Intelligence vs. Wisdom in D&D

To start off, an article on the subject posted here: http://www.gamegrene.com/node/385
The article describes a situation (a trap) encountered by a party of four characters with varying Intelligence and Wisdom scores. Some of what it states I agree with, but other points I find lacking.

Now, I do think that the Cleric in the example is showing signs of intelligence by reasoning. However, the waters are further muddied by the idea that 'common sense' is simply a different level of reasoning. You aren't going to take a knife and stab yourself in the foot, because common sense dictates that it isn't going to feel good. Yet, you're showing reasoning abilities by understanding the effect of the action before you do it. Some people consider it to be something you know without having to reason, yet 'common sense' is learned just like anything else. A child under a certain age doesn't necessarily see this connection until it is taught, so we can't say that it requires no reasoning ability.

As far as aphorisms go, I've also heard, "Intelligence is the knowledge you possess. Wisdom tells you how and when to apply that knowledge."

You can therefore show intelligence by realizing that stabbing yourself in the foot is going to hurt. You show wisdom, then, by deciding not to stab yourself in the foot.

A Wizard with high Intelligence and low Wisdom may have at his disposal a wide array of highly destructive spells... but he doesn't necessarily take into consideration whether or not a maximized, heightened fireball is the best spell to use in a 20x20 room against a fire elemental.

In contrast, a Cleric with a high Wisdom but a low Intelligence may be well aware that something needs to be done, but may not know enough to do anything. They're not likely to act without knowing the full situation, and they may even realize that they simply don't have the knowledge necessary to enact any sort of plan.

The Cleric, in the example above, showed Wisdom by realizing that others in the party had more knowledge of the situation, and let those with the appropriate knowledge deal with the situation. Yes, sometimes the wisest action is to not take action.

It's also possible for someone to recognize that something needs to be done, and for them to try and do something despite having insufficient knowledge of the best path, which can cause problems on its own. This could be seen as someone succeeding at one wisdom check while failing the next, or even as a median level between 'average' and 'high' wisdom.

A person with low Intelligence and low Wisdom likely would react similarly to the fighter in the example: If they even recognize the problem, chances are good they only have a limited scope of how to deal with it, and they are likely to implement a solution without realizing (or caring) what the full effects would be.

A person with both high Intelligence and high Wisdom is the sort of person who can argue with himself endlessly, proposing argument and counter-argument, eventually making himself dizzy with circular logic.

Probably my favorite quote upon the topic, however, comes from an old movie, "The Seven Faces of Dr. Lao":

"Do you know what wisdom is?"
"No."
"Wise answer."

No longer using Orble

For a while I was cross-posting both here and on my former Orble blog, Gamer Bard. However, Orble decided I didn't post frequently enough and handed over my domain to someone else.

I understand that's part of their policy, and that new bloggers are encouraged to choose a "dead" domain from their list. And I will admit I'd somewhat expected it, since I hadn't posted there since February. The redistribution wasn't recent, though. It was taken over back in April, a mere 2 months past my last post

Now, in the competitive blogging world, I suppose that's a freakishly long time. But every time previously that I'd taken a while to post, I'd gotten an email telling me so. This time, no email, no warning, nothing saying "we have someone who wants to take over your blog, post now or else".

So, whatever. Just bear in mind, if you happen across that site, that anything past February of '09 isn't mine.

Lying, and its place in the D&D Alignment Table

Before we get into this, a quote from the Book of Exalted Deeds:

Ends and Means: When do good means justify evil ends to achieve them? Is it morally acceptable, for example, to torture an evil captive in order to extract vital information to prevent the deaths of thousands of innocents? Any good character shudders at the thought of committing torture, but the goal of preventing a thousand deaths is undeniably a virtuous one, and the neutral character might easily consider the use of torture in such a circumstance. With evil acts on a smaller scale, even the most virtuous characters can find themselves tempted to agree that a very good end justifies a mildly evil means. Is it acceptable to tell a small lie in order to prevent a minor catastrophe? A large catastrophe? A world-shattering catastrophe? In the D&D Universe the fundamental answer is no, an evil act is an evil act no matter what good it may achieve. A Paladin who knowingly commits an evil act in pursuit of any end no matter how good still jeopardizes her paladinhood. ... Whether or not the good ends can justify the means they certainly cannot make evil means any less evil.

