My Opinion of Int and Wis in 3.X

[Math_Mage]

For someone who titled the thread "My Opinion of Int and Wis in 3.X," you're being very defensive about it. The thread would be more productive if you sought to integrate others' contributions into your hypothesis, instead of spending so much time in rebuttal mode (however justified).

That said, I'm going to start off with a criticism: I don't think it's a good idea to consider Int and Wis in terms of IQ calibration. IQ is not an especially meaningful measure in itself, and represents something very different from what Int and Wis do. A lot will be lost in translation, and the result will be ambiguous.

Considering the matter only by looking at what's on the character sheet, my first thought is that creativity doesn't get slotted into any individual stat--rather, it's spread out over all three mental stats. If it does go to one stat, Wisdom is certainly not that stat. Wisdom goes to:
-Will saves
-Heal
-Listen
-Profession
-Sense Motive
-Spot
-Survival

What about any of these things is especially indicative of creativity?

Backing up a step, I would describe each of the mental stats in terms of strength. Intelligence is strength of understanding. Wisdom is strength of perception. Charisma is strength of personality.

Intelligence manages those skills that assess one's understanding of a given subject. Appraise measures the character's knowledge of the relationship between objects and prices. Decipher script is a fairly direct measure of one's knowledge of cryptography. Disable Device measures one's knowledge of how these devices function and how to deactivate them. Knowledge...well, yeah. Side note: many of these skills require a good amount of creativity and intuition as well as strict knowledge-gathering.

Wisdom manages those skills that relate to how characters perceive the world. Sense Motive measures your ability to perceive another character's physical state and relate it to his mental state. Survival measures one's ability to perceive tracks, among other things ('survive in the wilderness' is so broad that it necessarily encompasses several of the traits, so I'm not going to deal with it). Spot and Listen I need not elaborate on. Notably, Will saves measure how strong your perception of the world is in the face of beguiling influences--illusions, enchantments and so on. Does Dominate Person overcome your perception of this BBEG as a foe? Does Silent Image overcome your perception of this hallway? It is primarily upon Will saves that I base my assessment of Wisdom. Wisdom skills can have some relation to creativity and intuition, though it is not immediately apparent. Spotting concealed knives, for example, may involve intuitive extrapolation from odd shapes in places where they shouldn't be. Sense Motive basically is intuition about another's state of mind.

Charisma manages those skills that relate to interpersonal interaction. Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Handle Animal...I won't go skill-by-skill as I did with the others, because I shouldn't have to. Charisma allows you to strongly present an image of yourself--what matters is not so much your native personality, but the personality you show to others, your ability to manage others' perceptions of you. Again, we see a number of skills that require creativity, from Bluff to Perform.

There are outliers for everything, of course. Search is an Int skill only because Spot is already a Wis skill. Heal does not appeal to one's perception of the world so much as the knowledge and practice of medical treatment, and yet it is a Wis skill (to say nothing of Profession, which was just thrown in). Charisma has Use Magic Device...yeah. But that's the basic conclusion I've arrived at from the crunch perspective. And thanks, imp_fireball, for provoking me to think about this.

EDIT: You're being better about the rebuttal thing today than yesterday, so I retract that statement.

[Riffington]

Exactly what I meant to say. Except for the last paragraph.

Unless by 'free will' you mean 'free range will that does whatever it desires'. By free will, I mean the technical reference to free will, simple sentience - the ability to feel and react accordingly and the ability to act as an individual consciousness.

Well, feeling requires Wisdom. Without it you can never feel; you'd just be a "brain in a vat". With a minimal wisdom, you could set out to do things but would almost immediately lose focus and quit.
Taking action requires Charisma. Without it, you can perceive (Wisdom) and understand the significance of what you perceive (Intelligence) but lack the personality to will yourself to take any actions. With a minimal charisma, you would need to be set upon a path - you'd see a small setback, intellectually know how to overcome it, but lack the force of personality to actually change course unless someone tells you to or you have a lot at stake.
Reasoning requires Intelligence. Without it, you can perceive and react, but only according to some set program/instincts; you'd be mindless. With only a minimal intelligence, you'd have as much "free will" as a goat.

personality' - the ability to assert your personality on others.

Not just on others. On the world.

There are outliers for everything, of course. Search is an Int skill only because Spot is already a Wis skill. Heal does not appeal to one's perception of the world so much as the knowledge and practice of medical treatment, and yet it is a Wis skill (to say nothing of Profession, which was just thrown in). Charisma has Use Magic Device...yeah. But that's the basic conclusion I've arrived at from the crunch perspective. And thanks, imp_fireball, for provoking me to think about this.

I do not believe these are outliers.
Search is an Int skill because it's not an intuitive perception. It involves reasoning out "now where could a key possibly be hidden here".
Being a good doctor is not primarily a matter of intelligence. As long as you have a sufficient level (IQ 130) having more doesn't make you a better doctor. Rather, good judgment and perceptiveness matter far more.
Profession is all about reacting appropriately. It's true that there's a lot of professions out there - but let's take cooking for example. Knowing how to bake the best cake in the world is Intelligence (Craft: cooking). Actually running a restaurant (Profession) requires far less smarts and far more sense.
Use Magic Device is the most direct "I see a power source and force it to do my will" there is... Charisma fits best.

[Math_Mage]

I do not believe these are outliers.
Search is an Int skill because it's not an intuitive perception. It involves reasoning out "now where could a key possibly be hidden here".
Being a good doctor is not primarily a matter of intelligence. As long as you have a sufficient level (IQ 130) having more doesn't make you a better doctor. Rather, good judgment and perceptiveness matter far more.
Profession is all about reacting appropriately. It's true that there's a lot of professions out there - but let's take cooking for example. Knowing how to bake the best cake in the world is Intelligence (Craft: cooking). Actually running a restaurant (Profession) requires far less smarts and far more sense.
Use Magic Device is the most direct "I see a power source and force it to do my will" there is... Charisma fits best.

True, these skills aren't outliers from the ability scores per se...it's just that the reasoning by which they fit under their respective ability is different from the reasoning I employed. Search is not so much a knowledge-based skill, as the others are; Heal employs both 'seeing what's wrong' (perception) and 'knowing what to do about it' (knowledge); and so on. It's not an imperfection in the system so much as it is an imperfection in my interpretation.

I hadn't thought about UMD that way before. Thanks for the insight.

[imp_fireball]

Use Magic Device is the most direct "I see a power source and force it to do my will" there is... Charisma fits best.

