Playing Characters Smarter Than You

[Nifft]

This thread is for suggestions to help players play characters who are smarter than the players themselves.

Mechanical modifications to add game support for smarter-than-human characters is also welcome.

War stories and experiences playing super-genius characters also welcome.

Idea #1: Crowdsourcing. The player of a smart character is allowed more time to decide the character's action, and is allowed to ask other people what they think about different action choices.

Idea #2: Smug Points. The player can spend a Smug Point to retroactively declare something about the universe, which only that character would have noticed, because the character is just so smart.

[Ralanr]

If you're playing games with a DM, the character is more likely to have access to knowledge than others in certain subjects (not the best example).

From what I can understand about writing characters that are smarter than you, it's all about the time it takes to go from A to B in their conclusions. You may spend hours researching the most accurate answer, but in the setting they reach it in seconds.

[Flickerdart]

It's really only feasible to play a character smarter than yourself in games where intelligence is some kind of mechanical ability. Even if you crowdsource ideas, the character is still only as smart as the play group, which is unlikely to be much of a help.

[Red Fel]

It really depends on what you mean by smart.

For example, do you mean "knows more?" That's easy. Use your system's version of Knowledge skills. Work it out with your DM that he can make rolls for you, so you don't have to constantly ask "Can I roll Knowledge on this?" He'll pass you notes. It'll be awesome.

Or do you mean "deduces promptly?" That's trickier. If in doubt, you could ask your DM to let you roll some kind of Int-check to start deducing; enough success and he drops a clue, with anything you've found so far offering circumstance bonuses.

Or do you mean "comes up with great plans?" Also tricky. Again, you could improvise an Int check to figure out, based on what you know, what might be effective in this situation, or against this obstacle.

Or do you mean "genius inventor?" You're not playing Tony Stark, stop that.

Or do you mean "comes up with witty retorts?" Watch some great plays, maybe some Oscar Wilde. You'll get it eventually.

[TheCountAlucard]

Or do you mean "genius inventor?" You're not playing Tony Stark, stop that.

That said, he's pretty playable in a number of systems, including various superhero games, Mage, and of course Exalted.

Or do you mean "comes up with witty retorts?" Watch some great plays, maybe some Oscar Wilde. You'll get it eventually.

I gotta say, I was doing some reading, and the woman who most likely inspired Doyle's character of Irene Adler was pretty darn sharp herself.

[Socksy]

Ask if you can use more metagame knowledge than the other players are allowed to, maybe?

I have the opposite problem - an INT/WIS 9 warlock and a dungeon which contains, well, not really puzzles, but a lot of choices which must be made. I spend a lot of time biting my lip and trying not to blab anything out.

[Telwar]

The player should actively try to use their Int score in the same fashion as the strong and twitchy characters use their Str/Dex scores, by leaning on them heavily and asking if they apply. DM can give them more hints, too.

[Nifft]

I have the opposite problem - an INT/WIS 9 warlock and a dungeon which contains, well, not really puzzles, but a lot of choices which must be made. I spend a lot of time biting my lip and trying not to blab anything out.

Hmm.

Maybe you can be the "Int Hint" imp on the shoulder of the Wizard / Warblade / whatever? Like, you whisper in the ear of the player who has a character with a high Int, and then that player has the high-Int character vocally declare the puzzle's solution.

[Flickerdart]

I have the opposite problem - an INT/WIS 9 warlock and a dungeon which contains, well, not really puzzles, but a lot of choices which must be made. I spend a lot of time biting my lip and trying not to blab anything out.

You can always make suggestions out of character.

[dream]

Idea #3: Genius is all about understanding what most people can't even see. The way it's portrayed in literature is a person who sees causes and consequences better than most. Sherlock Holmes. Batman. Reed Richards. Kaiser Soze. That guy from "Limitless". Genius is almost like a sixth sense, because the mind is operating on a higher level than others and can appear to be precognitive, with the character always staying 1-2 steps ahead of everyone else.

So how do you roleplay it? Depends on the system, but it starts with the GM and player working closely to ensure the character gains additional advantages by using his/her/its mind. Systems with an "Inspiration"-style dynamic complement this, allowing the player to use a Hero point or Bennie or similar feature to gain "special information" about a given subject. Example:

GM: "The bad guys are robbing the bank! They have hostages, heavy weapons, explosives, and the police negotiator hasn't shown up! Go!"

