Of all the characteristics possessed by
AD&D® game characters, intelligence
stands out as being of minimal value to all
classes (magic-users excepted). The advantages
of superior strength, dexterity, constitution,
and wisdom are frequently and
readily apparent. Even mundane and
"peaceful" characteristics such as charisma
and comeliness can be of great benefit to
player characters fortunate enough to
have high scores in these categories. In the
case of a high intelligence, though, few
bonuses accrue to the character.

Certainly, some bonuses for high intelligence
may be noted, such as an increased
chance for being psionic or for detecting
otherwise invisible creatures. But, cases
where these factors come into play are
rather rare. This writer knows of few
campaigns that make use of psionics. In
the past six years, I have only seen the
detection of invisibility table used twice.
There are, of course, a few other circumstances
in which the intelligence of the
character does become a factor, such as in
the case of a character's will vs. an intelligent
swords will, or in noting a scrying
attempt, but examples such as these are
infrequent, relegating a vital characteristic
to the status of an all but useless statistic
for non-magic-users, a characteristic
which should play a much more important
role in a character's existence. What follows,
then, are a few suggestions for beefing
up the use of intelligence and crafting
it into a more desirable characteristic.

Working smarter
It can be argued that intelligence should
play a major role in both the amount of
time spent in actual training and in the
expense entailed when reaching a new
level. It makes sense that Ragnor, a fighter
with an intelligence of 3, would have a
more difficult time understanding and
learning the various nuances and techniques
of better swordplay than would
Gwydion, a fighter with an intelligence of
18. Likewise, Redfern the Bland, with an
intelligence of 12, is probably not going to
be as adept in learning the magical arts as
Athanasius the Brilliant, who has an 18 in
the same category. Both Gwydion and
Athanasius should expect a reduction in
the amount of time necessary to advance
in levels and less expense in doing so.

The present level-advancement system
bases training costs and time factors in
direct proportion to how well the character
acts according to his alignment and
how well the functions of class are displayed.
This is fine as far as it goes, but
the consideration of character intelligence
in this article would do much to make a
good score in that characteristic a highly
desirable thing. A proposed variant which
takes the intelligence of the character
directly into consideration is presented
below.

First, assign a factor based on how well
--or how poorly -- the character displayed
the functions of his class(es):

Excellent: Fighters used proper weapons
in given situations and chose the best
targets for attacks; spellcasters used the
most useful spells based on knowledge of
the area without errors in range, area of
effect, or spell function; thieves checked
for traps in likely spots, chose targets
wisely, attacked in the most efficient manner
for the situation, and acquired extra
treasure intelligently and efficiently -- 0

Good: Character was played intelligently
with minimal errors. The character may
have been too cautious or reckless, but did
not place himself or group in great danger.
Spellcasters did not expose party to needless
danger from ineptitude -- ½.

Fair: Character was played tolerably,
though inefficiently, and constantly made
minor errors or was careless. Spellcasters
broke the flow of game continually, interrupting
game time to check on spell
details -- 1.

Poor: Character made inefficient use of
skills, gross errors in spellcasting, failed to
pull own weight, refused to cooperate
with party, or player repeatedly questioned
or argued with DM -- 2.

Next, assign a second factor based on
how well the character followed his alignment,
based on the following:

Excellent: No deviations from professed
alignment except as necessary for honorable
self-preservation (i.e., evil PC acting
"good" around party ranger; good thief
acting "evil" around waterfront NPCs
while gathering information, etc.) -- 0.

Good: Character made few unnecessary
deviations from professed alignment -- ½.

Poor: Character made repeated deviations
from professed alignment without
justification (note: double these penalties
for rangers, paladins, and clerics, as alignment
plays a much more important role in
these classes) -- 1.

Take the two factors and add them together,
then add an additional value of 1 to
get the multiplier penalty for training
time. We now refer to the following information
to note the normal training time,
depending on class:

Fighter classes: 7 days plus 1 day/level
training.

Thief classes: 9 days plus 1 day/level
training.

Cleric classes: 8 days plus 1 day/level
training.

Magic-user classes: 10 days plus 1 day/
level training.

Multiply the total training time above by
the penalty sum. For example, a fighter
training for 4th level has a base training
period of 11 days, but the fighter was
assessed a penalty of ½ for only good class
play and another ½ for following alignment
at the good rating, for a total of 1.
We therefore multiply the base training 
period by 2, finding that the fighter must 
spend 22 days in training, assuming he 
receives no additional training time for 
having poor INT or a lessening of 
training time for being bright.  USE the 
table below to find the INT multiplier 
to lengthen or shorten training. 

For simplicity, a table is provided below 
which shows at A glance the total required 
training time.

