definitely and Int skill, but in D&D universe, if "open your chakra" and "attune yourself with the spirits of life" works well enough to close open wounds, or restore whatever Hit Point represent, then that makes reasonably sense to have medecine as a Wis skill. [i.e Medecine becomes more of a "perception of life force to prevent it to leave the body" than "know the human body"]. In a game with Hit Points like D&D, I'm willing to buy any explanation on how healing works...

My personal method is "Do I expect an old monk Ermit away from civilisation since ages to be good at it? Yes -> Wisdom. Do I expect the stereotypical Holliwood heroic nerd to be good at it? Yes -> Int"

[Lvl 2 Expert]

The Survival skill seems to buck your trend. Having spent some time in wilderness survival training, it definitely depends on both thoughts and senses (and it's probably heavier on thoughts). This seems to let the ambiguity you loathe back into the equation...

But survival is a skill for noble savages, and those are wise, not intelligent.

Also it's thé skill for rangers, and their casting stat is wis.



Wis is everything related to senses, and also everything a typical wise sage character would be good at, and also anything related to the wild and animals. Int is everything related to knowledge and everything a hyper intelligent character would be good at. Sherlock Holmes is presented as smart, so Investigation is Int. But Perception would be something a native American who speaks in broken English would be good at, so that's Wis.


It's kind of an oversimplfication.

[stoutstien]

All the abilities are arbitrarily divided and that goes double for mental ones. I wouldn't put much thought into it past finding a way to be consistent in rulings.

[EggKookoo]

Data (from TNG) is IMHO the quintessential high-int, low-wis character. At least during the original series. He seems to have gained some wisdom in the following movies and whatnot.

Garibaldi (from B5) is more of a classic high-wis, low-int character. Not that he's stupid. That's not really what low-int means. He's just mostly about working with his gut.

High int = lots of facts and information to work with; book smarts.

High wis = perceptive and a good BS detector; street smarts.

[Kobold_paladin?]

Data (from TNG) is IMHO the quintessential high-int, low-wis character. At least during the original series. He seems to have gained some wisdom in the following movies and whatnot.

Garibaldi (from B5) is more of a classic high-wis, low-int character. Not that he's stupid. That's not really what low-int means. He's just mostly about working with his gut.

High int = lots of facts and information to work with; book smarts.

High wis = perceptive and a good BS detector; street smarts.

isn't that basically what i said?:smallannoyed:

[EggKookoo]

isn't that basically what i said?:smallannoyed:

The royalty check is in the mail.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

The royalty check is in the mail.

I got an 11.

Wasn't gonna get much better with my -4 royalty modifier.

[DrFunkenstein]

But survival is a skill for noble savages, and those are wise, not intelligent.

Jared Diamond, the author of "Guns, Germs & Steel" and head of UCLA's Geography department, strongly disagrees with you. He argues "noble savages" are MORE intelligent than modern folk, as their lives require more high-stakes problem-solving.

[Lavaeolus]

Wisdom is more mixed, but I think it all revolves around attention and being able to "read" something. Perception and Survival both relate to your ability to read your environment, while Animal Handling, Insight and Medecine involve reading a creature's mental and physical state.

I definitely think Medicine could work as an Intelligence skill, if the designers wanted. As examples, if diagnosing relied on the player drawing on their knowledge of obscure diseases, or maybe a player was concocting weird drugs, I'd definitely allow an Intelligence (Medicine) check to come into play. Assuming I was using the skills-with-different-abilities optional rule, of course.

But this is my read on it, yeah. It's easy to imagine Medicine as being something like, to borrow terminology from older editions, Knowledge (medicine), and to a degree it is. But it's also about paying attention to someone's symptoms, being very percept and aware, etc. The general use for Medicine in a campaign is stabilising a party member, possibly in combat -- certainly something medical training would come in handy for, but most adventurers are going to rely on quickly identifying where the wounds are / where the bleeding is, what needs immediate attention, etc. Which brings in elements of Insight and Perception.

I do think making Clerics (and maybe Rangers) more likely to be good at Medicine than Wizards might've been a factor in the ultimate decision over which mental stat to use, but I don't think Medicine-as-used is too unreasonable as a Wisdom skill. Also playing a role might be that Intelligence already covers a fair few skills, and I think it might as-is have the most amount of skills. Granted, I find that its skills are far more situational than something like Persuasion or Perception, although that's partly because its easy for DMs to forget about poor old Investigation.

In my eyes, I tend to think of 5e Wisdom as -- I guess 'awareness' might be a good term. Perception, noticing odd details, reading up on subtle cues. It's definitely a somewhat arbitary distinction, in the way that all attributes kind of are, but that's how I mostly reconcile it in my head. Divine characters like Druids and Rangers are, in my mind, literally more aware than Wizards, be that of the nature around them, be that the divine workings of the world; and that somehow allows them to tap in and twist the world, in a different way than Wizards and their knowledge of rituals and so forth. As far as the OP goes, that's something animals are often better at, in the sense they have better noses and better instincts, but aren't necessarily better at in all areas -- a hound would never be so aware as to tap into the divine, as an example. Well, probably.