I agree with this. A very charismatic person isn't 'strong willed' however (which usually implies defensive wills), they're just capable of better making their will manifest in others. If you saw one of these people in real life, you'd never associate strong will with them - you'd associate 'determination', but that may be because they were better at making themselves look more determined than others with their charisma.

Not just on others. On the world.

True. 'Others' essentially extends to 'the world' although it's difficult to shout and have the entire world hear you at once, not to mention the influence of other charismatic people is pressing against your own influence. Charismatic people are more easily remembered for their charisma too - at least for me (I remember the personality, but not necessarily the name considering I'm not good with names).

And thanks, imp_fireball, for provoking me to think about this.

Hey, it's my job.

Considering the matter only by looking at what's on the character sheet, my first thought is that creativity doesn't get slotted into any individual stat--rather, it's spread out over all three mental stats. If it does go to one stat, Wisdom is certainly not that stat.

Creativity doesn't necessarily disperse amongst all three stats and nor could it be a stat of its own, imo. Like everything involving perception, better perception of a situation can yield better resulting creativity - creativity to me is the ability to think about something unique that few have thought of. That takes wisdom, because wisdom is required to perceive the things that others missed. Note that a lot creativity in pop culture is just a re-hashing (conscious or unconscious) of old concepts. In fact, many of us don't even fully understand the idea of creativity, since it has been starved from certain groups as such. Note also that a wise person need not be creative. But it takes wisdom to learn how to be creative (there's no school course that teaches creativity - an art program teaches you artist techniques, not how to draw something that is thought provoking).

many of these skills require a good amount of creativity and intuition as well as strict knowledge-gathering.

But if someone knows all the knowledge in those avenues, then they require no creativity and intuition at all - just a good memory of the facts and then the ability to arrive at an obvious conclusion. Ie., decipher script: Jack compares the noble's hand writing with the one in the letter signed by said noble to determine if the order to cease adventuring actually came from the noble. After a successful check, he concludes that it did not in fact come from the noble. He can't make a knowledge check to determine why the person who wrote the letter would want the adventurers to discontinue, however.

If you extrapolate, you could say that it required creativity - but then again, creativity can be applied to pretty much any skill (if you swim in a creative way, you can prevent drowning; if you come up with a creative story via bluff, you can lie accordingly, etc.). The ability to perceive the amount of creativity necessary for a situation would be Wis. As would it be Wis to note the degree of creativity utilized in one thing to another (comparatively, they could say, "oh didn't take much to think of that/how did he know to think of that? That's really creative."). Creativity is knowing how to devise something that will appropriately affect another circumstance.

The thing with creativity and Wis is that applications of the Wis skill require creativity at certain points rather than where 'creativity can be applied, but it isn't necessary'. Note also that creativity in other skills doesn't apply a bonus unless the GM wants to give a circumstantial bonus to you (bluff even penalizes you for 'tall tales'). It could be argued that you are using Wis to come up with the creative application but since creativity is so passive, no check is needed and depends entirely upon what the players can think of.

the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods, interpretations

Transcend traditions? The Int guy would be able to recall traditions with knowledge. The Cha guy would be able to reflect traditions with his physical demonstration of them. The Wis guy would be able to work around or 'transcend' traditions (perceive what isn't traditional and then find a way to appropriately work it into tradition). Craft (painting) is an Int check, but note that in order to craft all sorts of art, you need to put ranks into each appropriate craft. Profession (artist) covers all of it. I'll note that that's a bad argument (especially since you can't create anything with profession), but it serves my point anyway.

Wisdom implies making use of creativity - hence it and creativity are the most related, imo. Otherwise, you could be creative in one thing - perhaps through experience of performing that task, but you may like creativity in another thing. A person with drive to do a task may be more creative than another person too.

Taking action requires Charisma. Without it, you can perceive (Wisdom) and understand the significance of what you perceive (Intelligence) but lack the personality to will yourself to take any actions. With a minimal charisma, you would need to be set upon a path - you'd see a small setback, intellectually know how to overcome it, but lack the force of personality to actually change course unless someone tells you to or you have a lot at stake.

Your point about charisma tends to overlap with wisdom and intelligence. Charisma has nothing to do with taking action unless it's taking action to convince others to take action or pretending that you are taking action.

The willingness to take action or direct work ethic isn't really an ability score and non-dependent upon the other three. The closest relation is Int considering that covers 'chewy work' like crafting and mathematics.

Understanding the significance of what you perceive is also Wis, unless you mean 'understanding how to apply knowledge to the perception'. Note that animals and humans are very un-alike. At the barrier between 2 and 3 Int, creatures either reason or they don't. In that sense, 'understanding significance' applies to Int. There is no definitive answer that applies to all ranges of intelligence or wisdom, considering things change a bit at the very low range of animal and sapient (3 int or greater).

Reasoning requires Intelligence. Without it, you can perceive and react, but only according to some set program/instincts; you'd be mindless. With only a minimal intelligence, you'd have as much "free will" as a goat.

D&D and I both agree with this, with the exception that this applies more to the '1 or nothing' range - Int 0 means you are brain dead, whereas no Int score makes you a simple program or construct whose range of reactions/interactions must be specified upon creation and 1 Int indicates fundamental survival instincts like that of an insect (note that if you punch a cow, it will react in a way, while predictable, slightly different each time - its head may turn at a different angle with each punch and its eyes will flick in surprise in a different pattern, for example). A goat has probably 2 Int though, so it'd have more free will.

So yes, something with no Int makes any free will that Wis could have given it redundant. Kind of like multiplying a number by 0. Doesn't remove the second number's application when multiplied against higher numbers than 0 however.

Again, say you had Wis 18 but Int 0. You'd see lots of things, but you wouldn't be able to react because you had no mind to. Int 0, Wis 18 and Cha 18 is the same thing. Think of it like this: Because Int reflects learning, having 0 Int means you are unable to learn anything, and hence, unable to learn how to react when you perceive something. Technically, anything you experience in life involves learning (however major/minor). Additionally, with Int 0, you wouldn't be able to recall any knowledge that you had when your Int wasn't at 0.

Wis 0 and Int 18 means you would know how to react, but you wouldn't be able to orient yourself with what you see. You wouldn't be able to understand anything you see. What's the point of trying to make sense of something if you don't know the appropriate steps to make sense of it? You can't look up a word on Wiki or dictionary.com if you are unable to read the word and copy/paste it into the search bar. Mechanically, 0 Wis functions similarly to 0 Int.

Cha 0 and Int 18, Wis 18, means you have no sense of anything other then the self. Thus, you are unable to orient yourself socially, and so nothing matters. You can't move and are helpless, because the world doesn't exist to you. How can the world exist if you are unable to make any impression upon it? If you cannot perceive how others perceive you, how can you reason whether or not they exist? Again, the mechanics are practically identical.

