Intelligence is knowledge and IQ. An intelligent person knows that smoking a cigarette is bad for you and that you shouldn't do it.
Wisdom is intuition and being able to draw on your life experiences to help resolve issues. An unwise, but smart person knows that smoking a cigarette is bad for you, but smokes anyway. The wise one does not smoke.
Charisma is your sense of self, personality and ability to lead and influence others.
None of the three mental traits cover another of the three mental traits, so all of them should be retained.
There's a lot of abstraction and arbitrary defining going on here, and the attributes could stand a little clean up work. My biggest issue is that most people equate intelligence with "booksmarts" and wisdom with common sense, when in reality there is no dichotomy there; street smarts is nothing but intelligence combined with learning and situational familiarity.
IMO the ability scores are largely abstractions and therefore when discussing them the discussion will be very abstract. Your assesment of how most people view intelligence may be true, but I generally think of int. as the ability to learn. High Int. creatures learn things faster than lower int. creatures. Having a high int. score does not automaticly equate to extensive booksmarts IMO.
Concerning street smarts, seeing street smarts as a funtion of int. is passable, I find it more plausable as the ability to read people which is a function of Wis. IMO.
Intelligence should be renamed Intellect, because it speaks more specifically to the mental attributes that intelligence is supposed to encapsulate - reasoning and problem solving skills, depth of thought, and breadth of education.
It's quite possible that intellect is a more fitting word than intelligence as you say. For me though the two words are so similar in their meanings that it really doesn't clear up a lot for me. That's not saying I would be against such a renaming though.
What might make more sense than Wisdom is Focus. People who exhibit the stereotypical "absent minded professer" don't lack wisdom (they are usually in fact very wise due to their education and introspection), they lack focus. They are scattered easily and frequently lost in their own thoughts. People with strong focus tend to be more alert and perceptive. It is also possible to be very intelligent but have bad focus, be very focused but not terribly intelligent, be bad at both and be good at both.
IMO the absent minded professor has high Int/low Wis. Usually high education in D&D is a function of Int., I've already given my opinion that such is not needed for a high int. score, but in general that is probably more common. In that case saying the professor is educated does not = high Wis. In your example absent minded professor is the intelligent, low focus character, or so it seems to me.
Religion/divine attunement is a different matter. I sort of agree with an above poster that this could easily be rolled into Charisma and in many ways even makes more sense. Religion is all about influencing others and, to be blunt, has nothing to do with wisdom.
Religion in D&D funtions differently than real world religion IMO. In D&D the gods make their presence know much more strongly, followers of exeptional faith perform miracles in the names of the gods in the present D&D timeline. This makes it much less dependent on the preachers Cha. to persuade the masses to believe in said gods.
There's also a difference between organized religion and a personal connection with a divine being. Organized religion is largely driven by charasmatic individuals, probably in the imaginary D&D world and real world. Having a personal connection with a divine being is something I'm not going into for the real world, but in the D&D world I would imagine it would be Wis. based. I can see a case for this to be Cha. based, but I still feel Wis is a better fit IMO, not a clearly supperior one though.
Again, though, it's a tough thing to get a handle on. Dexterity in many ways is both a physical and mental stat, so you could argue for some shifting around there as well.
I can agree with your thoughts on Dex, so at least we don't disagree about everything ;P.
I've always equated the mental stats with the physical ones.
STR = INT DEX = WIS CON = CHA
Intelligence is how mentally strong you are, Wisdom is how mentally agile, and Constitution is mental toughness.
You have that all wrong. It goes like this:
STR is physical power - CHA is mental power CON is physical endurance - WIS is mental endurance DEX is physical agility/skill - INT is mental agility/skill
There's plenty of evidence for this in the actual mechanics of the game, and it also has to deal with how defenses were grouped in 3.5 as compared to 4E:
3.5 CON towards Fortitude, 4E added STR as an option 3.5 DEX towards Reflex, 4E added INT as an option 3.5 WIS towards Will, 4E added CHA as an option
This wasn't coincidental or random. They were like that for a reason, and that reason, at least when it comes to Fortitude and Will, was that they began considering "the best defense is a good offensive" to be valid.
Said another way, remember back in 3.5 where there were opposed rolls? Think of it like that. An effect that targets your bodily fortitude can either be defended against via a defensive ability (CON, as in 3.5) or opposed by an offensive ability (STR, as added in 4E). Likewise, an effect that targets your mental fortitude (Will) can either be defended against via a defensive ability (WIS, as in 3.5) or opposed by an offensive ability (CHA, as added in 4E).
WIS is clearly the mental CON, and that becomes especially obvious when you consider that kinds of things that it does, particularly for classes like the Cleric. Faith and focus are mental unshakability, the ability of the internal self to keep from being affected by external force. CHA is clearly the mental STR, and that becomes especially obvious when you consider the kinds of things that it does, particularly for classes like the Sorcerer. Spirit and influence are mental power, the ability of the self to exert force and affect the external.