The classic "high-Int, low-Wis" character given in previous editions, after all, isn't Sherlock Holmes but an absent-minded professor, someone knowledgable but pretty much off in their own world and blind to their surroundings.

I try not to overthink it, though, or impose my view heavily on other players (or players I'm running a game for): I generally find haggling over what specifically each attribute should be is less conductive to running the game than just handwaving a bit. Probably the big challenge to my view, off the top of my head, is the Investigation skill, which does draw on paying attention to detail, finding clues, etc. -- but the focus on reason and deduction, trademarks of Intelligence, is what tends to make it distinct from Perception.

[Man_Over_Game]

The Survival skill seems to buck your trend. Having spent some time in wilderness survival training, it definitely depends on both thoughts and senses (and it's probably heavier on thoughts). This seems to let the ambiguity you loathe back into the equation...

I agree, I just also think that this is more of an issue with Survival than Wisdom/Intelligence.

For reference, there's also a Nature skill that uses Intelligence, but is made mostly redundant by the Survival skill as they both have similar uses.

[Tanarii]

The definitive distinction is:
- Intelligence measures mental acuity, accuracy of recall, and the ability to reason.
- Wisdom reflects how attuned you are t o the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition.

[Morty]

At the risk of being a spoilsport, the only valid distinction is that some things as labelled as depending on Intelligence and others as depending on Wisdom. There's not that much sense to it, because there's not much sense to the Wisdom attribute in general. It covers "mental" things that Intelligence doesn't cover, except when it does anyway.

[KorvinStarmast]

Jared Diamond, the author of "Guns, Germs & Steel" and head of UCLA's Geography department, was not talking about an abstraction in an RPG. There are lots of different kinds of intelligence. Coaches in the NBA talk a lot about "basketball IQ" - they are able to recognize who has it and who doesn't. In my years in aviation, there were some really smart people who couldn't fly worth a crap, and some who could. The difference was "aviation intelligence" (or what some people call "a knack for (this or that thing)."

What Jared Diamond was referring to is - mechanically - far closer to Wisdom (applied knowledge), than Int in the game-to-life attempts at translation that D&D has only ever gotten partly right.

The best answer to your question so far is from Milestone85 (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24497233&postcount=7).

Beyond that, might be worth going back to the rule book and reading again what the game authors are defining it as. I mention that because you are attempting to discuss this in the context of a game, and these abstract concepts are being applied to a game and so need game unique definitions. (I think that is where Tanarii was going with his good answer)

[Chronos]

Of course, Survival still works just fine with the OP's criteria, since most animals manage to get by in the wilderness, while many humans wouldn't.

[Tanarii]

Beyond that, might be worth going back to the rule book and reading again what the game authors are defining it as. I mention that because you are attempting to discuss this in the context of a game, and these abstract concepts are being applied to a game and so need game unique definitions. (I think that is where Tanarii was going with his good answer)
Yes, the two definitions in my post was a direct cut and paste from the PHB.

[HappyDaze]

I believe that a character's Intelligence score mainly represents memory. You recall what you learned about Arcana, History, Nature, or Religion. Meanwhile, Investigation could be said to be about connecting the dots between things you recently learned.

Wisdom is more mixed, but I think it all revolves around attention and being able to "read" something. Perception and Survival both relate to your ability to read your environment, while Animal Handling, Insight and Medecine involve reading a creature's mental and physical state.

This explanation may not be perfect, but it's probably the best I've seen in this thread.

[Tanarii]

I believe that a character's Intelligence score mainly represents memory. You recall what you learned about Arcana, History, Nature, or Religion. Meanwhile, Investigation could be said to be about connecting the dots between things you recently learned.


This explanation may not be perfect, but it's probably the best I've seen in this thread.

The only nitpick I have here is Intelligence mainly represents sharpness of mind. Acuity, accuracy of recall, and the ability to reason.

The difference is between thinking of a Lore check as a "Knowledge" check to determine if your character knows something (a state-of-the-character check) and determining if your character can accurately recall something they know in the heat of the moment. I know it's popular to use Intelligence checks as the former, but it's not really the way 5e checks are designed to work, nor how any of the Lore skills or Intelligence ability score is description is written.

[BoringInfoGuy]

I’ve seen the split as follows

Intelligence: Memorization and Math

Wisdom: Awareness of the world around you as well as Self Awareness.

Charisma: The ability to persuade others.

A good example of a character with High Int, Low Wisdom, but surprisingly good Charisma is Sheldon Cooper from the Big Bang Theory.

For his Int, he works as theoretical physicist and has eidetic memory.

For his low Wisdom, he often completely misses when someone is being sarcastic, and generally needs to be told we he has upset someone.

But for his surprisingly High Charisma, he often gets his way with the group. For example, when everyone was attending a conference, Sheldon wanted to travel by train. Everyone else wanted to fly. They all went by train.

[EggKookoo]

Charisma: The ability to persuade others.

