Quote from: yosemitemike on March 25, 2024, 06:47:53 PM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on March 25, 2024, 12:05:30 PM
The INT stat serves as point of reference for the intellect of the character. Calling for an INT check in order for the character to remember something that was discovered in play by the player 4 or 5 months ago in real time is another use for the stat. It might have only been a few days for character in game time.

That's not intellect.  That's memory.

There is no memory stat. INT covers it.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on March 25, 2024, 08:14:24 PM
There is no memory stat. INT covers it.

If it's just used to see if a character remembers something, then it is a memory stat.

Quote from: yosemitemike on March 26, 2024, 06:49:21 AM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on March 25, 2024, 08:14:24 PM
There is no memory stat. INT covers it.

If it's just used to see if a character remembers something, then it is a memory stat.

To be fair; Intellect as a stat can be used for more than just memory while covering something independent of the player and covering physical actions that rely on knowledge well beyond the scope of most players; specifically engineering/crafting and sciences (which might include being able to perform the complex formulas needed for some types of magic).

In my own system I have mental stats with specialties in Arcana (performing magic), Lore (the memory aspect, languages), Engineering (building things, disabling things, operating complex machinery, locating secret doors), Insight (noticing details/patterns), Nature (survival, navigation), and Medicine (fairly obvious).

Those are all categories I felt would be things related to knowledge and performance where the capabilities of a PC would differ from a player without impacting the decision-making element for the player in the same way that a being stronger than the player doesn't impact their decisions of what to do with said strength.

For me, intelligence is a legitimate character attribute that is separate from player intelligence/skill.

If players find a broken magical device and are trying to figure out what it does or how to put it back together, intelligence would be a determining factor. Your GM prep doesn't need to be so extensive that the device could be fixed by a real life physicist.

"Trish, you character has no idea what she is looking at or how it works." And oh the horror, if Trish's character has an intelligence of 8, for example, I won't even give her a roll.

Another easy and common example is languages.

- Box the Fighter has an intelligence of 4 and barely understands common. You don't have to talk to Box like a first grader. And if Box's player talks like an idiot all the time, the table will want to throw him off a building.

- Libby the Librarian has 16 intelligence and speaks six languages. Libby's player doesn't need to actually know how to speak Orc, Troll, and four other languages that do not exist.

Does that mean that sometimes players ARE smarter than their characters? Sure. But bringing this full circle, I guess that is where rulings, not rules comes in.

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 26, 2024, 08:27:28 AM
Those are all categories I felt would be things related to knowledge and performance where the capabilities of a PC would differ from a player without impacting the decision-making element for the player in the same way that a being stronger than the player doesn't impact their decisions of what to do with said strength.

Say the character encounters a puzzle or riddle or has to interpret a clue.  They have to engage in some form of logical problem solving.  Does the character's smarts stat figure directly into this or is it the player solving it?  Does the character's intelligence matter here in a mechanical sense?

Quote from: yosemitemike on March 26, 2024, 09:17:56 AM

Say the character encounters a puzzle or riddle or has to interpret a clue.  They have to engage in some form of logical problem solving.  Does the character's smarts stat figure directly into this or is it the player solving it?  Does the character's intelligence matter here in a mechanical sense?

And you've hit the nail on the head. But then there's also the corollary if you choose to do away with the INT/WIS/CHA stat: how do I play a charismatic/intelligent/wise character if I (as a player) have no charisma/smarts/willpower? Do I just have to suck it up and play something else? I don't think there's any "one true way" to solve this.
As a GM, I tend to allow the players first crack at solving something, only relying on character-based die rolls if they can't. And I might give them bonuses (or maluses) depending on what approach they are choosing.

So a player might say at the table, "My rogue has a high charisma and persuasion skill - he's going to cosy up to the barmaid and try to get some info out of her, charming her with a few well-placed compliments".

I would then roll based on their charisma + seduction/carousing/whatever. I'm not going to ask for details of what compliments he's using, or what body language they are looking for.

However, if I've set up a riddle, and one of the players works it out, I'm not going to force them to roll to see if their character knows it.
If no one can, I'll ask for INT/WIS rolls (whichever is appropriate) and then give out hints according to how well they roll.

It's not perfect, but it's mine - as Tim Minchin once said.

When we played our B/X and AD&D 1E mix in high school, the way we sometimes handled Int and Wis mods was that if your character decided to do something that required more than the player could come up with, they got extra help from another player for every point of mod.  Sitting there with a +2 on Wis, you get to consult two other players every time there was something to decide that might be wise/foolish.

Conversely, if you had a negative, you had to consult other players, and then the group would vote on the worst idea suggested, and that was what your character wanted to do.  We played it for laughs, and the other players were very happy to mess with another PC this way.  It was kind of like the way charm person works, only not magical.

I think the farther you get from reality (in both characters and world), the less useful common sense is.

Quote from: yosemitemike on March 26, 2024, 09:17:56 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 26, 2024, 08:27:28 AM
Those are all categories I felt would be things related to knowledge and performance where the capabilities of a PC would differ from a player without impacting the decision-making element for the player in the same way that a being stronger than the player doesn't impact their decisions of what to do with said strength.

Say the character encounters a puzzle or riddle or has to interpret a clue.  They have to engage in some form of logical problem solving.  Does the character's smarts stat figure directly into this or is it the player solving it?  Does the character's intelligence matter here in a mechanical sense?

