What did you think of "intelligence" as a stat in the old IE games?

[Nirgal]

I hated it.

 

I hated that it didn't influence how effective or powerful spells were, I hated that it was irrelevant in most difficulty settings and I hated that even when it was relevant and could actually prevent you from learning a spell, it was just too  easy to simply save before learning a spell or  buy an intelligence potion and learn all the spells at the same time.

 

Opinions?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

INT was handled much better in 3.X and Pathfinder, where it did affect how many spells you could cast and their potency. It also affected skills and other things, so it wasn't just a dump stat for anyone but a Mage.

[Gfted1]

Intelligence directly influences how many spells and how high of a spell level could be achieved.

[Orogun01]

Skill point multiplier, that's all.

[rjshae]

I hated that it didn't influence how effective or powerful spells were, I hated that it was irrelevant in most difficulty settings and I hated that even when it was relevant and could actually prevent you from learning a spell, it was just too  easy to simply save before learning a spell or  buy an intelligence potion and learn all the spells at the same time.

 

Perhaps you assume to much capability for intelligence? Being able to open the magical gate using your intelligence doesn't necessarily mean you can use the same means to control how wide the gate can open. Perhaps the ability to control the effectiveness of a spell instead depends on your biological heritage?

[Karkarov]

I have always thought intelligence was a pretty stupid stat.  But it has been a pen and paper bread and butter stat forever.

[Tale]

I'm not the biggest fan of stats all doing the same thing for different jobs. With Intelligence meaning more damage for mages, dexterity more damage for rogues, and strength more damage for fighters. It's functional design, but it doesn't compel me to think about the system.

 

Classes favoring their respective stats for different reasons (more damage for fighters, more versatility or casts/battle for mages, more reliability for rogues) just seems more interesting to me. And I think it paves the way for doing interesting things outside the standard three or four.

[JFSOCC]

My most loved and hated stat. Loved for its utility, hated for its execution.

[Iron_JG]

How the "intelligence" stat was handled was one of many flaws within 2nd Edition. To address the broader point, I think every stat should have *some* value to all characters. Third edition did a much better job of this. Even fighters could really benefit from extra wisdom or charisma. It'd be cool for PE to keep this up, allowing experimentation with more diverse builds.

[Infinitron]

Intelligence directly influences ... how high of a spell level could be achieved.

 

According to AD&D rules, but it didn't actually do this in the Infinity Engine games.

[Micamo]

Honestly, I think mental stats are pretty stupid overall. They tend to be either labels for stats that are only important for certain characters (e.g. mages benefiting from high INT), or they're just a reason for the DM to yell at you for "not roleplaying your stats correctly." For some reason a lot of people think dumping INT means you're only allowed to play Thog.

[Lephys]

Representing mental aptitude is a dirty job... but SOMEbody's gotta do it.

[Kjaamor]

In the D&D games: Useful stat, poorly implemented.

 

In the 2d Fallout games: Useful stat, well implemented.

 

Like others, I've always hated the way that social options are tied in directly with magic stats. Personally, for P:E, I would('ve) like(d) there to be a magic stat simply called 'Magic' that was quite seperate from concepts of intelligence or sociability.

 

If nothing else, it's always been a gripe that the party member leading the charge is inevitably the one with the poorest social skills.

[Stun]

I hated it.

 

I hated that it didn't influence how effective or powerful spells were, I hated that it was irrelevant in most difficulty settings and I hated that even when it was relevant and could actually prevent you from learning a spell, it was just too  easy to simply save before learning a spell or  buy an intelligence potion and learn all the spells at the same time.

 

Opinions?

In BG2, Intelligence played a huge role in survivability. If you disagree, then by all means, create a Tank with 18str, 18con and...3 intelligence, then barge into a Mindflayer base in all your "tanking" glory. :D

 

 

But seriously, I agree. Intelligence in the IE games was, perhaps, a bit too subtle to be important. It only ever had a minor effect, and only with mages (# of spells you can learn for your spellbook, but NOT how many you can memorize). Even Planescape torment limited its usefulness (the highest INT check in the game was 19, and that only happend once)

 

3e absolutely made intelligence more useful. Actually, it would be more accurate to say that 3e based computer games did. Because in my Pen and Paper days of 2nd edition, our DM made massive use of our intelligence scores. I couldn't tell you the number of times one of us would come up with a brilliant solution to a problem, only to have our DM make a dice roll then say: "nope, sorry, you're not smart enough to do that!"