I get success explaining to my players that Charisma is basically force of personality. Which is similar to persuasion, but it also covers intimidation or even deception (which, I think, is why it's tied to those skills). A high-Cha character know who they are, with a good sense of identity. That may play into them being a leader-type, but they could also just be a strong individualist. A high-Cha character often has strong principles or positions on things (which you don't have to agree with to be affected by). A low-Cha character goes with the flow and doesn't want to cause ripples. They may be very attractive, but they're not pushing themselves onto people. They're not really very memorable after the fact.

[GreyBlack]

Intelligence is knowing a tomato is a fruit.

Wisdom is knowing not to put a tomato in a fruit salad.

Charisma is being able to sell a tomato based fruit salad.

It's not that complicated.

[BoringInfoGuy]

I get success explaining to my players that Charisma is basically force of personality. Which is similar to persuasion, but it also covers intimidation or even deception (which, I think, is why it's tied to those skills). A high-Cha character know who they are, with a good sense of identity. That may play into them being a leader-type, but they could also just be a strong individualist. A high-Cha character often has strong principles or positions on things (which you don't have to agree with to be affected by). A low-Cha character goes with the flow and doesn't want to cause ripples. They may be very attractive, but they're not pushing themselves onto people. They're not really very memorable after the fact.

Force of personality is a good description - it’s what they used back in 3rd edition - but I’m deliberately avoiding using the term. Mainly because it’s not part of the Cha description in 5th edition.

But I’m going to disagree that a High Charisma person would “know who they are”. Knowing who you are is a measure of self awareness, which is an aspect of Wisdom.

Sheldon believes himself to be a delight to be around, despite on one occasion having been told flat out that he was the jerk they were trying to get away from.

A better example:

Consider Don Quixote from the play “Man of La Mancha”. He absolutely has no idea who he is, but his delusional self is inspiring. (Cervantes’ books were meant to mock Knightly stories popular in the day, so their tone is different, varying by translation).

Charisma is the ability to speak, and change the world with your words.*

Maybe it’s because there is something about who you are and the life you live that others feel that they want to be part of that life. (Cohen the Barbarian)

Maybe you don’t believe in anything except the only time you feel alive is when you are in the middle of running a con (Moist Von Lipwig)

Having a good Wisdom score (sense of self) is useful when matched with Charisma, but in the same way that a good Constitution Score is useful when matched with Strength. You don’t have to have it, but it helps you not have the mental equivalent of a “Glass Jaw”.

*Words, tone, body language, etc.

[OracularPoet]

As to medicine, it’s reasonable to argue that folk remedies were superior to state-of-the-art medical practice up until some point in the 1800’s. “First, do no harm” is wisdom, and likely the best ancient / medieval / renaissance piece of medical science. Knowing about the four humors and all the theory underlying keeping their balance is intelligence, though harmless at best and useful only accidentally.

[Yora]

If a computer can do it, it's Intelligence. (Perhaps ignoring modern neural network pattern recognitions.)

[elyktsorb]

Can we just make nature wisdom again so druids can be good at it? Like I completely understand why it would be int, but of the 2 classes that should arguably know about nature the most, neither of them wants to put effort towards it while it's int based.

[EggKookoo]

But I’m going to disagree that a High Charisma person would “know who they are”. Knowing who you are is a measure of self awareness, which is an aspect of Wisdom.

Fair point. What I meant was a high-Cha person is aware of themselves as an individual. They know they're there, in a way a low-Cha person more or less blends into the social order. The high-Cha character's self-image may be inaccurate or a self-delusion, but it's there. They draw your attention to them, for good or bad.

[Edenbeast]

As to medicine, it’s reasonable to argue that folk remedies were superior to state-of-the-art medical practice up until some point in the 1800’s. “First, do no harm” is wisdom, and likely the best ancient / medieval / renaissance piece of medical science. Knowing about the four humors and all the theory underlying keeping their balance is intelligence, though harmless at best and useful only accidentally.

Oh, I would argue it's alive and well today still. There are still people around without any university or college level medical/biology training who can tell you what kind of herbs you should take when you don't fell well. Or just common wisdom that when you're sick, you should stay in bed. In fact there is an entire field of pseudoscience called homeopathy... And lets be honest here, homeopathy is based on many of these folk remedies of old. Some even work, even though modern science has no answer to how it works (sometimes it works as a placebo). The Medicine skill in D&D should not be viewed as the equivalent of the modern day scientific field of medicine (which would indeed be intelligence based), but more, as you say, folk wisdom based medicine a.k.a. homeopathy, and thus wisdom based.

I like the tomato is fruit example, that's indeed demonstrative of the difference between intelligence and wisdom. In D&D terms, to describe and identify that a tomato is a fruit would be a Nature (intelligence) check, to know not to put it in a fruit salat would be a wisdom check, or to make it a better example: to know that the tomato is edible would be a Survival (wisdom) check.