Players: "... uh ..."

Player of Genius PC: "I burn a (fill-in-the-blank dynamic) to figured out how best to handle freeing the hostages, for starters."

At this point, the GM, knowing how best to resolve the situation, gives the Genius PC's player a solid tip for handling the robbers. Nothing that's automatically successful, but a piece or two of information that can be used to give the PCs a clear advantage (over the robbers and the cops).
Two heads (GM & Player) are better than one, especially when the GM has the entire adventure in-hand.

Idea #4: Another method I've used is, when the player of the smart PC comes up with an idea, no matter how crazy it sounds, I go with it, changing an encounter or even an adventure to fit the idea. Every idea doesn't work this way, but when the group is stumped, it's a fun ace to play. This way being smart has real impact, without being game-breaking.

Just my 2 coin.

[goto124]

If Idea #3 means the GM giving suggestions on how to deal with the situation, depends on the GM having planned out the plot beforehand - works well for adventure paths (and literature), but not something meant to have more freedom. The 'person who sees causes and consequences better than most' can be hard to work out when even the GM has little idea what will happen next. Okay, the GM knows the causes, but not the consequences.

Idea #4 works better with more freedom, but it can still be rather difficult, and requiring a lot of improv on the part of the GM. Even if it's a sandbox and the GM had only written the setting details, it can take a lot of twisting just to make the player's plan work. How far can you go before the setting loses internal consistency and makes no sense?

I suggest another idea: Being able to tell what an NPC is thinking or planning. It could work like a knowledge check, except your character is trying to deduce the thoughts of another person. What the players do with it is another story, since you can have High Int but Low Wis

EDIT: I just re-read the post, Idea #3 says 'a piece or two of information that can be used to give the PCs a clear advantage (over the [enemy NPCs])'. Then my idea is close to Idea #3.

[NichG]

The hard thing about playing smart authentically is that 'actually smart' feels very different than dramatic editing or the GM helping with the plan or things like that. A smart idea makes most people who see it immediately realize something they had missed, so it becomes obvious that its clever just by hearing it.

So of course, this is hard to do without actually having smart ideas.

One way to mask it a bit better is to use secrecy. If the GM says 'you should do X', then first of all you'll only have a character as smart as the GM, and secondly there's a potential impression of 'this works because the GM decided or was mechanically forced to decide ahead of time that it would work'. But if the GM just slips the person a note indirectly about some information that the other players aren't privy to, that can sometimes let the player come up with a plan that seems brilliant. The 'aha!' moment that makes a smart idea feel smart is being substituted by an 'aha!' moment associated with the revelation of that hidden information - not exactly the same thing, but its getting there.

This has to be used very carefully or it'll also feel fake. The hidden information should be something that a person could have deduced or intuited. Otherwise you get things like a murder mystery where the culprit was actually never mentioned or showed up until the reveal, at which point it goes from 'oh, I remember when that happened, crap, I could have figured it out!' to 'how could anyone possibly have figured that out?!'

So for example, the bank heist as presented would make it very hard to do this, because the GM gave the players almost no information. But if the GM's description had been a bit broader, it would have created some opportunities for this kind of hidden information. For example, a witness report about the robbers which talks about how they were dressed and what equipment they had, but is (not conspicuously, just left out) missing any sort of way for the robbers to load up any money (no sacks or backpacks or anything like that). The GM could pass a secret note 'How are the robbers going to carry any money out? Are they even planning to do so, or do they have a different agenda?' - when it turns out this is an assassination or a kidnapping or data theft or something like that, with the bank robbery acting to conceal it.

Again though, this is pretty hard, and requires a lot of work from both the player and the GM to pull off. But if you want Xanatos Gambit levels of impressive smartness, you kind of need a lot of prep for it.

On the other hand, if you just want to pull off the attitude of a smart character, I think that's a lot easier. One thing that can make a character seem smarter is to self-check whenever you're going to do something. That is to say, you have a lot of OOC time to think about what you're going to do compared to the IC time. So you can make use of that to think 'wait, is it really a good idea to do X?'. Just do it once per idea - don't obsess over it or try to perfect it, but just do a quick filter. You'll catch a lot more things where the answer should have obviously been 'no', but they seemed to fit the mood or seemed cool or whatever. Overall, it gives the character a bit more of a thoughtful air. Combine that with calm confidence in the things that you do eventually decide to do, and you can give off the idea that you have everything under control. This is more of a seasoned intelligence rather than a sort of explosive brilliance, but the former is easier to fake than the latter without external help.