Several years ago, this quote was used to express the idea that lying is, according to D&D rules, an Evil act and would therefore be anathema to Paladins and anyone else wishing to keep a Good alignment.

So the Gods of Goodness would rather have you tell a demilich where the last sanctuary of all that is Good is, truthfully, rather than lie and throw it off course, thereby saving the world (not to mention all of their worshipers, that, y'know, give them their power by worshiping them...).

Or, you could just not talk to the demilich at all, despite being tortured a million ways till Sunday. That's *perfectly* alright, because simply not revealing information, rather than lying, is listed as Good. Never mind that it means the demilich is going to kill you slowly and painfully. If you'd lied, there might have been a better chance of escape, but no... That would be Evil.

Because, of course, if you can't have a world without lies, you might as well not have a world at all...

Nice to know how much the Gods of Good love their worshipers. Veritable suicide is not the best way to serve one's deity. If nothing else, it means you can't serve any more.

As a side note, I have a history of disregarding things that WotC tries to pass off, and using my own common sense instead. Not just here, but in all the games they've produced that I've played, because WotC has a history of making some rather ridiculous rulings in the past. These are the same people that spent months playtesting their cardgames, only to ban a large number of those cards they produced from tournaments they sponsor.

One of the things I specifically remember from the old, 1st Edition AD&D books was the disclaimer that the handbooks were all meant as an aide to the creative process, and were not necessarily to be taken as the end-all, be-all of how things are. They had that, as I recall, in the introduction page at the front of the Player's Handbook. Seems to be lacking in 3rd Edition, strangely enough.

Lying is capable of hurting people, yes. So is telling the truth.

One of the first lessons given in first aid training is to reassure the patient. No matter what their condition is, you always tell them they're going to make it. It's called psychological first aid. Why is this done? Because if the person believes they'll pull through, they have a better chance of doing so. If the person knows they're likely to die, they may give up hope, losing the will to live, when they could have been saved. To say to them, "Hey man, this looks pretty bad. I don't think you're gonna make it." can be lethal.

I personally believe that lying should not be considered Evil. If it has to be aligned to any extreme, I think it should be considered a Chaotic act. Even that, though, I disagree with. It may not be lawful according to the laws of a nation, but I don't consider a person's Lawfulness, as it applies to the game, to be based upon their adherence to the laws of a nation. Lawfulness, to me, is simply adherence to a set of rules/laws or a code, which may be based upon the laws of the character's environment, or may be a personal code they developed. As long as they stick to it, I consider them Lawful. If there's nothing in their code which prohibits lying, then lying is not unlawful.

Personally, I see the act of lying as akin to a tool. A hammer is not in itself lawful, chaotic, good, or evil. It is the purpose to which that tool is put, the effect it causes, and the intent of its use which determine the alignment of the action taken. At that point it is not the tool which is attributed with the alignment, but the person who used it.

Unless the Paladin had taken an oath never to tell a lie, or unless their deity had lying as a particularly abhorred act (up there in the Unforgivable Deeds list), I don't see that a Paladin telling a lie should cause them to Fall. If that were the case, then there wouldn't be any Paladins, or at least not for long.

If there is a particular deity that specifically has a problem with lying, fine. Paladins of that deity should get penalized for lying. But that's why there are other deities. Just because one God says that lying is bad, doesn't mean another does, despite having many of the same goals and possibly the same alignment. Don't confine all Lawful Good characters to the dictates and dogma of one deity, especially when it may not be that character's deity.