[Chronos]

Homeopathy is actually an extremely detailed, complicated system that bears very little resemblance to folk remedies (and unfortunately, happens to be extremely detailed, complicated nonsense). Folk remedies are only lumped in with homeopathy because it makes them sound better, and there are exceptions built into the drug regulations for homeopathy.

As to Sheldon Cooper, I think him getting his way has more to do with hanging out with easily-persuaded people than it does with his own charisma. Whenever it's a question of whether Sheldon or Penny gets their way, though, it's always Penny who wins.

[Edenbeast]

Homeopathy is actually an extremely detailed, complicated system that bears very little resemblance to folk remedies (and unfortunately, happens to be extremely detailed, complicated nonsense). Folk remedies are only lumped in with homeopathy because it makes them sound better, and there are exceptions built into the drug regulations for homeopathy.

Well, first we have to admit that D&D is not a perfect emulation of life :P Second, many details does not imply that it should be intelligence based. Knowing what you can and what you can't eat in the forest is what you probably learned from the members of your tribe or by trying yourself. By studying from books you are probably able to classify and identify certain plants, but do you know they are edible? Anyway, there is quite some ambiguity. There was the reference to Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs and Steel, great book btw, where the author describes how "situational" the outcome of an IQ test is. Of course an educated person like us will score much better in such a test than a person from the jungles of New Guinea (he probably can't even read the questionnaire), but put both in the jungle, and who will then perform much better? It's all relative and determined by the environment you grow up in. We should be happy D&D doesn't try to be that complicated... The knowledge skills like Arcana, Nature, History, etc. should be regarded as lore picked up from studying books, or detailed information passed on from master to apprentice. The wisdom based skills are common sense lore picked up from the environment you grew up in, like Insight, Medicine and Survival. Both contain a lot of detailed information in their own ways.

[Edenbeast]

Can we just make nature wisdom again so druids can be good at it?

That was only in 4e, before (e.g. 3e, 3.5, Pathfinder) it was Knowledge (nature), which was intelligence-based.

[elyktsorb]

That was only in 4e, before (e.g. 3e, 3.5, Pathfinder) it was Knowledge (nature), which was intelligence-based.

Great, this doesn't dissuade from my point though. How many Druids bothered putting points into Nature in any of those either?

[Edenbeast]

Great, this doesn't dissuade from my point though. How many Druids bothered putting points into Nature in any of those either?

Well, it depends on your character concept... The druids I generally play tend not to be Mowgli or Tarzan, but instead tend more towards Radagast, so they have points in knowledge nature.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

The trick with nature checks is phrasing everything you want to do with them in such a way that they become survival.

If your DM lets you get away with it you should definitely have another character going around doing the opposite.

[jmartkdr]

The Survival skill seems to buck your trend. Having spent some time in wilderness survival training, it definitely depends on both thoughts and senses (and it's probably heavier on thoughts). This seems to let the ambiguity you loathe back into the equation...

Unfortunately, the existence of the Nature skill makes that example fall apart - knowing what mushrooms you can eat, and where to fin them is a *completely different* skill than knowing what they're called and what they can be used for (ie eating).

[HappyDaze]

Intelligence is having a detailed answer to this question ready to go...and Wisdom is in not posting it.

[EggKookoo]

Intelligence is having a detailed answer to this question ready to go...and Wisdom is in not posting it.

More and more these days I find myself typing up long multi-paragraph responses to posts, and then deleting 95% of it before submitting.

[KorvinStarmast]

Intelligence is knowing a tomato is a fruit.
Wisdom is knowing not to put a tomato in a fruit salad.
Charisma is being able to sell a tomato based fruit salad. Nice illustration.

As to medicine, it’s reasonable to argue that folk remedies were superior to state-of-the-art medical practice up until some point in the 1800’s. “First, do no harm” is wisdom, and likely the best ancient / medieval / renaissance piece of medical science. +1

Can we just make nature wisdom again so druids can be good at it? Yes, or, just give any druid by default proficiency in Nature. Make it a class feature. (Or, the DM can read Chapter7 and decide that many Nature Checks are made using Wisdom ... it's in the text, that flex.
The trick with nature checks is phrasing everything you want to do with them in such a way that they become survival. Not a bad idea.

Intelligence is having a detailed answer to this question ready to go...and Wisdom is in not posting it. Wise words.

More and more these days I find myself typing up long multi-paragraph responses to posts, and then deleting 95% of it before submitting. But man, your typing proficiency goes up, eh?

[Tanarii]

Can we just make nature wisdom again so druids can be good at it? Like I completely understand why it would be int, but of the 2 classes that should arguably know about nature the most, neither of them wants to put effort towards it while it's int based.
Honestly they should get rid of it. Survival is the "outdoors" skill D&D needs. Not a Lore skill. If recalling stuff about nature is really needed it can be an Intelligence (Survival) check.

[Edenbeast]

Honestly they should get rid of it. Survival is the "outdoors" skill D&D needs. Not a Lore skill. If recalling stuff about nature is really needed it can be an Intelligence (Survival) check.