[Riffington]

(there's no school course that teaches creativity - an art program teaches you artist techniques, not how to draw something that is thought provoking).

This is untrue. Good art schools (or even programs) go far beyond technique and do teach creativity; this creativity is very helpful both in art and in other fields. There's a reason so many great musicians have gone to Juilliard, and it's not just selection.

But if someone knows all the knowledge in those avenues, then they require no creativity and intuition at all - just a good memory of the facts and then the ability to arrive at an obvious conclusion.

I don't know that this is true. Take your forgery example (nitpick: not decipher script). If Jack weren't creative, he could look at the noble's handwriting and the letter and say they are nonidentical. He could then look at the noble's sister's handwriting and the letter and say they are nonidentical. But if he's good/has high Int, he may be able to tell whether the sister could have done that forgery.

but then again, creativity can be applied to pretty much any skill (if you swim in a creative way, you can prevent drowning; if you come up with a creative story via bluff, you can lie accordingly, etc.)

Some more than others. Creativity is a fairly minor part of swimming - it's mildly helpful. Creativity is, in contrast, vital to Bluff. The skill relies on it. If a computer can successfully Bluff, it deserves rights (that's the Turing Test)... if it can successfully cross the English Channel, not so much.

The thing with creativity and Wis is that applications of the Wis skill require creativity at certain points

Which? I think fleshing this part out would be most helpful to your argument. The only skill I can think of where creativity is explicitly rewarded is Bluff; the only skill that directly deals with creativity is Craft.

Transcend traditions? The Int guy would be able to recall traditions with knowledge.

And come up with alternatives to those traditions, and figure out the logical implications. What Wisdom does for you is apply the brakes and produce the gut feel "yes, that's logical, but I feel it's wrong anyway".


Alt Text: This happens in geek circles every so often. The 'Hey, this is just a system I can figure out easily!' is also a problem among engineers first diving into the stock market.

Profession (artist) covers all of it. I'll note that that's a bad argument (especially since you can't create anything with profession), but it serves my point anyway.

Craft (painting) is what it takes to make a creative painting; this could result in poverty or riches.
Profession (painter) is what it takes to make a living doing the same thing day in/day out. The point isn't your artwork, the point is maintaining a steady flow of income, managing costs and sales, promotions, etc.
Profession should be approximately as narrow as craft. Profession (artist) is a little too broad.

Charisma has nothing to do with taking action unless it's taking action to convince others to take action or pretending that you are taking action.

Not quite. Charisma covers the difference between Self and World, and is the stat of imposing Self on the World. A high-charisma person is therefore a "dynamo" - constantly Doing something even when she's sitting reading. A low-charisma person is one who "floats" - the world's currents move and she drifts along with them.

Note that animals and humans are very un-alike.

I think this disregards the main source of information we have on the difference between intelligence and wisdom. Animals are the embodiment of low-intelligence, comparatively-higher wisdom. They can act, and often act appropriately. They have no idea why, they are just built with instincts that serve them well in certain environments. Take them to a new environment, and those same instincts remain; they are just less useful.

[Orzel]

Wis- Material supplier
Int- Manufacturing
Cha-Sales

Wis-The Hunter, gather raw material/info
Int- the Butcher, process material/info
Cha-The Salesman, sells refined material/info

Spot/Listen is Wis because it is about noticing the obvious
"Sounds = movement. Duh."
Search is Int because it is about processing the obvious into the hidden
"Rocks are good secret triggers. Look for rocks."

As for creativity
Wis- Noticing and replication of details, styles, and forms
Int- Creating ideas
Cha- Expressing your own take on things

Wisdom alone will mostly just "copy" ideas. Therefore "wisdom creativity" isn't praised often. They are the tribute or cover band with better players.
Intelligence alone creates new ideas and deals with complexity. They can cover plot holes, explain away fridge logic. They make the Violets come before the Roses, but they are still red and blue. "Intelligence creativity" is the same ideas done a different way, but still the same ideas.
Charisma alone fills in the blanks. It's words/notes/colors used. "Charisma creativity" is choose the actual items used therefore is praise if performed well and hated if not.

[Math_Mage]

imp_fireball, you have sketched out a comprehensive and internally consistent understanding of the three mental stats, in which creativity slots primarily into Wisdom. Fine. But how does it hold up to the crunch? Remember, that's all I'm trying to work from here; to be honest, I don't give a fig about what the dictionary has to say, as it will invariably load the discussion with shades of meaning that are not found in the mechanics themselves. One might as well call the ability scores X, Y and Z instead of Int, Wis and Cha, the way I'm going about it.

So let's run down some of the skills. Int skills have a common pattern of being built through knowledge, but applied creatively. Craft, Appraise, Decipher Script, Search; all are thus. Cha skills are a matter of creative preparation and strong execution: Bluff, Disguise, Perform, Gather Information, etc. Wisdom, though...point me to a Wis skill that screams 'creativity' at you. I'm struggling to find one.

I previously mentioned the term 'intuition', and it seems to be a much better fit with the concept you're attempting to express than 'creativity'. Guessing at someone's motivations, from the Decipher Script example you gave, would be intuition rather than creativity at work. And a number of Wis-relevant attributes are intuitive: Heal, Spot, Sense Motive, Will saves, and so on...where I have trouble connecting those attributes to any creative impulse.

So if I had to refine my interpretation of the mental stats, it would run thus: Int expresses one's depth of knowledge and understanding; Wis expresses one's powers of perception and intuition; and Cha expresses one's mastery of interpersonal interaction.

PS. FWIW, I disagree with your intimation that schooling does not teach...whatever blend of creativity, intuition, and reasoning you're talking about. This view is challenged both by the data that Riffington brought up, and by the schooling I have received. But that's not something I can argue about, so I will refrain from further comment.

[imp_fireball]

But if he's good/has high Int, he may be able to tell whether the sister could have done that forgery.

No, he'd just notice, by happenstance, that the sister's hand writing is similar to that of the original letter writer. It takes Int to notice this (since it was in the process of the work being done), but not creativity.

As for schools that teach creativity, I find it very hard to believe that a school can teach open mindedness and the ability to think outside the box - that's always been a matter of student initiative. If it could simply be explained, then it would fall into Int obviously, but it can't. You'd have to give me examples of how they teach this sort of thing.

Int skills have a common pattern of being built through knowledge, but applied creatively.