Further, any deity that has War as one of their domains cannot honestly claim to be free of lies.
Misdirection is a part of combat. Any time a person makes a feint to throw off the enemy, they're lying. Should people who are Good (or Lawful, if you prefer) start calling out their shots to the enemy?

"I'm aiming for your head now! ... Good block! Now I'm going for your right leg..."

Quite honestly, without some measure of misdirection and deception in combat, a person's moves become predictable to a fault, and they are going to fail. But... at least they won't be lying to their enemy.

That's the type of thinking that gave rise to the term 'Lawful Stupid'. You don't have to fight your enemy on their terms.

Indiana Jones. You know the scene. The burly guy with the scimitar spends a good minute showing off. Rather than take out his whip and get into a contest of skill based upon the enemy's groundrules, Indy whipped out his gun and shot him. When that movie showed for the first time, theater audiences cheered.

You don't think of Indiana Jones as a Paladin type? *shrugs* He had his faith, and it protected him. The Ark didn't kill him. He was crusading for goodness, and for his code of law, putting holy relics and artifacts where they belonged, "in a museum," rather than leaving them in the hands of the thieves and murderers that stole them.

At any rate, feinting in combat, whether it's a one-on-one duel or the tactical false retreat of an army, is lying. I'm not arguing that violence itself is evil, although there are enough arguments out there for that. What I'm saying is that using misdirectional tactics is lying. Acting is lying. Roleplaying is lying.

Actually, as for violence, the Book of Exalted Deeds actually tackles that quandary, stating that it is the intent of violence that determines whether it is a Good or Evil act. Yet, lying is not given the same relativistic treatment?

Yes, D&D is a game originally based on moral absolutes. Yet, it's a game which gets constantly criticized and remodeled in order to make it 'more real'. Well, if we want to make it 'more real', we're going to have to realize that the original black & white ground-rules may be in need of some Crayolas.

I'm not asking for the system of alignments to be thrown out. All I'm saying is that I believe lying, in itself, is not inherently of any given alignment. I'm asking that people, from DMs to Players, have an open mind and allow for a wider interpretation of the alignments, especially when considering extenuating circumstances.

Nexon still delaying.

Up to the same tricks, Nexon released another teaser portion of their "Erinn Walker" magazine, this time 'revealing' what most already knew: Giants and Elves as playable races would be coming out. They also stated the next release date for more teasers as the 10th. When do we get the meat, already?

They also began another 'event' where you could win a free Giant or Elf character card if you posted on their forum claiming a side as better. What follows is what I wrote there.

When I first discovered Mabinogi, there were three major things that immediately caught my eye: the music skills, the ranged combat, and the ability to play elves. My character, Elrei, was based on a character I had made elsewhere who was an elven bard. I haven't heard a definite answer on whether or not humans will be able to rebirth as other races, but I'm not sure it matters at this point.

While I still like the fact that there is an outlet for musical expression in the game, I am deeply disappointed with magic music. I'm sure anyone who cares to know why can find my other post in the last event forum thread. As for ranged combat, I have to say it's pretty good, as long as I don't miss. It can be very frustrating, though, when I will let my aim meter run all the way up to 99% and I still miss the dead, immobile target three or four times. Also frustrating is the constant tossup between bows and crossbows. I like being able to run while loading a shot, but I can't help but feel like I miss more often with a crossbow. Further, I prefer the aesthetics of a composite.

I tend to run dungeons with another person who has put a lot of AP into the Smash skill. Despite the fact that I can make more shots in less time, my hits tend to be significantly weaker, which means that I still take longer to kill things, even if I hit with every shot. Meanwhile, my partner can run in with Smash loaded, one-shot a monster, load Smash again while running to the next monster, one-shot that one, lather, rinse, repeat. And she doesn't have a miss chance. True, I could Magnum and one-shot things, but then I still have to aim at the slower speed, meaning I still kill things slower. And I could still miss.

