Mega-Intelligence characters

[Qelan]

Does anyone have a problem letting players create characters who are mega-intelligent? I have a friend who wants to play this super-intelligent Sherlock Holmes/Buckaroo Bonzi type character in our game. I was wondering how would other GMs handle a character like this in their campaign? The main focus of a character like this would be logic solving and accurate deductive leaps of logic. How would a GM handle a player that could careless about combat and the character is infact almost designed to be knocked-out in any combative engagment? Now what the player wants out of the game is the ability to make the scenario flow around them or even change the course now and then.

[Hermit]

Well, Power wise you might consider things like limited Precognition linked to Deduction rolls. While the player might not be interested in combat, if you feel his character will get taken out too easily, you could suggest he buy some DCV or a little Damage Reduction linked to Intelligence rolls.

[Syberdwarf2]

Re: Mega-Intelligence characters

 

Originally posted by Qelan

Does anyone have a problem letting players create characters who are mega-intelligent? I have a friend who wants to play this super-intelligent Sherlock Holmes/Buckaroo Bonzi type character in our game. I was wondering how would other GMs handle a character like this in their campaign? The main focus of a character like this would be logic solving and accurate deductive leaps of logic. How would a GM handle a player that could careless about combat and the character is infact almost designed to be knocked-out in any combative engagment? Now what the player wants out of the game is the ability to make the scenario flow around them or even change the course now and then.

 

Not really sure how I would handle the mega-intelligent PC per se, but the game itself should be pretty easy. Just be sure to focus on the 'un'-mega-intelligence of the other characters.

Also, be careful. This maay be a character concept prompted by the popularity of the show John Doe. Such a character would be interesting to play, I admit, but it wouldnt leave much to do for the other players. He'd just be too darn smart. These types of characters, IMHO are normally requested as allowed by two types of players.

1) players who, although they're your friends, just don't have the mental capacity to convincingly pull off this character.

AND;

2) players who are 'smart' enough to pull it off, but have a tendency to be rules lawyers that try to take over the game.

[BarryB]

Re: Mega-Intelligence characters

 

Originally posted by Qelan

How would a GM handle a player that could careless about combat and the character is infact almost designed to be knocked-out in any combative engagment?

 

I suggest OCV and DCV levels to simulate the ability to figure out an opponent's moves: "You're just too, too predictable."

 

I suggest Find Weakness, though you may find that too powerful.

 

Analyze Combat Styles might also be in order as well as the ability to use skills like Mechanics or Electronics in combat on an opponent's focus to disable it.

 

Now what the player wants out of the game is the ability to make the scenario flow around them or even change the course now and then.

 

All players should be able to change the course of scenarios; how much is up to the GM. But your remark makes me think that the player wants the scenarios to center on his character's ability to figure out anything. I consider this to be a big no-no. The occasional scenario can center on the character, but not all or even most.

 

Something else to consider is the effect of the high intelligence on puzzles, traps, and mysteries. It sounds to me that the player is going to push hard to know every secret in a scenario "because I made my Deduction roll by 10 points."

[Qelan]

I have talked to him about sevral of the points you have made and he understands that there will be times when I am going to have to say "I don't want the story to move in that direction because it will end the game." And that is one of the issues I am wanting advice on. I want to be able to avoid having to say this because it will subtract from the "suspension of disbelief" in the game for him and even the other players.

[Acroyear]

1) All super sleuths have an arch-enemy. Moriarti for Sherlock Holmes. Hanoi Xan for Buckaroo. Make sure he has one.

 

2) Any adventure the sleuth is involved in is either sure to be, at least in part, due to the machinations of said villain... *or* the sleuth's involvement will get the villain's attention. What happens when you're tracking down an ordinarily mundane kidnapping or robbery and, out of the blue, Simon Mystery decides to make the game more interesting if for no other reason than to try to trip up our hero?

 

"Those clues? Wait... some are fake. But these two seem legitimate... and they conflict."

 

"That hired goon? Someone already got to him and silenced him... certainly not the work of the Jolly Jester."