But these two skills do not serve the same purpose. Nature encompasses basically the natural sciences (biology, geology, meteorology, etc.). It's in-depth knowledge on natural processes and functionality, much like arcana relates to magic, and history to, well, history. Survival relates to the capacity to handle yourself when you're out there in the wilds. They are two different approaches. Sure, a naturalist who likes to study ecology in the field might be adept at both Nature and Survival. While another may have never left the university grounds and does only lab work, can tell you a lot about Nature and how it works, but is not proficient with survival. Same goes the other way around, Mowgli knows hows how to survive, but don't ask him for a scientific explanation on a natural phenomenon.

[Tanarii]

But these two skills do not serve the same purpose. Nature encompasses basically the natural sciences (biology, geology, meteorology, etc.). It's in-depth knowledge on natural processes and functionality, much like arcana relates to magic, and history to, well, history. Survival relates to the capacity to handle yourself when you're out there in the wilds. They are two different approaches.
Yes. But adventurers don't really need the former. And if they do, for the kinds of things they're likely to need to make a check for, an Intelligence (Survival) check suffices. Unlike History or Arcana, which is Lore that comes up all the time in adventuring. Even Religion is important if you're doing lost temples or cults or whatever. A "Nature Sage" is extraneous.

Edit: granted, it's not as bad as Performance, which is basically a wasted proficiency slot for "roleplaying" purposes.

[EggKookoo]

Edit: granted, it's not as bad as Performance, which is basically a wasted proficiency slot for "roleplaying" purposes.

*cries in bard*

[Lunali]

Intelligence is knowing a tomato is a fruit.

Wisdom is knowing not to put a tomato in a fruit salad.

Charisma is being able to sell a tomato based fruit salad.

I call it salsa. (note: not originally my idea)

[Democratus]

Intelligence is knowing that Frankenstein wasn't the monster.

Wisdom is knowing that Frankenstein was the monster.

[EggKookoo]

I like the Socratic distinction. Intelligence is knowing that you know nothing. Wisdom is knowing that you know nothing.

[Edenbeast]

Yes. But adventurers don't really need the former. And if they do, for the kinds of things they're likely to need to make a check for, an Intelligence (Survival) check suffices. Unlike History or Arcana, which is Lore that comes up all the time in adventuring. Even Religion is important if you're doing lost temples or cults or whatever. A "Nature Sage" is extraneous.

Edit: granted, it's not as bad as Performance, which is basically a wasted proficiency slot for "roleplaying" purposes.

I find this a fault of DM more than anything else. Maybe none of the players had Nature, and the DM really wanted someone to pass the skill check so made a creative solution by making it a Intelligence (Survival) check. I would not make such a call. These kind of anecdotes actually feed into the idea that certain skills are not worth having. In good game play there should be a place for every skill, and I especially like rewarding creative use of skills. Performance is actually an excellent example: you can act, or keep the guards occupied with a captivating story while the rest of the party sneaks past.

"A Nature Sage is extraneous." Obviously, it depends on the setting. In an urban setting, sure a Nature Sage is not really need. Then again, nor is Survival in such a setting. A session 0 is really helpful in making sure all skills are covered.

Certain skills, like Performance, rely equally on the creativity of the player as the DM, but the knowledge skills are really up to the DM to fill in and give them purpose. I mean, it usually comes down to one thing: Can the character recall a certain piece of lore on X. Metagaming might be part of the issue, I guess.

In some cases there can be some overlap, just as Perception and Investigation can have some overlap as well, but Nature and Survival are two distinct skills and one should not replace the other. One of the best descriptions I've come across is that in general Survival relates to doing stuff in nature (hunting, tracking, finding food, e.g. basic stuff), while Nature relates to knowing stuff about nature (what's this animal and does it belong in this forest, is there supposed to be snow here, what's the weakness of this beast, I want to polymorph into ... or conjure ...). A good DM will allow, and provide opportunity, for every character to shine with their various skills and proficiencies.

[elyktsorb]

"A Nature Sage is extraneous." Obviously, it depends on the setting. In an urban setting, sure a Nature Sage is not really need. Then again, nor is Survival in such a setting. A session 0 is really helpful in making sure all skills are covered.


Except that people use survival for tracking, even in an urban setting.

[Edenbeast]

Except that people use survival for tracking, even in an urban setting.

I guess that's still pretty useful, and fun. And even Nature has a place in an urban setting. It's up to the DM to make every skill useful and rewarding. And maybe the issue is that there's a tendency to reduce the amount of dice rolls for the sake of simplification. But it's an oversimplification. 5e is already easier than Pathfinder and 3.5, and I think that's good: it makes the gameplay faster and actually allows for more role-play. But I think a DM should not be afraid to call for successive rolls when suitable, for example: Perception to find tracks, Nature to identify what animal made those tracks, Survival to follow the tracks.

[Lavaeolus]

But I think a DM should not be afraid to call for successive rolls when suitable, for example: Perception to find tracks, Nature to identify what animal made those tracks, Survival to follow the tracks.