Although I originally wanted to create an elf character when I first started, and was rather disappointed they weren't out yet, I'm beginning to think that I might prefer a Giant instead. If nothing else, then I wouldn't have to worry about being disappointed with Elves.

To be honest, I had no idea that Giants were an option when I first started. I learned about Mabinogi by seeing someone whose work I greatly admire mention it on their Livejournal page. I'm intrigued at the inclusion of Giants as opposed to Dwarves, since the latter are typically the ones pitted against Elves in most fantasy settings. I would very much like to know more about why the Giants and Elves are at odds with each other.

I was rather surprised to find myself more aesthetically drawn to the Giants than the Elves, looking solely at the pictures in the Erinn Walker pages. However, I'm very particular when it comes to Elves, and I personally do not care for the over-extended ears that they are given in most animated styles. Further, while the female face and hair choices shown could be decent, the males on the opposite page look rather clueless, which hardly fits with the 'intelligence' stereotype they're claiming. As for the Giants, while I can't say I'm particularly fond of the aquiline nose and pointed brow of the males (I thought the Elves were the one with the Falcon transformation, after all), I have to admit that the females look absolutely exquisite, as well as exotic compared to the Elves (who could almost be mistaken for human, if it weren't for the ears). And, of course, we can't forget about the addition of beards. I think it's something that's been missing for humans. Maybe allow a choice for stubble to form for them past a certain age?

Skill-wise, I don't really see the ranged advantage everyone says Elves have. Yes, they shoot 2 arrows at once. Yes, their skill loads faster, but they also aim slower. Yes, they can move while aiming, and ride while aiming, but their accuracy suffers for this, and I already miss too often. Further, they don't get Arrow Revolver, so pretty much everyone who has it is already better than an Elf is going to be for at least a while. Mirage Missile does sound nifty, but the one skill that intrigues me most is their ability to Hide. And as I understand it, that can't be used in combat, so I'm not sure about practical uses on that yet.

Yes, an Elf will have a ranged advantage on a Giant, but I think Humans are still going to win in that regard. Meanwhile, speaking of ranged attacks, the Giants have access to a rather nifty device called an atlatl. It's a rarely seen weapon, but very ancient, which uses basic principles of leverage to throw a javelin with much greater distance and force. Basically, a slingshot for javelins. I've only seen it even mentioned in one other game, and that was old 1st Edition AD&D. Chances were good most people didn't know what it was, since there weren't good descriptions given for it there. And most people didn't bother taking it as a weapon due to sheer munchkinism and number crunching (simply, it didn't do enough damage to be popular), so it was phased out in later editions. But it is a very cool weapon, and to actually see it implemented in a graphical game sends a thrill through my cranium.

As for Giants being melee powerhouses, I'm not sure I agree with that, either. As I understand it, they don't get Final Hit, so once again I think Humans are going to have the upper hand here. I don't know. I'm not too interested in crunching numbers at the moment.

Culture-wise, it's about equal. I'm curious how being desert-dwellers will affect the stereotypical image and history of Elves. I'm also intrigued by the possibilities inherent in playing a race that comes from a land completely covered in snow and ice (I'm seeing very Nordic themes from that, which is cool since the vikings played a role in early Celtic culture, and the game is, at least in theory, based off of that). The two are polar opposites, if you will, so I suppose it's natural they'd conflict, although I can't imagine what it is they fight over. I doubt the Elves, used to the blazing sun and heat, would really want to go anywhere near someplace as cold as where the Giants live.

Despite my original intentions, then, it seems I'm more likely to play a Giant than an Elf. At least until the novelty of being able to bash things with trees and use an atlatl wear off.

Mabinogi is releasing G4!! Soon! Yes? ... Maybe?

Mabinogi is gearing up for its next big generation release, and pretty much everyone in-game is chomping at the bit. Unfortunately, while a lot of people thought this patch was coming in just 2 days, on Feb 5, it seems that it may just be the release date of another teaser. This comes as a disappointment to many, myself included. You can only build up suspense and excitement so much before people start wondering if anything will ever happen at all.