 

Not only can you cancel out the sleuth's skills (he's certainly going to be more dependent on skill rolls) when you need to, but it can help provide story arcs, side plots, and sticks with the theme of the super genius sleuth. You don't need Simon Mystery every time... but when you need to halt skill use, he seems to have a finger in the pie Don't cancel him by saying "oh, that roll will end the story" instead cancel him with red herrings and roadblocks by a worthy adversary.

 

That said, suggest to him that he take "rival" as a disad for is criminal counterpart. Not hunted, of course... the rival lives for the game and showing him up at every opportunity.

[Supreme]

Re: Mega-Intelligence characters

 

Ack... just drank coffee... having creative flash... long post...

 

I've played the super-intellect guys before and I've seen what's wrong with them. A super-intelligent character, however you figure the powers, skills, etc. is someone who will make every non-combat roll, find every clue, analyze every clue correctly, and solve every riddle. I think GMs should allow such characters, but be aware of what they will do to the campaign, and how to challenge them.

 

What the Super-Sleuth Will Do to the Campaign

In any standard campaign, the super-sleuth will take all of the time normally spent investigating and reduce it by 90%. While this might sound nice for the combat-monsters, the rest of us - including the GM - might not find that as fun. Also, while the super-sleuth is solving all the mysteries, the other PCs will have little or nothing to do. It would probably be a good idea to have other things for the non-sleuthing PCs to do (like have social lives, help repair collateral damage, etc.).

 

How to Challenge the Super-Sleuth

1. Give them problems that are not solved by skill rolls. The most classic example of this is the old convention of crime-riddles. The villain leaves behind clues for the heroes in the form of riddles. Don't allow the super-sleuth to make any "riddle-solving" rolls. Chances are the super-sleuth will ignore the riddle and try to dig up other clues. To deal with that either read #2 here, or let the other PCs work on the riddle while the super-sleuth does his thing.

2. Have the villains use things that are from beyond the scope of human knowledge, as established in the campaign world. First, before play begins, have it established how much humanity as a whole knows about things like alien technology, the supernatural, etc. Most super-sleuths, as they are defined, should only have the ability to know about stuff from the normal human world (Batman may know that there was once a world called Krypton, but he probably wouldn't know how to fix - or even identify - Kryptonian technology). So throw clues at them from beyond human experience. Hey, that's the kind of stuff that super-heroes are supposed to deal with.

3. Only allow skill rolls to reveal facts. Leave all summations and inferences to the PC. That's what a super-sleuth is for. Let them make their forensics rolls and determine the time of death as indicated by body temperature. Then let them figure out that that time of death conflicts with other facts of the case. (As a side note, I generally didn't allow characters to take Deduction. It always seemed like a cheat.)

 

When the Sleuth Gets Knocked Out

I personally don't think this is much of a problem. In fact, I consider it the PCs responsibility to see to their combat effectiveness. The truth is, I've never met a player who enjoyed getting knocked out every combat. If they get knocked out enough, they'll start to make the necessary changes to their character.

[BarryB]

Oh, Supreme's post reminded me of something.

 

Roleplay the sleuthing. Don't let Brain-man make a skill roll on Conversation and say "So what do I learn from the conversation?" or make a Deduction roll and say "What clues do I find?"

 

I find the technique of asking players to make a skill roll and telling me how much they made it by to be an effective tool to keep them in the dark as to whether the skill actually worked or not.

 

"I examine the bookcase closely."

"Make your Perception roll and tell me how much you made it by."

"I made it by five."

"Nothing you notice strikes you as out of the ordinary."

 

Of course, KS: Bookcases might be a complementary skill.

[Delthrien]

I'm not a super genius but I play one in a campaign...

 

Unfortunately, I have no insights to offer. The character in question seems to waffle between a sleuth and a gadgeteer (leaning more heavily to the gadgeteer side). There are a couple of things that I've done with the character to try to simulate the "super-sleuth/super-scientist" is a VPP that's limited to scientific/sleuthing skills. I had also tried a limited form of retrocognition to allow him to deduce what had happened at a crime scene based on the available evidence. Mixed results on that one.