[goto124]

The hidden information should be something that a person could have deduced or intuited. Otherwise you get things like a murder mystery where the culprit was actually never mentioned or showed up until the reveal, at which point it goes from 'oh, I remember when that happened, crap, I could have figured it out!' to 'how could anyone possibly have figured that out?!'

Also... Knowledge checks, which bascially give information that the character knows to the player.

[NichG]

Also... Knowledge checks, which bascially give information that the character knows to the player.

I guess what I'm aiming at is hiding the GM's involvement and creating the illusion that the idea was just the result of the one character thinking more clearly than everyone else. A knowledge check is both public and external (new factual information rather than deduction or intuition), so I don't think it creates that impression very well.

[Cluedrew]

I feel your greatest weapon here is time, it has been mentioned before but I would like to draw some more attention to it. This doesn't work as well for "master planner" types but if you want someone coming up with bright ideas on the fly then remember that "the fly" actually means "as much time as you need" on your end, plus, try bouncing ideas off of other people, two heads are better than one and all that.

The other is have them act intelligent, smart people are not smart because they are smart, there is some root cause to it all. If they are knowledgeable have them learn things on screen, if they are thoughtful have them be lost in though for a few moments now and again. Done right you can portray a rather intelligent character without ever doing something intelligent.

Doesn't work for all types of "intelligent" but sometimes this is enough.

[dream]

If Idea #3 means the GM giving suggestions on how to deal with the situation, depends on the GM having planned out the plot beforehand - works well for adventure paths (and literature), but not something meant to have more freedom. The 'person who sees causes and consequences better than most' can be hard to work out when even the GM has little idea what will happen next. Okay, the GM knows the causes, but not the consequences.

I agree with most of your points, except the GM not knowing consequences. The norm is the players make their decisions and RP a scene, but ultimately, the GM can "fiat/railroad" any encounter to the PCs' advantage or disadvantage.

The hard thing about playing smart authentically is that 'actually smart' feels very different than dramatic editing or the GM helping with the plan or things like that. A smart idea makes most people who see it immediately realize something they had missed, so it becomes obvious that its clever just by hearing it.

So of course, this is hard to do without actually having smart ideas.

snip

Great points! Is it really difficult though? I'm thinking it merely requires an agreement between GM and player that the smart PC will have that "highly-intelligent" aspect, which can produce situational advantages. I like the secret approach: it helps maintain immersion.

I feel your greatest weapon here is time, it has been mentioned before but I would like to draw some more attention to it. This doesn't work as well for "master planner" types but if you want someone coming up with bright ideas on the fly then remember that "the fly" actually means "as much time as you need" on your end, plus, try bouncing ideas off of other people, two heads are better than one and all that.

The other is have them act intelligent, smart people are not smart because they are smart, there is some root cause to it all. If they are knowledgeable have them learn things on screen, if they are thoughtful have them be lost in though for a few moments now and again. Done right you can portray a rather intelligent character without ever doing something intelligent.

Doesn't work for all types of "intelligent" but sometimes this is enough.

Great point!

[Darth Ultron]

Intelligence covers so much, that it is impossible for a player in an RPG to even simulate it. Some people are fine with just knowledge, as if intelligence is just knowing more stuff. And that is an easy and mechanical thing to add to any game. Other then that, it's tricky.

The DM can babysit the intelligent character and make sure they always and only do smart things. But that can be awkward for the player as they don't get to ''play there character''. But some players are fine just sitting back and letting the DM run their character. Though this is not the player playing a smart character, of course.

The DM can make the world dumb, and this makes the smart character look smart. This is done in fiction all the time. And it works well enough. If everyone else in the world acts very dumb, then even the average intelligence people seem smart.

Though, ultimately, I'd just say to a player something like this: ''No matter what you will never ever play a character ''the real'' way that character would be ''for real'', so just get over it and play the game."

[Cluedrew]

I have two points I would like to say in relation to Ultron's post.

The first is I have read stories where an "intelligent" character is only so because s/he is surrounded by the greatest of fools, constantly. It shows, plus all the other members of the party would have to dumb down their characters as well which they could do if they wanted to help, but that seems excessive and almost unfair.