I would let the players try to solve it first because figuring stuff out is rewarding for the player. If the group can't quite figure it out then the higher INT characters will get extra clues. It is compromise between letting the players play the game and not letting things grind to a halt and high INT characters are the ones that get the special clues.

Quote from: yosemitemike on March 26, 2024, 09:17:56 AM
Say the character encounters a puzzle or riddle or has to interpret a clue.  They have to engage in some form of logical problem solving.  Does the character's smarts stat figure directly into this or is it the player solving it?  Does the character's intelligence matter here in a mechanical sense?

Riddles and puzzles are different beasts, and riddles suck as they only have one exact solution. For a puzzle, higher Int characters would get more information upfront. You see a funny looking mark vs a sigil of such and such cult. Knowing a thing is on the character, making deductions is on the player. Implementation of the solution would come down to a test if there is uncertainty in the out come.

This is like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.  It's a game.  A top hat or dog can't use money, nor can they own real estate, but the people playing Monopoly can enjoy playing them. 

The purpose of a game is to entertain the players.  Just because you play a role in an RPG doesn't that you are bound to exact simulation of a completely different person, mainly because you can't.  And because it probably isn't as fun.  It's why I hate the people who justify screwing the party because "that's what my character would do."  First of all, your character isn't real.  You determine what they would do, and you determine any principles they would have that might cause problems.  So if your character is being a dick, it's because you made a character with the tendency to be a dick, on purpose.  Secondly, as a player, you already have context and perspective not available to the character.  You know it's a game.  You know the rules of the game.  So the idea that you can play "in character" is a fantasy.

Puzzles exist in the game because some players find them enjoyable.  The players solve them for fun.  A fictional character is irrelevant in this case.  You might as well figure out the odds your character would live until 10th level and get rich getting there, then roll percentile dice.  It'd simulate the character's outcome much better than actually playing in a campaign.  But it wouldn't be fun, so we don't do it.

Quote from: Wisithir on March 26, 2024, 10:15:15 PM
Riddles and puzzles are different beasts, and riddles suck as they only have one exact solution. For a puzzle, higher Int characters would get more information upfront. You see a funny looking mark vs a sigil of such and such cult. Knowing a thing is on the character, making deductions is on the player. Implementation of the solution would come down to a test if there is uncertainty in the out come.

That doesn't really answer my question at all.  Say I make a character and dump intelligence hard.  Another player makes a character and gives them a very high intelligence.  The characters get some clues.  Things must deduced from these clues.  If it's the player making the deductions, the character's intelligence stat doesn't matter.  Having  6 doesn't hamper me and having an 18 doesn't really help him much.  The intelligence stat doesn't have any actual, mechanical effect.  At this point, you may as well just get rid of the stat.

Quote from: yosemitemike on March 27, 2024, 03:07:19 AM
That doesn't really answer my question at all.  Say I make a character and dump intelligence hard.  Another player makes a character and gives them a very high intelligence.  The characters get some clues.  Things must deduced from these clues.  If it's the player making the deductions, the character's intelligence stat doesn't matter.  Having  6 doesn't hamper me and having an 18 doesn't really help him much.  The intelligence stat doesn't have any actual, mechanical effect.  At this point, you may as well just get rid of the stat.

If an Int 6 and Int 18 are looking at the same thing, the Int 6 is dumbfounded while the Int 18 get it is, and shares with the Int 6.  Now if an Int 6 and Int 18 are searching different rooms, the Int 18 will find one clue and the Int 6 will find nothing, meaning either a clue is missed or the party waits for the Int 18 to check everything. Time is the resource being spent when the party cannot proceed in parallel due to effective stat requirements. The low stat of one party member must be carried by another, but this effect is less obvious with mental stats, and is especially variable by GM style.

However, I am open to dumping mental stats to avoid characters stated beyond the player's ability to roleplay and the problems that brings. I am happy to replace them with qualifiers for observation, knowledgeability, and force of personality.

Quote from: Wisithir on March 27, 2024, 03:38:45 AM
If an Int 6 and Int 18 are looking at the same thing, the Int 6 is dumbfounded while the Int 18 get it is, and shares with the Int 6. 

If the player is the one doing the deduction, then this isn't really the case in any significant, mechanical way. 

Quote from: Wisithir on March 27, 2024, 03:38:45 AM
However, I am open to dumping mental stats to avoid characters stated beyond the player's ability to roleplay and the problems that brings. I am happy to replace them with qualifiers for observation, knowledgeability, and force of personality.

Nothing would be changed in any concrete mechanical sense if the intelligence stat didn't exist at all in that kind of example.  The players are as good at deduction as they are in real life and what is says on the sheet by INT doesn't matter.

Quote from: yosemitemike on March 27, 2024, 04:09:46 AM
Nothing would be changed in any concrete mechanical sense if the intelligence stat didn't exist at all in that kind of example.  The players are as good at deduction as they are in real life and what is says on the sheet by INT doesn't matter.

The GM tells the players what their character see and know about the world. The players decide what the characters feel and think about it.  So, yes, deduction is a challenge for the player, not a skill gate for the character. INT should effect finding the clues in the first place and doing the research to discover their significance, not forming conclusions about them.