You can even see it in skills with things like Athletics being shows of exerting physical influence on one's physical surroundings while Endurance is a defense of the physical self from physical forces. Diplomacy is a shows of exerting mental influence on other minds while Sense Motive is a defenses of the mental self from mental influence.
It's really DEX and INT that are the odd ones out when considering those dualities, but then they parallel one another so perfectly as physical-mental variation of agility and skill, with DEX being physical agility and skill and INT being mental agility and skill, something beyond the simple offense and defense. I think that's why INT became an option for Reflex in 4E, because moving out of the way of something isn't always as simple as physically automatic reflexes, and physically automatic reflexes just aren't going to help against something like an explosion or lightning strike once it's already happened. It's INT that helps you avoid those things through a mental reflex, quickly interpreting and then reacting to information before your body gets the message, knowledge and prediction.
So, as far as I can see, this is the only possible logical conclusion:
STR is physical power - CHA is mental power CON is physical endurance - WIS is mental endurance DEX is physical agility/skill - INT is mental agility/skill
I've been in agreement with other threads suggesting CON be dropped, so I similarly have little problem with having the mentally analogous WIS dropped. There's no WIS-based mechanic that I can think of that I can't either (a) just as well move to another ability or (b) make entirely ability-independant.
Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha
Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further.
Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
I've always equated the mental stats with the physical ones.
STR = INT DEX = WIS CON = CHA
Intelligence is how mentally strong you are, Wisdom is how mentally agile, and Constitution is mental toughness.
You have that all wrong. It goes like this:
STR is physical power - CHA is mental power CON is physical endurance - WIS is mental endurance DEX is physical agility/skill - INT is mental agility/skill
There's plenty of evidence for this in the actual mechanics of the game, and it also has to deal with how defenses were grouped in 3.5 as compared to 4E:
3.5 CON towards Fortitude, 4E added STR as an option 3.5 DEX towards Reflex, 4E added INT as an option 3.5 WIS towards Will, 4E added CHA as an option
This wasn't coincidental or random. They were like that for a reason, and that reason, at least when it comes to Fortitude and Will, was that they began considering "the best defense is a good offensive" to be valid.
Said another way, remember back in 3.5 where there were opposed rolls? Think of it like that. An effect that targets your bodily fortitude can either be defended against via a defensive ability (CON, as in 3.5) or opposed by an offensive ability (STR, as added in 4E). Likewise, an effect that targets your mental fortitude (Will) can either be defended against via a defensive ability (WIS, as in 3.5) or opposed by an offensive ability (CHA, as added in 4E).
WIS is clearly the mental CON, and that becomes especially obvious when you consider that kinds of things that it does, particularly for classes like the Cleric. Faith and focus are mental unshakability, the ability of the internal self to keep from being affected by external force. CHA is clearly the mental STR, and that becomes especially obvious when you consider the kinds of things that it does, particularly for classes like the Sorcerer. Spirit and influence are mental power, the ability of the self to exert force and affect the external.
You can even see it in skills with things like Athletics being shows of exerting physical influence on one's physical surroundings while Endurance is a defense of the physical self from physical forces. Diplomacy is a shows of exerting mental influence on other minds while Sense Motive is a defenses of the mental self from mental influence.
It's really DEX and INT that are the odd ones out when considering those dualities, but then they parallel one another so perfectly as physical-mental variation of agility and skill, with DEX being physical agility and skill and INT being mental agility and skill, something beyond the simple offense and defense. I think that's why INT became an option for Reflex in 4E, because moving out of the way of something isn't always as simple as physically automatic reflexes, and physically automatic reflexes just aren't going to help against something like an explosion or lightning strike once it's already happened. It's INT that helps you avoid those things through a mental reflex, quickly interpreting and then reacting to information before your body gets the message, knowledge and prediction.
So, as far as I can see, this is the only possible logical conclusion:
STR is physical power - CHA is mental power CON is physical endurance - WIS is mental endurance DEX is physical agility/skill - INT is mental agility/skill
I've been in agreement with other threads suggesting CON be dropped, so I similarly have little problem with having the mentally analogous WIS dropped. There's no WIS-based mechanic that I can think of that I can't either (a) just as well move to another ability or (b) make entirely ability-independant.
The problem with dropping con is that many people are strong, but not healthy or do not have a high endurance or vice versa. One does not equate to the other, though they are linked to a degree.
The problem with dropping con is that many people are strong, but not healthy or do not have a high endurance or vice versa. One does not equate to the other, though they are linked to a degree.
The proposals that I've seen for dropping CON do not give all of its stuff over to STR. Instead, they make what CON used to do ability-independent.
Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha
Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further.
Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
According to the 5e rules: "Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to your surroundings, representing general perceptiveness, intuition, insight, and other, less tangible senses."
According to a popular online dictionary Wisdom is: "The quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment."
So one of the issues with wisdom is that it's something different in D&D than what we are likely to assume it is.