The other is that it is impossible to actually play a character smarter than yourself. In a sense you are correct but really we only have to make a character that looks smarter than you to make it work. That may not be "the real" for intelligence as you said but... not a lot of RPGs is real to begin with so I don't think that is as big of an issue as you make it out to be. Of course that is just my opinion on the matter, anyone thinking about playing an intelligent character will have to make their own decision on the matter.

[LudicSavant]

Strictly speaking, the best way to play a more intelligent character is to make yourself more intelligent. Seriously, that's a perfectly doable option. I'll even give you a really great place to start: http://lesswrong.com/about/ and http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/FAQ.

However, that said, this:

The other is that it is impossible to actually play a character smarter than yourself.

isn't entirely true. There are tricks you can take advantage of in order to represent a character with faculties that you, yourself, do not have. It can only go so far, of course, but it's still simulating a character smarter than yourself.

1) Take advantage of the difference between real-time and game-time. Your character often has less time at their disposal than you do. A combat round isn't actually resolved in 6 seconds. Heck, in the extreme case of a play by post, you may well have adequate time to research everything you say if you're so inclined. As a result, your character can relatively easily be made to think faster than you do.

2) Take advantage of your access to metagame information. Before anyone cries foul, keep in mind that it's possible to do this without actually breaking immersion or having your character know things they couldn't possibly know. It will often be possible for a hypothetical character to have deduced information that you as a player know, even if you yourself may not have been able to make that connection if you were in that character's shoes. If you have information available to you as a player, you can often reverse-engineer an explanation for how your character could know that.

To put it another way, as a player with access to metagame information, you have the benefit of hindsight, and hindsight makes it easier to see how someone could have arrived at that answer, and thus justify how your character would have that information.

3) Take advantage of real-world tools that your in-world character does not have. For example, you can take notes, but just say that your character is just recalling things unaided. Other examples include things like calculators, google, crowdsourcing, etc. Basically, take advantage of a real-world tool that replicates a cognitive talent's effect, then say that the in-world character got that effect through cognitive talent.

4) Take advantage of in-game mechanics that represent cognitive advantages. You don't actually need to be able to read people well in real life in order to detect lies like Dr. Cal Lightman in your roleplaying game. There is a lot of room for mechanics to simulate cognitive advantages, and it would be interesting to see some homebrew that expanded this further (since I feel D&D really only scratches the surface in this regard).

[goto124]

'The first is I have read stories where an "intelligent" character is only so because s/he is surrounded by the greatest of fools, constantly. It shows, plus all the other members of the party would have to dumb down their characters as well which they could do if they wanted to help, but that seems excessive and almost unfair.'

Also, in stories, you can control the thoughts and actions of the heroes as well. Heck, it doesn't really work in stories (which already have everything pre-planned and executed perfectly) when the reader can think a bit and start wondering 'why doesn't person X think of doing Y instead of Z?' Trying to do this in a tabletop game, where the PCs are free to choose what to do, will most likely end up with your NPCs acting like, well, the dumb scripted NPCs of railroady computer games.

I once ran an investigation game ripped off a computer game. One thing I didn't realise: in a tabletop game, you can do things not possible in computer games. Such as talk to NPCs, which opens up a lot of possibilities such as 'why don't you just ask her nicely for information/to get into that room/to interrogate her/etc' ? It made me realise how little sense the original setting made, and how a little communciation could've ended the whole thing in five seconds if anyone actually bothered talking to one another. I ended the game shortly afterwards, so that I could rework the setting.

[NichG]

Great points! Is it really difficult though? I'm thinking it merely requires an agreement between GM and player that the smart PC will have that "highly-intelligent" aspect, which can produce situational advantages. I like the secret approach: it helps maintain immersion.

Basically, it breaks down at the same place that the GM trying to play a super-intelligent NPC breaks down. If the other players can tell that the advantage is fiat or arbitrary, it won't feel like it came about because of their intelligence, but just because of fiat. So the limit becomes how well you can trick the other players into buying into the illusion and not noticing the fiat elements - thus the secrecy angle.