I'd agree with this, but notice that they don't depend on creativity. Someone who operates in any Int profession can really just succeed entirely on knowledge and not creativity.

Creativity can be applied to anything as I've already stated.

point me to a Wis skill that screams 'creativity' at you.

It's rather intrinsic actually (as in, not entirely evident). Profession relies on creativity to deal with customers in the business. How are you going to run the business? There's no clear manual that describes things. Neither does smiling at customers all the time help if you are the manager of the department as well. You have to be creative in order to compete.

Sense motive relies on you having a decent imagination upon what someone else is capable of. There's no clear manual that tells you what someone could be thinking at any given point in time. You can't smile at the person and expect them to be honest (unless you roll really high on intimidate and even then some GMs may convert the NPC to dislike you or back stab you later on).

Survival is probably the most evident example - what does the environment tell you? You must imagine what can be done with the environment in order to survive in its conditions. Although a manual can tell you how to survive in different environs, the environment changes all the time and you'll have to adapt. You can't reason with the environment through conversation.

Wisdom isn't entirely the epitome of creativity, but intrinsically relates to creativity the most - or at least imagination and perception. Imagination goes hand in hand with creativity and it takes perception to realize what's appropriate.

As for charisma, the most it relates to creativity or perception is probably gather information - who do you think would help you the most in regards to the information you are looking for? Although quite often, help is coincidental (although respectively in part due to your charisma).

Sense motive, spot, listen and profession aren't coincidental and neither is any of the Int skills. Survival is probably the most incidental/happenstance (but not coincidental).

Int expresses one's depth of knowledge and understanding; Wis expresses one's powers of perception and intuition; and Cha expresses one's mastery of interpersonal interaction.

I'd agree with this - except that I'd change understanding to 'learning capacity'. Understanding could fall into both Wis and Int - I'm sure a sage would be considered 'understanding'. Then again other wise people don't fully understand anything and merely acknowledge it; so again, it's up for debate.

IMO, the fact that someone understands something is a matter of personality - they have the drive to seek out and understand things as opposed a more apathetic person with the same Wis or Int score (although Int and Wis does often provide that drive quite often when they discover that they're 'good at it'). Also I'd change 'depth of knowledge' to 'probable/possible depth of knowledge, if any'. That way, a high Int character could live in a society of illiterates with no books for a thousand miles. It's impossible to fully know anything without books for reference (history is forgotten or sparse when passed by word of mouth).

As for creativity
Wis- Noticing and replication of details, styles, and forms
Int- Creating ideas
Cha- Expressing your own take on things

Now for a game of mix'n'match, I suppose.

Replace Wis with Int and we're good (GG ). Wis relates to creation of ideas because ideas are better created when stood up against a wall of other things that a person can perceive. Perception relates to Wis. That's why I argue that at least this sort of creativity (not the artsy type of creativity, but more the philosophical sort, I suppose) is related to Wis.

Then there's creativity in the form of forward thinking. It doesn't directly relate to intuition as some intuitive people just shrug and say they got a hunch - they don't pursue ideas with forward thinking. Forward thinking is more of a personality kind of thing, but IMO, it's supplemented the most by Wis.

A charismatic forward thinker would probably wish to match up their ideas with the opinions of those whom they associate with. Whereas an Intelligent forward thinker would most likely be inspired by whatever they read - in fact, I think it's least likely that a person dependent on Int alone would be a forward thinker (I can imagine them referencing texts and saying 'they got it right' and nothing else needs to be done except maybe to bring the ideas forward which they may or may not do; rather then come up with a new idea that refutes the old ideas). That's just my opinion though.

Intelligence alone creates new ideas and deals with complexity. They can cover plot holes, explain away fridge logic. They make the Violets come before the Roses, but they are still red and blue. "Intelligence creativity" is the same ideas done a different way, but still the same ideas.

While intelligence often associates with complexity, I wouldn't say that it creates new ideas. I'd agree with the fact that it often provides tribute or covers though - or represents something old in a new format.

Explaining away fridge logic or identifying fridge logic has a lot to do with Wis - it's all perception. An intelligent person can reference fridge logic, sure, but they aren't any better at explaining beyond repeating the definition more slowly or with simpler words.

It'd also be nice if you clarified that wisdom was the one to discover 'red and blue'. It had to be perceived first. After that, intelligence of course decided that 'red and blue' could be 'rose and violet'. Wisdom already knew that rose and violet had slightly different tones then other colors that could be categorized as red and blue but it was intelligence that chose to call these tones of red and blue rose and violet.

Charisma alone fills in the blanks. It's words/notes/colors used. "Charisma creativity" is choose the actual items used therefore is praise if performed well and hated if not.

That's an interesting take... naturally anyone can fill in the blanks, but I suppose a charismatic person may be the best one for the job. There ability to associate with the questions that people ask and then please those people with their presentations is the main motive here.
------

Here's another take, in the form of colors!

Intelligence - Intelligence is purple, because it's all about flare. It seeks to impress with its articulation. It is a wealth of learning and definition.

Charisma - Charisma is orange, because it's the main motive behind what inspires people to be captivated. Orange is a tasty color, both simple and deep all at once - and in a way, somewhat supernatural. It is a guiding color.

Wisdom - Wisdom is brown, because it's both absolute like the earth itself and yet often ignored. People accept it for what it is. It perceives everything and is very old and conservative. So intrinsic is it, that it reflects pretty much all aspects of life and perpetuity not at all reflected by the above colors. Brown is an opaque color, and does not reflect these things well however - it requires assistance from the other colors to truly derive meaning from it. Before something is discovered by Charisma or Intelligence, Wisdom already knew it (if vaguely), or could have known of it - there was at least one person who may have perceived it at any point in their lives.

Some more than others. Creativity is a fairly minor part of swimming - it's mildly helpful. Creativity is, in contrast, vital to Bluff. The skill relies on it. If a computer can successfully Bluff, it deserves rights (that's the Turing Test)... if it can successfully cross the English Channel, not so much.

This is where skills can overlap with ability scores, but a skill may be more reliant on one ability score then another (and so the designers decided that they should simply assign the most dependent ability score to that skill instead). Bluff mostly relies on charisma - the ability to put up a convincing face. Gather Information largely depends on perception of the community but it's even more dependent on the ability to get on somebody's good side - hence, charisma again. Perform (Comedy), while it could be facilitated by wittiness and sense of humor (wisdom), relies mostly on presentation - hence, charisma yet again. The same goes for any perform (instrument) which, while it could be argued that it relies on the ability to learn the instrument (Int) or be adept at manipulating its parts (Dex), relies mainly on the ability to enforce a decent presentation.