 

Someone had mentioned a "John Doe" inspiration earlier and, if I remember correctly, there had been a question on the old incarnation of the HERO boards regarding simulating the near "bottomless pit" of knowledge that Doe possesses. The most creative response that I recall was to give the character a "Knowledge Skill: Everything, 30-" to allow him to come up with even the most esoteric bits of information easily. I've almost tried running that one past the GM... ;-)

[lemming]

Originally posted by BarryB

Oh, Supreme's post reminded me of something.

 

Roleplay the sleuthing. Don't let Brain-man make a skill roll on Conversation and say "So what do I learn from the conversation?" or make a Deduction roll and say "What clues do I find?"

 

Which reminds me of a great line by Steve Barnes when we were stuck in a seriously overly long game that was going nowhere.

 

"Is there any sort of roll I can make to get this game going again?"

 

This is paraphrased since I'm going off of a 20 year old memory. (And that's Steve Barnes of Hero Maker, not the Sci-Fi author)

[Patriot]

Geniuses

 

In my opinion Any one can play the brick, e-caster,speedster

what ever,....but to play a very very intellegent Pc you gotta have a little smarts yourself I have ad people play Pcs who were supposed to be geniuses,but they were not the real good at deduction......I know its just my opinion but thats my 2cents

[Tech]

Re: Mega-Intelligence characters

 

Originally posted by Qelan

Does anyone have a problem letting players create characters who are mega-intelligent? I have a friend who wants to play this super-intelligent Sherlock Holmes/Buckaroo Bonzi type character in our game. I was wondering how would other GMs handle a character like this in their campaign? The main focus of a character like this would be logic solving and accurate deductive leaps of logic. How would a GM handle a player that could careless about combat and the character is infact almost designed to be knocked-out in any combative engagment? Now what the player wants out of the game is the ability to make the scenario flow around them or even change the course now and then.

From what you're saying, it sounds more like you mean exceedingly good in their skills. I doubt Sherlock Holmes was super-intelligent. When I think of super-intelligent, I think of Marvel's Leader or maybe Mister Fantastic. What about Brainiac? Being supremely good at a particular skill or job does not equate to being super-intelligent. I don't think Batman is super-intelligent but there's not doubting his detective skills.

[JohnTaber]

I think Tech or Supreme touched on this comment but I'm not sure if they hit it exactly...

 

I would also make sure the player understands the difference between super smart and super knowledgeable. There is a difference in game terms (i.e. high INT vs KS/SS/Skills) and in solving mysteries and such. Sherlock might have a KS:Poisons roll on a 15- but if your player does not have this they will not be poison experts.

 

Hopefully you get the point.

 

What to do about it?

 

If you mention this to the PC plus frankly talk with him about your problem hopefully he will understand. I would suggest having the PC spend lots of point on KS/SS/Languages etc plus consider a gadget pool or something so that at least they can show up in combats.

 

"Balance is important in all things."

- Splinter from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

[Dynamo]

I've played a few hyper-intelligent characters in the past, and I've never had any problem being a push-over in combat, though one of them never actually entered melee. Oversight was a communication-optimized telepath/remote-viewer who provided tactical overwatch to the team and had a number of powers usable by others at range through mental contact to simulate insightful tactical advice. I had just finished a long period of playing a front-line brawler and wanted a new challenge. It worked out well and I never got bored during combat despite not once rolling damage dice.

 

Another was Jim Samson the World's Smartest Man. Originally made as a throw-away character for a high-point game, Samson was actually a lot of fun to play, with powers bought to represent figuring things out almost before they happen. Things like Penetrating HtH Attack (hitting them where it hurts), Nonpersistent 75% Damage Reduction (saw it coming), and a "Be Prepared" Gadget Pool to simulate "It just so happens I dropped by last night and left a few surprises in case things got ugly."