Part of that is to not fiat things directly. "The smart character's stupid plans always work" will be seen through pretty quickly, because everyone can do the mental math and say 'what would I have done as DM in this situation?' and notice that something is off. There's an uncanny valley there - if you play it up, you go past that into cartoon physics and pulp fiction mad science type characters, where you don't really buy that the character is 'smart' per se, but they have 'science powers!' or whatever.

But what the DM could do is, for example, make it so that there are more puzzles in the environment to be solved all the time, or that there are many built-in ways to bypass the normal way of resolving things by figuring out and understanding what's going on. If everyone sees 'I could have solved it that way too, and it made sense', then that reinforces the illusion that it was real and not fiat. Of course it was still fiat, but the fiat was somewhere other than where people would expect - in creating the scenario, not in the actions of the smart character.

[dream]

Intelligence covers so much, that it is impossible for a player in an RPG to even simulate it. Some people are fine with just knowledge, as if intelligence is just knowing more stuff. And that is an easy and mechanical thing to add to any game. Other then that, it's tricky.

The DM can babysit the intelligent character and make sure they always and only do smart things. But that can be awkward for the player as they don't get to ''play there character''. But some players are fine just sitting back and letting the DM run their character. Though this is not the player playing a smart character, of course.

The DM can make the world dumb, and this makes the smart character look smart. This is done in fiction all the time. And it works well enough. If everyone else in the world acts very dumb, then even the average intelligence people seem smart.

Though, ultimately, I'd just say to a player something like this: ''No matter what you will never ever play a character ''the real'' way that character would be ''for real'', so just get over it and play the game."

Is it impossible to simulate PCs lifting buildings? Is it hard to simulate PCs dodging bullets and lasers? No. So, why would it be hard to simulate genius, unless (let's be honest) you don't have the experience as a GM. The more you learn, the more you know.

Super Genius is not different from Super-Strength, outside of focus. You guys are magnifying "just another power", as if it's different in how it impacts the scenery. Two words: Reed Richards. If you can handle a PC playing him, you have this down. If not, you need an education.

What do you need to master this aspect of Gamemastery? I ran a Marvel adventure where the consciousness of Reed Richards was summoned by members of the FF, because he was dead. So, I can handle genius.

[Darth Ultron]

Is it impossible to simulate PCs lifting buildings? Is it hard to simulate PCs dodging bullets and lasers? No. So, why would it be hard to simulate genius, unless (let's be honest) you don't have the experience as a GM. The more you learn, the more you know.

Super Genius is not different from Super-Strength, outside of focus. You guys are magnifying "just another power", as if it's different in how it impacts the scenery. Two words: Reed Richards. If you can handle a PC playing him, you have this down. If not, you need an education.

What do you need to master this aspect of Gamemastery? I ran a Marvel adventure where the consciousness of Reed Richards was summoned by members of the FF, because he was dead. So, I can handle genius.

Well, I guess the question real is: Is Reed Richards Useless? And my answer is yes, to an extreme harmful degree in fact.

You can pretend to do all sorts of things in a RPG, swing swords or shoot fire. It just takes imagination. But you can't pretend to have intelligence.

And intelligence is one of the things that is really hard to define anyway. Is just knowing a ton of stuff being intelligent? How about using what you know? What about interactions with people? And so forth.....''intelligence'' covers a lot.

[Solaris]

The DM can make the world dumb, and this makes the smart character look smart. This is done in fiction all the time. And it works well enough. If everyone else in the world acts very dumb, then even the average intelligence people seem smart.

... For a given value of "well enough".
It drives me nuts when writers do that.

Personally, I think crowdsourcing is the best means to deal with this situation. Being smart doesn't mean you're necessarily right all the time, it just means you're better at working with the information you have on-hand (and if you don't believe me, I promise that there are people with genius-level intellects who hold political/religious/console preferences completely opposite your own). If that doesn't work well because you're gaming with a bunch of idiots, well... like Darth Ultron said, it works well enough.

[qazzquimby]

@NichG, I wanted to ask something about your god game, but the old thread is dead and your inbox is full. Clear your inbox so I can pm, and tell me when you do?

@everyone else, I'm sorry for my irrelevant post. It seemed the least disruptive way to communicate.

[dream]

"Smart" is just another power. How is Richards useless when he finds the means of success for his team? No disdain offered when I post that genius is the key to handling a scenario. Most players look for a combat solution to an issue, while genius can prevent that. So maybe genius is disliked as an option for that reason?