The fact that bluff rewards players for creativity is up to the GM. The system actually penalizes people for tall tales - although you could easily argue that coming up with tall tales, while requiring imagination are all in all foolish. Technically, the players can be rewarded for any sort of creativity by the GM in anything (except in the case of physical skills, mostly).

It's just that the Wis skills, while not requiring creativity from the player, would require creativity from the character. I acknowledge that some Wis skills don't entirely depend on creativity either or can even apply creativity (spot and listen). Some depend on it, though.

the point is maintaining a steady flow of income, managing costs and sales, promotions, etc.

That depends on creativity.

Profession (artist) is a little too broad.

Well technically, a generic artist could divulge in all sorts of art. Not necessarily 'well' however, since they aren't specialists. According to the mechanics, it evens out however (since a generic artist manages to meet everyone's tastes rather then the excessive tastes of one group of people; unless that group of people were wealthy, and even then that would open up the specialist to a whole new market of other specialists that they'd need to compete with and then it would even out again).

A high-charisma person is therefore a "dynamo" - constantly Doing something even when she's sitting reading.

Well I suppose a person with lots of charisma will perceive everyone else as boring or as people they need to consistently impress to maintain their status and thus become 'dynamos' - again however, this is a matter of personality. Stats don't necessarily define personality (although they can provide convenient aids in doing so).

Of course, people will be less willing to ridicule a high charisma person then someone with low charisma unless said person's reputation is that of a celebrity (and then people will ridicule them as if they were Paris Hilton or Britney Spears - particularly if they are far away from immediate contact with the person).

I think this disregards the main source of information we have on the difference between intelligence and wisdom. Animals are the embodiment of low-intelligence, comparatively-higher wisdom. They can act, and often act appropriately. They have no idea why, they are just built with instincts that serve them well in certain environments. Take them to a new environment, and those same instincts remain; they are just less useful.

This doesn't necessarily refute my argument about animals and humans. My point is that the average animal could probably adapt better then the average human if they were both equally as intelligent and the animal's biology/physiology was comparative to that of a human.

Again, it's difficult to make sense of what you perceive if you have the inability to learn anything beyond a few things to fill up your trick slots (as covered by handle animal rules in the 3.X system).
---

Yet Another Interpretation

Wisdom: The ability to receive and retrieve stimulus (not necessarily remember, but imagine - that sorta thing). Can interpret stimulus on a more vague level. For animals, this is enough to trigger their instincts.

Intelligence: The ability to interpret stimulus down to a raw definitive level. If both intelligence and wisdom are of reasonable levels, wisdom can aid severely in facilitating understanding.

Charisma: The ability to offer stimulus.

[Math_Mage]

I'd agree with this, but notice that they don't depend on creativity. Someone who operates in any Int profession can really just succeed entirely on knowledge and not creativity.

1. I would like to see you telling a group of scientists that their Knowledge ([insert science here]) was obtained without creativity. It's possible, sure...just as it's possible to run a Profession without creativity. But you are going to great lengths to undermine the creativity of Int-based fields--why? Because you're just that attached to the idea of creativity being primarily the domain of Wisdom? I don't get it.
2. If we're going to run by this measure of dependence, surely Charisma wins out. All the Cha-based skills I mentioned in my previous post depend on creative formulation.

Creativity can be applied to anything as I've already stated.

Then why insist on narrowing down creativity into one slot? If it applies to everything, then why not let it apply to everything?

It's rather intrinsic actually (as in, not entirely evident). Profession relies on creativity to deal with customers in the business. How are you going to run the business? There's no clear manual that describes things. Neither does smiling at customers all the time help if you are the manager of the department as well. You have to be creative in order to compete.

"This was my father's business, and his father's before him, and his father's..." There is nothing intrinsically creative about running a profession. And yes, often there is a clear manual that describes things. That's how businesses operate. But hey, Profession isn't exactly the skill you first think of when you think of Wis skills--let's look at the others, eh?

Sense motive relies on you having a decent imagination upon what someone else is capable of. There's no clear manual that tells you what someone could be thinking at any given point in time. You can't smile at the person and expect them to be honest (unless you roll really high on intimidate and even then some GMs may convert the NPC to dislike you or back stab you later on).

I don't see how this 'there's no clear manual' thing translates to especial, intrinsic creativity. And what you describe above is simply caution. 'He might be bluffing' is not an attitude that takes creativity. Determining if he is bluffing takes intuition and perception, not creativity. Really, the only use of Sense Motive that implies creativity is the check made against sending secret messages.

Survival is probably the most evident example - what does the environment tell you? You must imagine what can be done with the environment in order to survive in its conditions. Although a manual can tell you how to survive in different environs, the environment changes all the time and you'll have to adapt. You can't reason with the environment through conversation.

Again with the manual thing. Thinking outside the box isn't creativity when there's no box to begin with. And Survival, like Profession, is one of those multi-attribute skills that were slotted into single attributes to keep paperwork to a minimum. Does it take intelligence and knowledge to run a business? Does it take good intuition and perception to run a business? Does it take good people skills to run a business? And in practice, survival in the wilderness runs off a melange of physical stats, knowledge, perception, and intuition (a 5-stat skill). Creativity helps the Survival skill just like everything else, but survival doesn't depend on it.

Wisdom isn't entirely the epitome of creativity, but intrinsically relates to creativity the most - or at least imagination and perception. Imagination goes hand in hand with creativity and it takes perception to realize what's appropriate.

Imagination? Appropriate? Now we're throwing terms in willy-nilly. And none of them seriously strengthens your justification for considering creativity and Wisdom to go hand in hand, particularly not from the crunch perspective.

As for charisma, the most it relates to creativity or perception is probably gather information - who do you think would help you the most in regards to the information you are looking for? Although quite often, help is coincidental (although respectively in part due to your charisma).

Wait, when did perception become tied to creativity in this discussion? And when did creativity lose it importance in bluffing, diplomacy, performance and so on?

Sense motive, spot, listen and profession aren't coincidental and neither is any of the Int skills. Survival is probably the most incidental/happenstance (but not coincidental).

...

This 'coincidental', I do not understand where it came up in discussion.

I'd agree with this - except that I'd change understanding to 'learning capacity'. Understanding could fall into both Wis and Int - I'm sure a sage would be considered 'understanding'. Then again other wise people don't fully understand anything and merely acknowledge it; so again, it's up for debate.

Fair enough. Understanding is a broad term.