I think that Nexon's decision to release another teaser rather than the real deal is ultimately going to demoralize their playerbase rather than heighten the excitement, building more irritation than anything. And that's not the kind of tension you should be going for.

I'm personally hoping that G4 will see the release of something a bit more "worth it" for bard characters. At present, the skills Composing and Music Theory have been capped at rank 9 (rank 1 being highest, and F through A being below). This meant a person could get their Instrument Playing skill to rank 7 fairly easily, since you could create scores that would give you skill experience for playing.

At rank 7 playing, however, in order to advance you must resort to playing 'default' music, stock music created by the game designers. When playing default music, the song you play is completely random, so you cannot choose to only play one song, or even songs of a specific difficulty. Despite this, I managed to spam my way to rank 6 of Instrument Playing.

The reason someone would put so much into these skills is that once you have Composing and Music Theory to rank 9, you can create score scrolls that have magical effects. Some regenerate HP, mana, or stamina. Some give boosts to a single stat, such as Strength or Luck. Some of them have other effects, such as charming animals or giving direct combat bonuses. The better you are at Instrument Playing, the better effects you can do, and they affect all party members within a rather large area. Sounds nifty, right?

Problem One:
The type of score scroll you get is determined by random, and it seems that some types are more likely to be generated than others. Furthermore, whether or not your score gets a magic effect (which is determined at creation of the scroll) is also completely random.

Problem Two:
You need to be at least Rank 5 in Instrument Playing before you can use any magical music aside from stat boosts or regen. So I'd have to spam my way with default music through yet another rank. Not so big of an issue, since those types of scores are harder to come by anyway.

Problem Three:
There's only a handful of scores that are actually useful below Playing rank of 5. Strength boosters are good if the party is heavy with melee fighters. Dexterity is good if you have a lot of ranged fighters. Intelligence might be good if you were in a party full of spellslingers (not common at all, even individually) but is otherwise only useful for a quick boost when trying to enchant something. As far as Will and Luck go, the questionable bonus received from a boost to these is hardly worth mentioning.

The regen scrolls, at first glance, seem much more worthwhile. Instead of being a single temporary bonus (that seems to end an amount of time after the song ends roughly equivalent to the length of the song), they would regen the specified amount at regular intervals throughout the playing. Unfortunately, only the mana and stamina regen scores seem to be at all useful, and even then only minutely. The majority of the players are simply too impatient to wait for a slow regeneration effect. Potions already exist that will restore HP, mana, and stamina, and these are both quicker and more plentiful than score scrolls anyway, not to mention bards who can play them. Regen scores are much harder (it seems) to produce than stat-boosters, as well.

Problem Four:
Another reason that the magic music is so relatively useless takes some explanation. The numeric potential of the stat-boosting and regen scores is determined by your Playing Instrument rank, and you need to be at least rank 9 to get any effect at all. No matter what rank you are, however, the value you get is determined within a set range which always starts at zero. If it's zero, then you get a message saying the music seems to have no effect.

Rank 9 playing grants 0-1 for stat boosts and 0-2 for regen, according to information available. When I was rank 9 playing, more often than not my score would work, and I'd get a value of 1 regardless of what type I played, and I figured that was fair enough.

Rank 8 playing grants 0-2 for stat boosts and 0-3 for regen, again according to available info. Once I got to rank 8, the biggest difference I saw immediately was that my score scrolls had zero effect more often than they had before. I very rarely got a value of 2 from a stat boost, and even more rarely a value of 3 for regen.

Rank 7 playing, in theory, grants 0-6 for stat boosts and 0-4 for regen. By this point, I was getting zero effect from my magical scores more often than I got any effect at all, and the majority of the time I was still getting 1's and 2's. Occasionally I got 4 from a regen. I still have never seen anything above 4 from a stat boost, and usually only got 3 at best. Most of the time, if the party needed hp or stamina regeneration and didn't want to use potions, the Rest skill would regen them faster than my music could, anyway.