Not inherently against that, but remember that the more rolls you ask for, the harder something gets. I remember a time, so me and a friend wanted to cross a shallow stream, but the water was running fast. We could get swept off our feet!

So we tied a rope around me before I sent myself in. DM asks for a Survival check, for the knot. I started moving in -- DM asked for Acrobatics to stay upright. I passed... and got a quarter of the way through the river. Apparently I'd need to pass four of these, at least. Failed the next Acrobatics check -- roll Athletics to pull yourself back up, DM asks. I failed, time to use the rope to pull me back out. Roll Athletics.

Of course, this made the task pretty much impossible, and the end result was just a waste of time and a lot of dice rolled. Less of a concern if each successful roll is a permanent, tangible benefit on its own, but still, it can be a little frustrating. If I may make a suggestion: if it's relevant and you want to streamline things, consider proficiency + advantage if two proficient skills are of use. It's a Xanathar rule for specifically making tools more useful, but I find bringing it in occasionally for skills can be nice.

[Chronos]

Ooh, I like that Frankenstein example, Democratus. Though of course, both of those characters would be named Frankenstein.

[Dienekes]

Intelligence is knowing that Frankenstein wasn't the monster.

Wisdom is knowing that Frankenstein was the monster.

Cynicism is thinking both characters were pretty much bastards that deserved each other.

[Lunali]

Intelligence is knowing that Frankenstein wasn't the monster.

Wisdom is knowing that Frankenstein was the monster.

So which one is it to know that you were talking about the doctor in both cases?

[Boci]

So which one is it to know that you were talking about the doctor in both cases?

Intelligence. Or just reading the book.

[SociopathFriend]

In D&D, few things spark more debate than what is the distinction between Intelligence and Wisdom. I have found most explanations unsatisfactory, but I stumbled upon this trend when looking at the Monster Manual.


Technically most debates I've seen regarding Intelligence and Wisdom are related to their Saving Throws and what they represent- typically with Charisma thrown in for good measure.

[Tanarii]

I find this a fault of DM more than anything else.Normally I'd agree with you. That's how I feel about Intelligence checks in general when people talk about dumping stats. But with Nature the overlap with survival and ability to make cross ability skill checks makes it much less critical. You're more likely to get use out of Medicine because a DM feels it's okay to use Intelligence (Medicine) gathering information about a dead body in standard course of play. The requirement for Nature just requires that much DM contrivance to come up with a scenario that an Intelligence (Survival) check wouldn't suffice as a replacement.


These kind of anecdotes actually feed into the idea that certain skills are not worth having. In good game play there should be a place for every skill, and I especially like rewarding creative use of skills. Performance is actually an excellent example: you can act, or keep the guards occupied with a captivating story while the rest of the party sneaks past.Like I said, DM contrivance.

[HappyDaze]

The requirement for Nature just requires that much DM contrivance to come up with a scenario that an Intelligence (Survival) check wouldn't suffice as a replacement.


There's actually a lot to Nature that has nothing to do with Survival. If the players can't figure that out, the blame falls on them for being bad players.

[Morty]

I'm honestly kind of confused by the continued attempts to frame one or both of those attributes as having something to do with good decision-making or personality traits.

[Millstone85]

I'm honestly kind of confused by the continued attempts to frame one or both of those attributes as having something to do with good decision-making or personality traits.My guess is that "good decision-making" is the plain-English definition of wisdom, and the D&D ability being completely divorced from this meaning is, to many, simply unacceptable.

Also, I blame the tomato.

There is a popular explanation / Internet meme that goes like this:

Strength is being able to crush a tomato.
Dexterity is being able to dodge a tomato.
Constitution is being able to eat a rotten tomato.
Intelligence is knowing that a tomato is a fruit.
Wisdom is knowing not to put a tomato in a fruit salad.
Charisma is being able to sell a tomato-based fruit salad.

The last time I saw it was through this beautiful illustration:
https://i.imgur.com/zVxDosV.jpg
I made a comment that, in D&D, Wisdom would actually have little to do with knowing not to put a tomato in a fruit salad. Rather, it would be about noticing the presence of a tomato.

My comment got downvoted. Clearly, you shall not question the wisdom of the tomato.

[EggKookoo]

My comment got downvoted. Clearly, you shall not question the wisdom of the tomato.

Also, I'm sorry internet, but salsa isn't fruit salad, any more than the lettuce and slice of tomato on your burger is a salad.

Salsa is a sauce.

[Morty]

My guess is that "good decision-making" is the plain-English definition of wisdom, and the D&D ability being completely divorced from this meaning is, to many, simply unacceptable.

Also, I blame the tomato.

There is a popular explanation / Internet meme that goes like this:

Strength is being able to crush a tomato.
Dexterity is being able to dodge a tomato.
Constitution is being able to eat a rotten tomato.
Intelligence is knowing that a tomato is a fruit.
Wisdom is knowing not to put a tomato in a fruit salad.
Charisma is being able to sell a tomato-based fruit salad.

