From: svoboda@rtsg.mot.com (David Svoboda)
Subject: Re: PC vs. Player INT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 19:39:55 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.220235.24994@umbc3.umbc.edu> ac999239@umbc8.umbc.edu (ac999239) writes:
|What about the reverse problem? A bunch of smart players playing dumb
|characters? 

If you DM for a while, you have to learn to play NPCs which are dumb as stumps.
This carries over into your playing.  (Well, this is under the possibly flawed
assumption that I'm not deep-down dumb as a stump. :)

|The players will be thinking of things the characters would never be able to.
|So should the DM make it simply not work even though it is a brilliant plan
|or what?

Yes.  If a player is of poor enough role-playing ability that he cannot limit
his emulation with regard to intelligence, then he does not deserve for the 
plan to work.

The way a DM can do this is simply be making it understood in the beginning of
the game that physics as we know it is not necessarily valid.  If magic is in
the game, this can be rationalized by saying that the affect of magic, which
the players certainly cannot understand, has an unknown effect on the fabric
of the universe, so that any physical relationship must take into account the
affects of latent magic.

The DM must strive to be reasonably consistent and fair, but I personally feel
that it is eminently fair for a DM to penalize a smart player who is 
overplaying the intelligence of his character.

BTW, about Charisma scores--a charismatic player may "lead" the party, but in
any interaction with NPCs, if his character is uncharismatic, it will 
certainly have a delaterious effect.

|And if an average person is playing a character with genius intelligence should
|some plans work when if they are idiotic in nature?

Absolutely.  You can guide a player into a successful plan by planting 
information that the intelligent character "figured out".  For that matter, 
I have no trouble saying, "Gee, that looks like it might fail due to..." to 
the player of a bright character, where the player of the soap dish gets 
nothing.

|I honestly don't think any of the books have completely addressed these issues.

So use your imagination.  Rationalize.  The books are not gospel.

|The same thing can be said for wisdom...I know how to build things that have
|not been invented yet, but does my character? 

No, your character does not.

|What if my character is a genius
|and calculus is not invented yet despite the fact in real life I know it!

If you can actually use calculus to solve a gaming problem in DND, then I 
would rule that an 18 intelligence character could invent the science.  Why 
not, it's fantasy.  But if the character isn't intelligent enough to have 
invented calculus, then it's a simple matter of making the use of the 
calculations fail, due to having not taking into consideration the effects 
of latent magic.  That goes for chemistry, and physics, too.

|Can my character somehow discover this branch since we ARE in an alternate
|reality.

Sure.  It would be fun.  Of course, trying to explain it to others might 
be a very entertaining exercise in role playing.  "See, this little rune 
is what I call a 'integral sign'."  "It looks like a branch."  "Well, it's 
an integral sign."  "Oh, then it's a magical rune that just *represents* 
a branch."  "No, it represents a summation."  "Oh, yes, I think I've heard 
of the Summation Tree.  It's a sort of pine, right?  It's druidical magic, 
then."

|A great many dilemmas can be dredged up because of the fact the character
|stats do not reflect the players stats.

Dilemmas can be a really fun part of the game.  A good DM takes dilemmas 
like this and turns it into a baffling, fun, funny, and rewarding encounter 
with the characters' worlds.  Remember, the DM's view of the world is the 
governing one, and if a character makes an assumption that turns out wrong, 
it is simply due to a basic misunderstanding of "reality".

			Dave Svoboda, Palatine, IL