Edited July 3, 2013 by Stun

[Bill Gates' Son]

It was a useful stat in Planescape Torment IMO.  While Wisdom was the most important stat, there were a lot of dialog options not available if you never raised the stat. Like the conversation you had with the woman at the beginning of the ward.

 

And it had its uses in the D&D 3.5 games.  Everybody benefited from it due to the stat giving skill points.

[Stun]

Yeah, they went in the right direction with it in PS:T, but of course, you still didn't need to actually spend any points in it, since the game floods you with Crainium rat charms, which you can use to temporarily boost your intelligence as high as you wanted, so that you never failed an intelligence check against Anyone or anything.

[Kjaamor]

Yeah, they went in the right direction with it in PS:T, but of course, you still didn't need to actually spend any points in it, since the game floods you with Crainium rat charms, which you can use to temporarily boost your intelligence as high as you wanted, so that you never failed an intelligence check against Anyone or anything.

 

Ah, the good old 'Game developers flood their game with stat-boost consumables to undermine character creation' trick.

 

[ShadowTiger]

I never really had a problem with intelligence, though I thought it was weird that priests get bonus spells in IE games but wizards don't. 

I think the most important thing is to make sure that each attribute is equally useful, including resisting spells and completing quests. The easiest way to balance this is to reduce the number of stats, which is why there might be a temptation to just go with str/int/dex like all the simple RPGs.

That being said, I really like the way they do it in arcanum... Intelligence simply unlocks higher level spells. That game had 8 attributes, 4 physical and 4 mental, I thought it worked out well. 

Edited July 6, 2013 by ShadowTiger

[Valsuelm]

Of all the game systems I've seen out there (and I've seen most of them), IE games did intelligence (and overall the other stats as well) the best. Reason being, because of all the PnP game systems I've seen out there AD&D did intelligence the best.

 

Up to a point, I do like the manner in which Palladium has both ME (mental endurance) and IQ (intelligence quotient), however that system scales very badly after a point (though house rules can nip all the issues in the butt).

 

Edited July 7, 2013 by Valsuelm

[Archmage Silver]

Which edition are we talking about? AD&D 2E, D&D 3E? I was fine with Baldur's Gate's approach to it (2E), but it was alright by me in Icewind Dale II as well (3E). I preferred the 2E way of rolling stats though.

[Kjaamor]

Which edition are we talking about? AD&D 2E, D&D 3E? I was fine with Baldur's Gate's approach to it (2E), but it was alright by me in Icewind Dale II as well (3E). I preferred the 2E way of rolling stats though.

 

Rolling stats made up about 20% of my gametime for the D&D games.

 

Honestly, while I agree to a point about the 2E system being more enjoyable, let's not roll stats in this. The time it takes to create a character should not be measured in days.

[Iucounu]

I've always found the whole 2E system unimaginative and static. But looking back, I had more fun playing 2E than the much more dynamic and number-heavy 3E. If I had a clue why, I'd probably gain a deeper understanding of the universe.

[Ffordesoon]

Honestly, unless especially low and/or especially high intelligence results in a substantially different game than a playthrough with average intelligence, I find the stat essentially worthless for cRPGs - especially when there's also Wisdom and Charisma, which together cover everything Intelligence tends to cover in most cRPGs. It's a good stat for PnP, because it can have an enjoyable effect on roleplaying, but it tends to feel redundant in a game where Ugg the Skullcrusher, a barbarian with 3 INT, still speaks in complete and grammatically correct sentences.

 

Not to mention that it's tremendously difficult to write super-intelligent characters well without having them come across as either wise or charismatic, especially in fantasy worlds, where the science is necessarily false.

[forgottenlor]

I think its fine in 3.X and pathfinder as it gives (or takes away) skill points, in addition to fueling Wizard magic. Unfortunately skills were only rarely useful in Icewind Dale 2, so dumping on intellegence wasn't so brutal as in other games. Let's hope skills have more of an impact in P:E

[Valsuelm]

Which edition are we talking about? AD&D 2E, D&D 3E? I was fine with Baldur's Gate's approach to it (2E), but it was alright by me in Icewind Dale II as well (3E). I preferred the 2E way of rolling stats though.

I was referring to AD&D 2nd edition (that which was used for all but one of the IE games), though 1st edition would also work, as there is very little difference between the two editions (2nd edition was mostly the same as 1st minus boobies and demons (due to so much bad publicity about these things being in 1st edition during the 80s)). 3rd edition wasn't really called AD&D anymore but just D&D, and it wasn't until 3rd edition that some basic things were overhauled in a manner that was more often not for the better in my opinion.

 

I also definitely very much prefer the 2E IE games way of rolling stats.