The last time I saw it was through this beautiful illustration:
https://i.imgur.com/zVxDosV.jpg
I made a comment that, in D&D, Wisdom would actually have little to do with knowing not to put a tomato in a fruit salad. Rather, it would be about noticing the presence of a tomato.

My comment got downvoted. Clearly, you shall not question the wisdom of the tomato.

Yes, Wisdom is a mish-mash of functions at the best of times and calling it "Wisdom" just piles one more thing on top of it all and makes it even more confusing.

[Tanarii]

My comment got downvoted. Clearly, you shall not question the wisdom of the tomato.
D&D wisdom is like D&D alignment good/evil. People bring a lot of preconceived notions to the table that don't line up with the book, based on common use of the words.

[BoringInfoGuy]

Int is memorizing facts.

I know that a tomato is a fruit.
I know that despite being a fruit, it is a bad choice for fruit salad.

Is the second really wisdom, or just another learned fact? It’s the sort of example that makes sense for those who already understand the difference but is poor at illustrating the difference for those who don’t.

Someone with high intelligence could learn what a variety of cultures believe about death. They could learn the psychology of grief, it’s stages, and various theories on how to deal with it.

But Wisdom is being aware of what your grieving friend needs from you in that moment. Sure, you could dump out all you know, but that is more likely to make yourself feel better instead of the one grieving.

Sometimes hearing the various beliefs throughout history can help.

Sometimes hearing the about the stages of grief or basic psychology can help.

Sometimes having someone listen can help.

Sometimes just being silent together can help.

Sometimes being given permission to grieve can help.

Sometimes being taken out and distracted from your grief can help.

And sometimes any of that can be exactly the wrong thing to do. Sometimes what helped yesterday, or even a moment ago is no longer helpful in this moment.

Wisdom is being aware of how you can help someone grieving right now, without them telling you. Because they may not know.

That can fit the “a tomato does not go into a fruit salad,” explanation.

Going back to the Sheldon Cooper example.

When Sheldon learns someone is upset about something, he makes them a warm drink. Because that is what he was taught to do. It’s a learned response, without any deeper understanding. If [input = sad person] then [output = make sad person warm drink]. The offer is not optional.

This is also fits the “knowing a tomato does not go into a fruit salad” definition, but has nothing to do with Wisdom.

TL;DR
If you are writing a paper on the process of grieving, you want the help of someone with high Intelligence. They can help you get a good grade.

If you are grieving, you want the help of someone with high Wisdom. They can help you get through the process.

[jas61292]

I have always hated the tomato example, precisely because the wisdom example has nothing to do with D&D wisdom at all, and if anything is another example of intelligence. I also hate it because while knowing a tomato is a fruit is technically an Int thing, it is such common knowledge that no one should ever have to actually make a check to know it. A much better example would be "knowing a tomato is a fruit and it is also a vegetable, depending on the context." But that's a bit off track.

The real point is, as others have pointed out, that wisdom is a real word, but that the real word has nothing to do with the mechanical implications of it. Someone who is "wise" in the common sense of the word is someone who has a high Intelligence score, not Wisdom. Wisdom is all about perception, both literally, through your senses, and through intuition. But it has nothing to do with knowing anything.

[greenstone]

Garibaldi (from B5) is more of a classic high-wis, low-int character. Not that he's stupid. That's not really what low-int means. He's just mostly about working with his gut.

I'm going to use that last word more. INT is brain-stuff, WIS is gut-stuff.

It's better than INT is reasoning, WIS is intuition.

[Morty]

The real point is, as others have pointed out, that wisdom is a real word, but that the real word has nothing to do with the mechanical implications of it. Someone who is "wise" in the common sense of the word is someone who has a high Intelligence score, not Wisdom. Wisdom is all about perception, both literally, through your senses, and through intuition. But it has nothing to do with knowing anything.

I would go a step further and say that Intelligence shouldn't cover this either. The "Intelligence" attribute is a mechanical abstraction that only really describes one particular kind of intelligence. Good judgement shouldn't be measured by attributes.

[KorvinStarmast]

But these two skills do not serve the same purpose. Nature encompasses basically the natural sciences (biology, geology, meteorology, etc.). It's in-depth knowledge on natural processes and functionality, much like arcana relates to magic, and history to, well, history. Survival relates to the capacity to handle yourself when you're out there in the wilds. They are two different approaches. Sure, a naturalist who likes to study ecology in the field might be adept at both Nature and Survival. yes, it doesn't have to be either/or.

I call it salsa. I make home made salsa with some regularity. (I've also been told that jalapeon's are fruits since the seeds are on the inside). So my salsa has in it jalapeños{Fruit?}, tomatoes{fruit?}, onions (OK, that's a vegetable, darnit!), lime juice{fruit?}, garlic (vegetable?), salt and pepper.
More fruit than anything else, you might say, but yeah, it's a sauce.

I like the Socratic distinction.
Intelligence is knowing that you know nothing.
Wisdom is knowing that you know nothing.
Golf clap.

[Millstone85]

Good judgement shouldn't be measured by attributes.Serious question: Has "roll to reconsider this course of actions" ever actually been a thing?