IMO, the fact that someone understands something is a matter of personality - they have the drive to seek out and understand things as opposed a more apathetic person with the same Wis or Int score (although Int and Wis does often provide that drive quite often when they discover that they're 'good at it'). Also I'd change 'depth of knowledge' to 'probable/possible depth of knowledge, if any'. That way, a high Int character could live in a society of illiterates with no books for a thousand miles. It's impossible to fully know anything without books for reference (history is forgotten or sparse when passed by word of mouth).

The distinction between native intelligence and acquired learning is not large, in the crunch, and is satisfied by the suggestion of 'learning capacity'. Hard cases make bad law, and borderline scenarios make bad definitions.

The fact that bluff rewards players for creativity is up to the GM. The system actually penalizes people for tall tales - although you could easily argue that coming up with tall tales, while requiring imagination are all in all foolish. Technically, the players can be rewarded for any sort of creativity by the GM in anything (except in the case of physical skills, mostly).

Obviously improper application of creativity leads to poor results. That does not make creativity any less critical to bluffing well.

It's just that the Wis skills, while not requiring creativity from the player, would require creativity from the character. I acknowledge that some Wis skills don't entirely depend on creativity either or can even apply creativity (spot and listen). Some depend on it, though.

Which is no more than can be said for Int or Cha.

Yet Another Interpretation

Wisdom: The ability to receive and retrieve stimulus (not necessarily remember, but imagine - that sorta thing). Can interpret stimulus on a more vague level. For animals, this is enough to trigger their instincts.

Intelligence: The ability to interpret stimulus down to a raw definitive level. If both intelligence and wisdom are of reasonable levels, wisdom can aid severely in facilitating understanding.

Charisma: The ability to offer stimulus.

This I like intuitively. Haven't tried to apply the crunch to it. The color-based one seems needlessly roundabout to me.

[imp_fireball]

1. I would like to see you telling a group of scientists that their Knowledge ([insert science here]) was obtained without creativity. It's possible, sure...just as it's possible to run a Profession without creativity. But you are going to great lengths to undermine the creativity of Int-based fields--why? Because you're just that attached to the idea of creativity being primarily the domain of Wisdom? I don't get it.
2. If we're going to run by this measure of dependence, surely Charisma wins out. All the Cha-based skills I mentioned in my previous post depend on creative formulation.

1. Int doesn't depend on creativity. It can utilize creativity but it doesn't depend on it.
2. I wouldn't say they depend on it. Like Int, you can use creativity to help perform the skill but it doesn't depend on it.

Then why insist on narrowing down creativity into one slot? If it applies to everything, then why not let it apply to everything?

It does apply to everything. It's just that there's a few wisdom skills that depend on it absolutely. Hence, wisdom is more related to creativity then the others.

"This was my father's business, and his father's before him, and his father's..." There is nothing intrinsically creative about running a profession. And yes, often there is a clear manual that describes things. That's how businesses operate. But hey, Profession isn't exactly the skill you first think of when you think of Wis skills--let's look at the others, eh?

Running a profession in itself isn't creative - but intrinsically, you must be creative to keep it running depending on circumstances. You must be creative in marketing and competing with similar businesses.

Wait, when did perception become tied to creativity in this discussion? And when did creativity lose it importance in bluffing, diplomacy, performance and so on?

I've been implying that nearly from the OP actually. I didn't say creativity lost its importance in the charisma skills. It's just that it isn't necessary to the performance of those skills. You can make a cover of an existing song and still get the same money from the perform check. In order to make money out of creativity, profession (musician) would probably help you to market a new song that isn't popular yet or profession (song writer) (or craft (song) which is less generalized but not really covered by craft rules since the amount of money it makes depends largely on marketing and public opinion of the song - a song cannot be appraised for value whereas an item that uses actual materials can; hence, I don't think craft is appropriate for anything to do with art unless there's some sort of fascist art authoritarian state buying up all art at a set value).

[Math_Mage]

Running a profession in itself isn't creative - but intrinsically, you must be creative to keep it running depending on circumstances. You must be creative in marketing and competing with similar businesses.

And this is different from the creativity it takes to tell a good lie, play a good performance, analyze an obscure script based on perceived relationships with ones you know--how, exactly? You keep saying and saying that Wisdom has a uniquely intrinsic connection to creativity (this arbitrary distinction between 'helps you perform a skill' and 'required for a skill'), but how does "creativity helps you run a profession" differ from any of these others? My character has ranks in Profession (Sailor). Where did creativity enter into it?

[imp_fireball]

Well, charisma reciprocates creativity, whereas wisdom involves 'higher echelon' creativity.

Wisdom incorporates the ability to recall sensations and find out the 'why' behind creativity. Thus, they are able to put meaning into creativity and use creativity to get things done.

Other forms of creativity, like drawing something flashy is reciprocation. It doesn't help get things done. But it happens to be flashy and fall into the creativity paradigm by social definition.

Intelligence helps organize creative pursuits.

[Thinker]

Your opinion is wrong.

[The Glyphstone]

No, your opinion is wrong.

*winds up popcorn machine*

[Thinker]

I never claimed my opinion was right.

[Math_Mage]

Well, charisma reciprocates creativity, whereas wisdom involves 'higher echelon' creativity.

Wisdom incorporates the ability to recall sensations and find out the 'why' behind creativity. Thus, they are able to put meaning into creativity and use creativity to get things done.

Other forms of creativity, like drawing something flashy is reciprocation. It doesn't help get things done. But it happens to be flashy and fall into the creativity paradigm by social definition.

Intelligence helps organize creative pursuits.

Your statements are too vague to be evaluated. What is the 'reciprocation' of creativity? What is 'higher echelon' creativity? What does, say, the Survival skill have to do with finding out the 'why' behind creativity? How is producing a drawing not 'getting things done' in the way that Wisdom is? What is the 'organization of creative pursuits' that Intelligence supposedly helps with?

[Knaight]

And yet another thread that explains why I cut mental stats. Of course, I don't play D&D, the system involved is a little easier to tweak at such a drastic level.

[imp_fireball]

Your statements are too vague to be evaluated. What is the 'reciprocation' of creativity? What is 'higher echelon' creativity? What does, say, the Survival skill have to do with finding out the 'why' behind creativity? How is producing a drawing not 'getting things done' in the way that Wisdom is? What is the 'organization of creative pursuits' that Intelligence supposedly helps with?

Discerning 'why' isn't a skill, that's why.

If you don't know what reciprocation or symbolism is, look it up in a dictionary. I can't help you beyond that.

EDIT: Survival requires the senses. Recalling sensations is senses. Pretty simple thar, hur hur.