If we keep the current definition, then there is a good case for renaming it to perception to avoid this confusion. There is also a good case for moving Clerics to another primary stat. I like charisma for this, but an in-depth debate on why is probably worth a standalone thread.
If we go back to the real-world definition (which was also the definition used in the first few editions), you would likely want to move perception (the skill) to a different ability. There is also a fairly good argument for not needing it as a core ability at all, as experience and knowledge don't really belong in that initial 'layer' of character generation and 'good judgement' is a minor facet of character that could easily be rolled into INT.
Doesn't that more or less cover everything wisdom covers in D&D?
People seem to have problem with the whole perception thing, because they want to look at it as senses = perception. In the past couple editions, sharp senses have been simulated by feats (alertness, quick recon, etc..), and I imagine DDN will include sharp senses as a theme of some kind. Wisdom is used for perception because most of having good perception is being able to discern (or judge) what's important. Sharp senses just give you a bonus.
Some examples...
1) While a rogue player is crawling through an underground tunnel, an explosion caused by the wizard player inadvertantly causes a torrent of water to start rushing through the tunnel. The DM asks the rogue player to make a perception check. It isn't just about whether the rogue hears the sound of rushing water. What's important is whether she hears it and is then able to discern that this is the sound of an incoming torrent of water and not a pretty waterfall in a cave up ahead, or maybe even something more incorrect like the call of a strange beast or the roaring of a large furnace (it might sound ridiculous on paper, but in reality, identifying sounds you've heard is often not easy -- especially under pressure).
2) Several characters enter a temple room with symbols covering the walls. The DM calls for a perception check to see if they notice anything. In this case, every character can see the symbols, but it takes a wisdom check to notice that one of the symbols doesn't belong (perhaps a clue?).
3) A characters is keeping watch, looking towards a forest on a windy day. While having sharp vision might help the character notice that several bushes are swaying a little too much, his low wisdom score might cause him to write it off as "probably nothing" or to not even register the discrepancy as relevant. Wisdom, however, might have allowed the character to notice the rustling as unusual, alerting him to the approach of hidden foes.
Or a real life example...
4) I'm sitting on my computer posting on the D&D forums when I hear a strange sound coming from outside my window. I immediately hear the sound and identify it as the call of a barking seal. However, I live in Toronto, a city where seals do not regularly roam the streets. My wisdom and judgement tell me that the "seal call" I heard must just be a barking dog that happens to sound exactly like a seal.
Religion/divine attunement is a different matter. I sort of agree with an above poster that this could easily be rolled into Charisma and in many ways even makes more sense. Religion is all about influencing others and, to be blunt, has nothing to do with wisdom.
Religion in D&D funtions differently than real world religion IMO. In D&D the gods make their presence know much more strongly, followers of exeptional faith perform miracles in the names of the gods in the present D&D timeline. This makes it much less dependent on the preachers Cha. to persuade the masses to believe in said gods.
There's also a difference between organized religion and a personal connection with a divine being. Organized religion is largely driven by charasmatic individuals, probably in the imaginary D&D world and real world. Having a personal connection with a divine being is something I'm not going into for the real world, but in the D&D world I would imagine it would be Wis. based. I can see a case for this to be Cha. based, but I still feel Wis is a better fit IMO, not a clearly supperior one though.
I agree with this 100%. In a world where gods are established to be real, having "knowledgeofwhatistrueorright" is important for understanding the gods mysteries and true motives. If you can't understand a gods true motives and/or lack the judgement to enact his or her will through your actions, why would that god trust you with any sort of special power?
In my opinion, characters with low wisdom would be much more likely not to believe in the gods outright, which in the world of D&D is incorrect. The gods are very real in D&D and high wisdom characters are more likely to realise that.
The problem with dropping con is that many people are strong, but not healthy or do not have a high endurance or vice versa. One does not equate to the other, though they are linked to a degree.
The proposals that I've seen for dropping CON do not give all of its stuff over to STR. Instead, they make what CON used to do ability-independent.
Hmm. You have a link to one of those threads? I'd be interested in seeing the proposals.
According to the 5e rules: "Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to your surroundings, representing general perceptiveness, intuition, insight, and other, less tangible senses."
According to a popular online dictionary Wisdom is: "The quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment."
So one of the issues with wisdom is that it's something different in D&D than what we are likely to assume it is.
If we keep the current definition, then there is a good case for renaming it to perception to avoid this confusion. There is also a good case for moving Clerics to another primary stat. I like charisma for this, but an in-depth debate on why is probably worth a standalone thread.
If we go back to the real-world definition (which was also the definition used in the first few editions), you would likely want to move perception (the skill) to a different ability. There is also a fairly good argument for not needing it as a core ability at all, as experience and knowledge don't really belong in that initial 'layer' of character generation and 'good judgement' is a minor facet of character that could easily be rolled into INT.
Wisdom has been experience, knowledge and good judgment for 4 editions now. I think a better case could be made to try and convince WoTC not to mess with wisdom and just leave it be. Perception is not a "stat", but rather a skill or secondary ability.