______________________________
 

Character's intelligence	Penalty or bonus percentage
3	+60%
4	+40%
5-7	+25%
8-12	0
13-14	-25%
15-16	-40%
17	-45%
18	-50%
19 or better	-60%

______________________________

                                            Character Intelligence

Base days of training	3	4	5-7	8-12	13-14	15-16	17	18	19+
9	14	13	11	9	8	6	5	5	4
10	16	14	13	10	8	6	6	5	4
11	18	15	14	11	9	7	6	6	4
12	19	17	15	12	9	7	7	6	5
13	21	18	16	13	10	8	7	7	5
14	22	20	18	14	11	8	8	7	6
15	24	21	19	15	11	9	8	8	6
16	26	22	20	16	12	10	9	8	6
17	27	24	21	17	13	11	9	9	7
18	29	25	22	18	14	11	10	9	7
19	30	27	24	19	14	11	10	10	8
20	32	28	26	20	16	12	11	10	8
21	34	30	26	21	16	13	12	11	8
22	35	31	27	22	17	13	12	11	9
23	37	32	29	23	17	14	13	12	9
24	38	34	30	24	18	14	13	12	10
25	40	35	30	25	19	15	14	13	10
26	41	36	33	26	20	16	14	13	10
27	43	38	34	27	20	16	14	14	11
28	45	39	35	28	21	17	15	14	11
29	46	41	36	29	22	17	16	15	12
30	48	42	38	30	23	18	17	15	12
31	50	43	39	31	23	19	17	16	12
32	51	45	40	32	24	19	18	16	13
33	53	46	41	33	25	20	18	17	13
34	54	48	43	34	26	20	19	17	14
35	56	49	44	35	26	21	19	18	14
36	58	50	45	36	27	22	20	18	14
37	59	52	46	37	28	22	20	19	15
38	61	53	48	38	29	23	21	19	15
39	62	55	49	39	29	23	21	20	16
40	64	56	50	40	30	24	22	20	16
41	66	57	51	41	31	25	23	21	16
42	67	59	53	43	32	25	23	21	17
43	69	60	54	43	32	26	24	22	17
44	70	62	55	44	33	26	24	22	18
45	72	63	56	45	34	27	25	23	18
46	74	64	58	46	35	28	25	23	18
47	76	66	59	47	35	28	26	24	19
48	77	67	60	48	36	29	27	24	19
49	78	69	61	49	37	29	28	25	20
50	80	70	63	50	38	30	28	25	20
51	82	71	64	51	38	31	29	26	20
52	83	73	65	52	39	31	29	26	21
53	85	74	66	53	40	32	29	27	21
54	86	76	68	54	41	32	30	27	22
55	88	77	69	55	41	33	30	28	22
56	90	78	70	56	42	34	31	28	22
57	91	80	71	57	43	34	31	29	23
58	93	81	73	58	44	35	32	29	23
59	94	83	74	59	44	35	32	30	24
60	96	84	75	60	45	36	33	30	24

Referring back to our fighter in training
for 4th-level, we decide he is a bit brighter
than average, with an intelligence of 14.
When cross-referenced with the table 
provided, we see that his base training 
period of 22 days is reduced to 17 days.  
Checking that with the cost data, we find 
that the daily cost to the fighter is 200 gp 
per day, for a total cost of 3,400 gp for 17 
days of training.

Having now determined how, many days
the character must spend in actual training,
note the data below to find the suggested
daily cost for training, depending
on class and level.

Intelligence and saving throws table
                                                    Character intelligence

Level/Class	3	4	5-7	8-14	15	16	17	18	19
Magic-user	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
I. Nystul's magic aura	-3	-2	-1	0	+1	+2	+3	+4	immunity
II. Leomund's trap	N/A	N/A	-5%	0	+5%	+10%	+15%	+20%	+30%
III. Phantasmal force	-3	-2	-1	0	+1	+2	+3	+4	immunity
-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Illusionist spells	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
I. Phantasmal force	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*
II. Fascinate	-3	-2	-1	0	+1	+2	+3	+4	+5
II. Improved phantasmal force	-4	-3	-2	0	0	+1	+2	+3	+4
III. Spectral force	-3	-3	-2	0	0	0	+1	+2	+3
IV. Rainbow pattern	-3	-2	-1	0	+1	+1	+2	+3	+4
IV. Shadow monsters	-3	-2	-1	0	+1	+2	+3	+4	+5
V. Advanced illusion	-4	-3	-2	0	0	+1	+2	+3	+4
V. Demi-shadow monsters	-3	-2	-1	0	0	+1	+2	+3	+4
VI. Demi-shadow magic	-5	-3	-2	0	0	0	+1	+1	+2
VI. Phantasmagoria	-4	-2	-1	0	+1	+2	+3	+4	immunity
VI. Programmed illusion	-6	-4	-3	0	0	0	0	+1	+2
VI. Shades	-3	-2	-1	0	0	+1	+2	+2	+3
VI. Veil	**	**	**	**	**	**	**	**	**

* As 3rd-level magic-user spell
** straight saving throw

Smart saving throws
Just as a high wisdom score allots a
bonus to the saving throw vs. spells which
involve a question of will force (charm,
rulership, suggestion, etc.), a bonus to
one’s saving throw vs. some illusion/
phantasm spells, given that the individual
encountering these spells possesses superior
intelligence, would not be inappropriate.
DEITIES & DEMIGODS clearly states that
beings with extremely high intelligence
statistics actually gain immunity to various
levels of illusion/phantasm spells. This
clearly illustrates a direct correlation
between intelligence and the successful
warding off of these spells. Perhaps consideration
should be made for allowing
saving-throw bonuses or penalties based
on intelligence.

A list of illusion/phantasm spells is offered
above, with suggested saving-throw
modifiers based on the intelligence score.

Certainly, a strong argument can be
made against some of the premises suggested
in this article, such as immunity to
a phantasmagoria spell or a saving throw
for a veil spell, even with a 19 intelligence.
Any readers considering adapting sections
of this article into their campaigns should
carefully review all data and adjust any
figures according to their own tastes,
keeping game balance in mind.

JANUARY 1986