Organization involves intelligence because the knowledge skill in itself recalls organized facts. Intelligence is the ability to orient those facts and recall them appropriately. If intelligence is put to creativity then it involves its organization. Say you want to apply some logistical method to creativity - that would require intelligence.

[Math_Mage]

Discerning 'why' isn't a skill, that's why.

That's why what? I didn't even ask a 'why' question.

If you don't know what reciprocation or symbolism is, look it up in a dictionary. I can't help you beyond that.

I know what the words mean, and I don't appreciate your condescending attitude. The phrase "reciprocation of creativity" does not parse well. Do you mean that, say, bluffing involves receiving creativity and giving it in return (reciprocating)? Also, since you have not previously mentioned symbolism, I am confused as to why you bring it up now.

EDIT: Survival requires the senses. Recalling sensations is senses. Pretty simple thar, hur hur.

Everything requires the senses. This has very little to do with your previous comments about 'higher echelon' creativity and finding out the 'why' behind creativity and so forth, which is what I asked about. So don't 'hur hur' at me.

Organization involves intelligence because the knowledge skill in itself recalls organized facts. Intelligence is the ability to orient those facts and recall them appropriately. If intelligence is put to creativity then it involves its organization. Say you want to apply some logistical method to creativity - that would require intelligence.

"Say you want to apply some logistical method to creativity." This sentence, it has no meaning. I understand that organization involves intelligence--it is this nebulous process of 'organizing creativity' that puzzles me.

[Ihouji]

I've generall viewed Int as acedemic learning ability, whereas Wis is Judgement.

This is the view I have always taken as well.

This more or less accounts for all the people I know who are incredibly intelligent and yet still make incredibly stupid decisions (high Int, low Wis).

It also accounts for the all the stories of people who drop out of high school and yet still become incredibly successful (low Int, high Wis).

[imp_fireball]

"Say you want to apply some logistical method to creativity." This sentence, it has no meaning. I understand that organization involves intelligence--it is this nebulous process of 'organizing creativity' that puzzles me.

Maybe you should tell me specifically what puzzles you and then I can narrow it down to make my opinion more clear.

Also, please don't get offended. It's all just debatin' dialogue.

[Math_Mage]

Maybe you should tell me specifically what puzzles you and then I can narrow it down to make my opinion more clear.

Also, please don't get offended. It's all just debatin' dialogue.

-I have difficulty interpreting the phrase 'reciprocation of creativity' as it applies to Charisma.
-I don't understand what you are referring to as 'higher echelon creativity' and 'the 'why' behind creativity' when you talk about Wisdom.
-I see little reason to define intelligence in terms of 'organizing creativity' if you are simply talking about the organization and recall of knowledge.
-I have trouble understanding why creativity needs to be the focus of this analysis, when it doesn't appear to be uniquely important to any one mental attribute.

[imp_fireball]

-I have difficulty interpreting the phrase 'reciprocation of creativity' as it applies to Charisma.
-I don't understand what you are referring to as 'higher echelon creativity' and 'the 'why' behind creativity' when you talk about Wisdom.
-I see little reason to define intelligence in terms of 'organizing creativity' if you are simply talking about the organization and recall of knowledge.
-I have trouble understanding why creativity needs to be the focus of this analysis, when it doesn't appear to be uniquely important to any one mental attribute.

You've said all this before, but you haven't given me reasons why.

I used the word 'reciprocation' because when someone receives ideas from another creator, they subconsciously recreate those ideas in their attempts to be creative. Drawing a cartoon of a dancing flower is an example of this - in layman's terms, someone has probably thought of this before.

Symbolism falls into this because I need to refer to it in order to fully define what I mean by 'higher echelon creativity'.

It's difficult, but I'm getting there, hopefully.

Symbolism contains meaning and hence it relates somewhat to the why behind creativity. The 'why' might involve the reason why someone created something - they wanted to convey a message via symbolism (ie.), or perhaps they wanted to make money on an original concept (like, the simpsons, ie.?). Doing it to win an art contest would be reciprocation, inevitably, since it falls on the decision of a few judges rather then an entire market and perhaps a publisher that may cancel your creation at a moment's notice. Hence 'why'. Why did someone create something? How do we explain this process of thought? The why behind creativity. It's hard to go beyond that.

Also, creating symbolism, whether through drawing paintings or writing fiction, is boring in D&D (D&D is already fiction in itself), unless there's some magical effect that you get from doing so. Hence, no skills actually relate to this except reciting poetry as bardic inspiration (which requires charisma; people don't want to hear if you aren't emotional about it).

Also, one of you questioned creativity, so that's why the debate is moving over to that now.

Off subject points of note:

- Does anyone agree that wisdom is required to improve one's sense of humor or to tell a lasting joke?

- Leonardo Davinci: IMO, he has both a high wis and int. How did he envision his replicas of modern technology? Clearly he was smart (good int), otherwise he wouldn't have pursued science to the point of innovation. He was also an artist - which, so far argued, doesn't relate to any of the ability scores; although since wisdom relates to the senses involving skills like spot and listen (and I know everyone can sense, but the degree to which someone can do so is invariably wisdom), I'd argue that really good art requires wisdom since it involves the ability to sense and create beauty from scratch, rather then to recreate it or reciprocate it (ie. drawing a land scape from what you see).

[Rothen]

Now if only IQ was an accurate measurement of one's intellect.

Oh well.

[imp_fireball]

Now if only IQ was an accurate measurement of one's intellect.

Oh well.

Humans are too complicated for that.

Hell, animals are too.

[Math_Mage]

You've said all this before, but you haven't given me reasons why.

Presumably you are referring to the last point, as the others do not appear to require further explanation, at least from my point of view. I just don't see how creativity in bluffing, disguise, or performance is any less important than creativity in spotting, survival or professional work. Presumably the rest of your post is meant to answer this to some extent.

I used the word 'reciprocation' because when someone receives ideas from another creator, they subconsciously recreate those ideas in their attempts to be creative. Drawing a cartoon of a dancing flower is an example of this - in layman's terms, someone has probably thought of this before.

Just because there's nothing new under the sun does not mean it requires no original creativity on the part of the individual to engage in these practices. Composers: High int, high wis, or high cha? And would you say they are creative, or no?

Symbolism falls into this because I need to refer to it in order to fully define what I mean by 'higher echelon creativity'.

It's difficult, but I'm getting there, hopefully.

Symbolism contains meaning and hence it relates somewhat to the why behind creativity. The 'why' might involve the reason why someone created something - they wanted to convey a message via symbolism (ie.), or perhaps they wanted to make money on an original concept (like, the simpsons, ie.?). Doing it to win an art contest would be reciprocation, inevitably, since it falls on the decision of a few judges rather then an entire market and perhaps a publisher that may cancel your creation at a moment's notice. Hence 'why'. Why did someone create something? How do we explain this process of thought? The why behind creativity. It's hard to go beyond that.