[Dienekes]

I think some of this confusion about Wisdom is that it did represent common sense.

From the 3.5 player's handbook pg 9
"Wisdom describes a character’s willpower, common sense, perception, and intuition."

From the 4e player's handbook pg. 17
"Wisdom (Wis) measures your common sense, perception, self-discipline, and empathy."

It's only 5e that removed it. And honestly, I didn't even realize it was gone until this thread, because I haven't gone back to check the descriptions of the abilities.

[Tanarii]

Serious question: Has "roll to reconsider this course of actions" ever actually been a thing?
5e PHB p178 under wisdom:
- Get a gut feeling about what course of action to follow

[MoiMagnus]

Serious question: Has "roll to reconsider this course of actions" ever actually been a thing?

Sometimes, the line between "The DM was unclear in his explanations, leading to the players making bad assumptions and making absurd course of actions"
[ex: our DM once failed to communicate to us that the train we were in was going through bridges and mountains, and not through flat campaign, making our escape plan through the windows not reasonable at all.]
and "The players are making wrong assumptions, but that they would also do if they were in person in place of their PC. Their course of action might seems absurd to the DM, but it's just because the DM has more info" is blurry.

In those moments where the DM is wondering "Well, they didn't understood that, it should have been obvious. Or is it? Thinking about it, it's unclear. Is it reasonable for anyone living is that universe to miss that?", then a Wisdom check (probably a secret one) can help to determine whether or not the PCs get additional hints from the DMs.

Another use I've seen at my table: combat is dragging in length and feel difficult, player ask "Wait, do we even have a chance to win? How threatening this situation look compared to what we've gone through before? Should we retreat?", DM answer "You can make a Wisdom check to have my opinion on this subject."

[Millstone85]

From the 3.5 player's handbook pg 9
"Wisdom describes a character’s willpower, common sense, perception, and intuition."

From the 4e player's handbook pg. 17
"Wisdom (Wis) measures your common sense, perception, self-discipline, and empathy."
5e PHB p178 under wisdom:
- Get a gut feeling about what course of action to followAh, so maybe there is something to the tomato after all.


In those moments where the DM is wondering "Well, they didn't understood that, it should have been obvious. Or is it? Thinking about it, it's unclear. Is it reasonable for anyone living is that universe to miss that?", then a Wisdom check (probably a secret one) can help to determine whether or not the PCs get additional hints from the DMs.That does sound reasonable.

[Tanarii]

Ah, so maybe there is something to the tomato after all.5e wisdom does explicitly cover intuition, which shows up in the gut feeling check and the Insight skill. Maybe Animal Handling as well.

Common Sense is a totally different thing, and I'm glad they ditched it. Because like "logic", all it really means nowadays is "it makes sense to me". One persons "logic" or "common sense" is another persons "stupid". Similarly one persons "wisdom" is another persons "roll eyes".

[BoringInfoGuy]

I think some of this confusion about Wisdom is that it did represent common sense.

From the 3.5 player's handbook pg 9
"Wisdom describes a character’s willpower, common sense, perception, and intuition."

From the 4e player's handbook pg. 17
"Wisdom (Wis) measures your common sense, perception, self-discipline, and empathy."

It's only 5e that removed it. And honestly, I didn't even realize it was gone until this thread, because I haven't gone back to check the descriptions of the abilities.

I don’t believe common sense is a thing that actually exists.

If you are in a workplace, and your boss is telling you to “Use your common sense” on a project, do they mean “look at the situation, the various resources available to you, and create what seems like the best course of action,”?

In my experience, they do not. The mean “Do it exactly the way I would do it without me having to explain how I would do it.”

To have a common sense assumes similar life experiences, which we all do not have. Also, any two people who did have similar life experiences do not necessarily have the same interpretation of the meaning of those events.

If our experiences, situations, and personal views are different, how can we have a “Common” sense? I think we do not, hence the “Why is Common sense so rare?” meme.

I do believe in Practical Wisdom. The ability to make sensible choices for your life, without the assumption that what works for you should work for everybody.

I’m not too upset that 5e dropped common sense from the Wisdom description.

[Witty Username]

I'm honestly kind of confused by the continued attempts to frame one or both of those attributes as having something to do with good decision-making or personality traits.

I personally think it has to do with previous editions, which each defined intelligence and wisdom differently and for different reasons, especially 2ed and earlier in which they where used primarily as a role-playing aid, along with charisma. Times have changed, like charisma having a purpose and lore being exclusively int.

There are some things to be gleaned though
nature vs survival (Are these two different skills? I mean it seems like the only difference is survival includes a sense of direction)
investigation vs perception (why vs what)

Also, int seems to lend itself toward lore while wis practical application, nature vs animal handling and survival and religion being int despite the priest association with wis and medicine being wis despite our perception that medicine involves substantial knowledge and study. This could also be applied to saving throws which seams to be if it is int or wis, it is wis because wis is useful.

Side note: disguise is int? I didn't notice that before.