 

You do have to be careful not to step on the other PCs toes when it comes to non-combat skills. I played Samson with a guy who wanted to play a Batman-esque brillliant detective, so I steered clear of investigation skills. We both took very high Deduction skills though, so we had a lot of "Are you thinking what I'm thinking?" (Good thing Pinky & the Brain hadn't debuted yet.)

[Qelan]

There is a lot of really good information in this thread, I hope someone is writing a lot of this stuff down.

 

Well the character I am talking about (his name is Jonni Ray Cyrrius or Prof. Cyrrius) has more skills then a 13yr-old has pimples and a 40 int. not to mention rapid sensing, editic memory, and some of the skills are investigation types so he really covers pretty much the full spectrum of what intelligence is.

 

Most of these ideas in this thread are exaclly what I was looking for. I was looking for ways to keep the challenge factor of the game up without making it come to a halt and at the same time letting the super intelligent character feel like he is adding to the story. If anyone have any more suggessions on this topic please feel free to voice them even if they may seem odd or strange.

[TheEmerged]

Speaking as someone with a 40 INT PC in his current campaign and more than a few hyper-intelligent types...

 

1> Beware the "netrunner" syndrome. This is where one player gets all the attention at certain points of the session but might as well be out running for pizza the rest of the time. If a player brings you such a character, strongly recommend something with more balance.

 

2> Get used to the idea of a variable future. I use this as a blanket rule for religious reasons, but it's a handy device for dealing with players "so smart they can see the future". Variable change; sometimes just knowing those variables change them.

 

3> Beware the "Highlander!" syndrome (There can be only one!). This isn't a gaming issue, it's a personal one. Some people seem to be obsessed with being the centerpiece of the story, despite the presence of other players. This player tends toward the Doctor Doom "know everything" concept. This can be an asset: "Jim, make an INT roll to see the giant neon sign that says "Clue Here" ". This can also be a problem for the rest of your players -- if anything, unless you have some unusually passive players it's GOING to become a problem sooner or later.

 

The solution for #3 is just as personal as the issue. Don't depend on the gaming mechanics -- be up-front with this concern and develop an understanding with the player. That understanding may involve them finding another gaming group, but hopefully you can either prevent it or work it out

 

 

4> One gaming issue that might surprise you is the simple power of having a 17- PER roll, with all available senses. If this is your first time dealing with that, prepare to get a good handle on the sense-affecting rules

 

[Tamashii2000]

Re: Geniuses

 

Originally posted by Patriot

In my opinion Any one can play the brick, e-caster,speedster

what ever,....but to play a very very intellegent Pc you gotta have a little smarts yourself I have ad people play Pcs who were supposed to be geniuses,but they were not the real good at deduction......I know its just my opinion but thats my 2cents

 

I think that in some cases you just have to let a PC simply roll the dice and then tell them the results. When it comes right down to it, Thier PC expecialy when they have say 25+ int are going to figure things out that the player simply isn't capable of. This is doubly true when they have deduction and such skills backing it up.

 

Its said that just becase the Player knows something doesn't mean the character does... This also works in reverse. Just because the player Doesn't know something, does not mean the character might not.

[Prometheus]

One of the characters in my campaign has a 43 INT, but in contrast to your example, he brings alot of raw physical power to the campaign as well. Adding to what has already been said, here are a couple of things to consider:

 

1) PER Rolls. An 18- borders on Danger Sense when it comes to surprise, and villians that rely on Stealth are going to be confounded by the PC's keen senses. The same holds true for Acting, Disguise and Invisibility. Barring an arbitrary decision ("You just didn't catch that, sorry."), you're going to have to find a way to deal with the PC's keen senses.

 

2) Knowledge, Professional and Science Skills. It seems like a godsend to have a PC with strong non-combat skills in a team, but the potential for abuse is stunning. PS: Lawyer 18- may mean that the your villians go to jail for a long time, and generally cleaner streets, but it also means that the PC is all but immune to conviction (arrest and bad press are a different story). Even at -8, he has about a 50% chance of spin doctoring past the jury.

 

With a very high INT, the PC becomes a plot vehicle- good if you want to have a sure fire way of keeping the team going, not so good if you want to have some control over story flow.