1. I'm not seeing anything here related to what Wisdom actually is in D&D, only to how your interpretations of creativity play out in this context. Is Wisdom having a good reason to create a painting? Is Wisdom knowing why somebody created a painting?
2. Your use of 'reciprocation' here is very different from what you said above. Why does creativity become reciprocal--that is, an unconscious recreation of past work (as per your definition)--simply because it is judged by a different set of people? Is it your contention that an artist looking to win an art contest and the same artist looking to make money on an original concept cannot produce the same work? If so, why? If not, how do you justify calling one the product of 'higher echelon' creativity, and the other the product of 'reciprocal' creativity?

Also, creating symbolism, whether through drawing paintings or writing fiction, is boring in D&D (D&D is already fiction in itself), unless there's some magical effect that you get from doing so. Hence, no skills actually relate to this except reciting poetry as bardic inspiration (which requires charisma; people don't want to hear if you aren't emotional about it).

If none of the mechanics of D&D relate to the creation of symbolism, why the pressing need to assign it to some particular attribute? If Wisdom in D&D is not used in the context of symbolism, then why define it in terms of symbolism?

Off subject points of note:

- Does anyone agree that wisdom is required to improve one's sense of humor or to tell a lasting joke?

Sure, if we're talking about wisdom as 'higher-echelon' creativity--but you have yet to adequately define the latter, let alone demonstrate an intrinsic connection between the two.

- Leonardo Davinci: IMO, he has both a high wis and int. How did he envision his replicas of modern technology? Clearly he was smart (good int), otherwise he wouldn't have pursued science to the point of innovation. He was also an artist - which, so far argued, doesn't relate to any of the ability scores; although since wisdom relates to the senses involving skills like spot and listen (and I know everyone can sense, but the degree to which someone can do so is invariably wisdom), I'd argue that really good art requires wisdom since it involves the ability to sense and create beauty from scratch, rather then to recreate it or reciprocate it (ie. drawing a land scape from what you see).

da Vinci was the quintessential Renaissance man: all of his mental stats were high.

You say that 'really good art' requires creating beauty from scratch; but the Mona Lisa is a portrait. And what does the creation of beauty have to do with 'skills like spot or listen'?

[Cogidubnus]

Interesting, haven't read the whole thread, but I will suggest this - the human brain only ever works at 1/3 actual capacity. Perhaps INT enhancing items actually simply allow you to use more of that capacity without going crazy? So a wizard with 20 INT and 10 WIS and +6 headband of intellect, although he has an IQ of 140 by your math, is still much more mentally capable than an ordinary human, hence the enormous boost to INT based stats.

[grarrrg]

Wow... If the thread is raised by Necromancy, but the Necromancer is the original poster is it still Undead?

OH! I know how to solve this:

The original poster is Hitler, all the replies that disagree with him are Nazis. Therefore by Godwin's Law (and its corrilaries):
1: This thread is hereby over. (Was going in circles anyway)
2: Because I mentioned Hitler/Nazis my side of the arguement automatically loses.
3: Because I support both the original poster AND the dissenters, then they lose as well.
4: Because the other side lost, both sides win.
5: Everybody is now happy

[Math_Mage]

Wow... If the thread is raised by Necromancy, but the Necromancer is the original poster is it still Undead?

OH! I know how to solve this:

The original poster is Hitler, all the replies that disagree with him are Nazis. Therefore by Godwin's Law (and its corrilaries):
1: This thread is hereby over. (Was going in circles anyway)
2: Because I mentioned Hitler/Nazis my side of the arguement automatically loses.
3: Because I support both the original poster AND the dissenters, then they lose as well.
4: Because the other side lost, both sides win.
5: Everybody is now happy

The thread is within the Forum Rules limits on necromancy.

[imp_fireball]

Composers: High int, high wis, or high cha? And would you say they are creative, or no?

Difficult to judge. Knowledge of how to compose requires int, but then again composing is just a skill like anything else - truly famous composers might have good wis if they are able to perceive what's been done before and then work in something unique and fresh.

All of that falls into the bounds of creativity, so yes they're creative.

the human brain only ever works at 1/3 actual capacity.

I don't think this is actually proven. I think I remember reading somewhere that it actually works at full capacity but only during times of absolute concentration or stress. Most of the time, a person is relaxed and/or sleeping, hence 1/3 capacity on average, probably.

Perhaps INT enhancing items actually simply allow you to use more of that capacity without going crazy?

Or maybe his neurons fire faster, effectively increasing his meat computer's processing speed?

There's another area of the brain involving perception (and that's perception of all things), executive functions, etc., and that would strongly preclude wisdom probably.

You say that 'really good art' requires creating beauty from scratch; but the Mona Lisa is a portrait. And what does the creation of beauty have to do with 'skills like spot or listen'?

Ah... never mind then.

Also, I don't think Da Vinci had to be all that charismatic.

If Wisdom in D&D is not used in the context of symbolism, then why define it in terms of symbolism?

I wanna go beyond D&D here. Main reason for it is, role playing is enhanced when we stretch into reality rather then remaining with the bounds of a game.

Is Wisdom having a good reason to create a painting? Is Wisdom knowing why somebody created a painting?

Yes it is. Both of those uses of wisdom are perception. In construed D&D terms, that would be sense motive to connect evidence or empathy to understand one's feelings (latter isn't a skill, but sense motive or a wis check can suffice).

Is it your contention that an artist looking to win an art contest and the same artist looking to make money on an original concept cannot produce the same work? If so, why? If not, how do you justify calling one the product of 'higher echelon' creativity, and the other the product of 'reciprocal' creativity?

Many artists win art contests, but only a few make it big. This is true of real life.

People generally realize a work as being 'higher echelon' when they've analyzed it again and again and possibly come up with different definitions.

Thus, the bible would be higher echelon. Mona Lisa would be higher echelon if it wasn't a portrait (because it is a portrait, the only reason for her smiling is because the girl was probably smiling when she had her portrait done - that's just one conclusion though, it'd be possible that the artist simply added it in, but nonetheless, it leaves less room for thought about the subject beyond 'it was a nicely done picture').

It also accounts for the all the stories of people who drop out of high school and yet still become incredibly successful (low Int, high Wis).

It takes creativity to do that sort of thing, no?

The same goes for people that graduated high school but didn't major in anything in university or whatever.