Rank 6 playing is supposed to give 0-10 for stat boosts and 0-5 for regen. I've only been rank 6 a short while, but so far it seems my success ratio (success being any value above 0, failure being 0) is about 50%, which is an improvement on rank 7 (but still not as good as I remember rank 9). I'm seeing more 3's and 4's from both stat boosts and regen, though not reliably. As I said before, I've never seen anything above 4, which is a shame because a bonus of 10 to a stat like Strength or Dexterity could be a major boon.

So Problem Four is actually two-fold: 4a) The range of the bonus, regardless of playing rank, always starts at 0. 4b) The value you get doesn't seem to be based on anything you can effect. It's not entirely random, or else you'd see more high numbers than now. I suppose you could call it semi-random, erring on the low side with higher numbers being exponentially less likely.

With weapon damage, you have an attribute called Balance, modified by the weapon type and by your Dexterity, which determines where in the damage range of the weapon you're likely to have your hits fall. On average, a damage range of 10-20 with a Balance of 50% will generally mean 15 damage each hit.

With spellcasting, there is Magic Balance, modified by Intelligence, which determines where in the damage range of the spell you are likely to hit.

There does not seem to be any apparent equivalent "Music Balance". If there is, I'm completely at a loss as to what effects or modifies it.

As far as the regen scores go (at least so far), HP is pretty much worthless, both inside and outside of combat. Inside of combat, the Healing spell and hp potions are much faster and more reliable. With a roughly equal chance of getting any effect and no effect at all, chances are your music won't do any healing the first try, and if it does, it's too slow to save anyone's life.

Stamina regen scores are marginally more useful. It can be easy to run out of stamina (which is used up by using skills) in a long fight, and sometimes you don't have the time to quaff a potion, or maybe you didn't realize you were low. Having a constant regen of stamina, regardless of the amount, could actually save someone in combat. Outside of combat, it's pretty much useless. The Rest skill regens faster.

Mana regen is, arguably, the most potentially useful effect below rank 5 Playing. Since mana regen is naturally very slow (faster at night, but still fairly slow), it can be nice to have another method of regenerating it. Again, however, potions are plentiful, especially if you have the Herbalism and Potion Making skills. And like with the HP regen, you're not going to get enough benefit out of it during battle that it's likely to make a difference. Outside battle, it's more useful.

So: HP regen? No use. Stam regen? Potentially useful during combat, but otherwise not. Mana regen? Potentially useful outside of combat, but otherwise not.

Problem Five (What, you thought I was done?):
The musician is rendered immobile while playing. Now, the area of effect is pretty big. I can stand in one corner of a normal dungeon room and reach party members almost in the opposite corner. But stat-boost effects will end early if the song ends early. So if the party wipes out the room and starts heading on to the next one, the bard either gets left behind to finish the song (if it produced an effect worthwhile enough to continue) or to cancel it and catch up so that he can play it again (possibly getting a worse result) in the next room.

Further, because the bard is immobile, and because monster spawns in a room are random in their location, it's quite possible one will aggro on the bard and hit him, ending the song prematurely, before the party can assist. This means a wasted attempt, and the bard has an instrument in hand instead of a weapon to defend himself with, if he's still alive.

So, half the time (or less) you make a scroll, it's magic.
Half the time (or less) it's magic, it's something useful.
Half the time (or less) it's something useful, you can get it to work.
If you get it to work, half the time (or less) it's actually worthwhile.
1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 = 1/16
So... I guess 1/16th of the time (or less) it's worth playing a bard?

I swear, I'm going to de-rank Music Theory.

Overall I think the biggest problems are the abundance of potions and the impatience of the majority of players, followed by the unreliability of the effects. These are the main factors that make playing a bard so frustrating and, quite frankly, useless.

Funny... I guess I expected bards to be more powerful in a game called Mabinogi.