In my setting the longes living species is hypercarnivorous. Large theropods, Skyrann, living on the plains and forests in small tribal groups and rare towns of few hundred people in places where they can feed enough livestock. They technically can live up to 350-380 years, but rarely. Food shortages put a hard cap on their population. Hunting is inheritely dangerous and they get wounded. Diesieases, festering wounds, predator attacks on isolated members and occasional raids/infighting in bad times mean they rarely live beyond 150. And the issue of urgency and proceastiantion is virtually non-existent, since not doing something well and fast usually leads to getting no food for the day. And the low population density does not exactly help with technological and societal progress, with their societies being stuck in bronze age at best. Most of them were having a pretty shit time overall. Until an expansionist human empire learned about them. Humans quickly realised the Skyrann would make excellent shock troops, so the Empire offered them a place in human society. The offer of stability and access to services that were completely inaccessible to the tribes was tempting enough to convince quite a lot of then to move. They were not a warlike species though. They did not exactly rush to become soldiers. And forcefully conscripting huge lizards is a rather bad idead at the best of circumstances. But the problem was ultimately solved. You can always buy food in human cities, if you can afford it - and meat is not exactly cheap in a society without industrialised farming. So the families of enlisted soldiers got the benefit of heavy government subsidies on food. So now, a lot of them are running around and fighting for what amounts to a controll freak in wars they have absolutely no buisness in, so their clans and families could live somewhat comfortably in a society that will never fully accept them because of what they were born as, while at the same time their culture is being slowly erased and their ways abandonned.

Absolutely love this video!!!! <3 One thing that can also be fun about playing a genius is that being really fucking smart *isn't all there is to a character!* Like, I'm playing a goblin Silverquill Wizard who's a straight up genius, was stuck as a TA for years at the institute she graduated with a *doctorate* because of shitty bureaucracy, and who had a night job as an exotic dancer to pay off her student loans. She's loudmouthed, nosy, loves flashy jewelry, and is a massive nerd - because people who are smart usually nerd the fuck out about their respective subjects. Obviously she's gonna go on an overexcited tangent about the origin, craftsmanship, and useability of an enchanted object, but she's then gonna realize she's rambling and say, "Yeah, so this is for you, Warlock. I can't attune to this. But the properties of this bitch are bonkers, so maybe I can watch you mess around with it and take notes?" There are a million different ways to be clever, and even more subjects that an individual can be intellectually capable in. Sometimes I find it useful to reframe 'genius' as 'a massive fucking dork,' not because someone shouldn't be proud to be smart, but because 'genius' carries a certain pompous weight to it when reiterated, a la Sherlock or House.

Since the short doesnt say, this monster is published in Fizban's Treasury of Dragons on page 194

Rick and Morty made this worse. The issue is being the smartest person in the room gets frustrating over time, and sometimes you’re sick of all the stupid. This can lead to being impatient… but being a dick is a consequence, not a cause, and should be played as annoyed not condescending… condescending is just answering AITA as “yes”. Best way to play smart is to try and use unrelated knowledge in situations, smart people see connections between things others don’t. Only be “that guy” when dealing with npcs that are condescending and wrong. “Why wouldn’t you be that superior if you’re that much smarter?” Because you’re smart enough to know better. I only play that guy types of intellectuals if Charisma is my dump stat… to explain the low cha.

So, I enjoyed this thought experiment, but going into it, I was expecting an entirely different concept. I thought this was going to be "Elves can live practically forever. What makes a player choose this option? What mechanical value does it really have?" A few players might get to build a character who plays through what amounts to several campaigns; maybe even from 1-20, but most of us build expecting to just "run Tomb of Annihilation", and after that is done, we forget it, build a new character, and play Storm King's Thunder. Our character is usually only good for a single story, and if a Human can still be in their prime, when it ends, or even a Half-Orc, what need is there to be able to live 700 years? ToA won't take that long. Even SKT, which doesn't have the same built in timer, doesn't, so why care? Conversely, Elves are renowned for their Magix, which we might like to meme only they can live long enough to master...except a Human can reach 20th in their lifespan, and if any ages Elf isn't Epic, what have they been doing? That all is more what I expected, but this was fun, too, as we do get to see Frieren as she has tried to cope with the world.

The Agatha Christie character Miss Marple is great at this. She sees what is happening, says it reminds her of someone, usually a postmaster's daughter, or a widowed neighbor, or an apprentice parson, or the grocer, back in her village of St. Mary Mead. This is often kind if laughed at, as they're currently investigating the murder by poisoned tennis racket of a duchess, but then she tells a simple story about human interaction and how a seemingly mild mannered person can allow resentment or pain to fester until "well, it was certainly an unpleasant affair for their family". The detective then realizes she sees the situation behind the situation, the interaction of people and their problems. She also advises you g people in this way, asking many questions, leading them to think her a bored or gossipy old woman, then tells a seemingly unrelated story, but our young hero or heroine see their way through the muck and make it work with their love interest, and by the end when they tell Miss Marple that they are in love, or announce their engagement, she's already knitting something for their future children and promising to wrote them a card every Christmas.

The author here is talking down to us in this video. He speaks as if he has a greater understanding, and instead of coming across as a patient teacher, he chooses to speak to us as if we are wasting his time. As if we walked into his home and said," Please, wise one, tell me about smart people" I think it's more common then people want to admit, especially people with a decent level of academic knowledge. Emotional knowledge is something that takes them longer to come by. Sherlock is a genius, an immature genius.

This is the first video of yours I've found! I am so happy to subscribe and hear more of you two!

I have two intelligent characters, both are immortal in different ways and intelligent in different ways. One is smart simply because he was there when things were learned and he's still a huge dummy lol definitely type to forget that he knows stuff. The other is immortal in that he reincarnates with all his knowledge every time he dies, and actively seeks out MORE knowledge and share what he knows and since he's always reincarnated he has different perspective of knowledge and learning.

long time ago bud. when thet stopped playing d&d and started pandering to the fans

Great video Jay and some great great advice. I do have to defend Sherlock a bit though. Sherlock in almost every incarnation is a man who highly values the pursuit of knowledge in his chosen field. He has many character flaws but one of his greatest is his constant frustration with those who don’t know what he knows not because he wants to be smarter than everyone else but because he DOESN’T. He constantly seeks somebody who can challenge his intellect and is so irritated that others don’t understand what he believes to be basic knowledge. One of his most famous terms is “elementary “ which he uses to dismiss people’s amazement at his deductions, inferring that his conclusion is so basic that a child should understand.

It seems like a level 20 party type shit 💀

My female bard had int 21 and wis 8. She was a loremaster-type, and it was hilarious. Oh we're going into the sewers? Time to equip my rubber pants and boots. Why do I have those? How long I've had those? I've had them for months in real life and years in-game time. (the GM nods). Why? Because we're playing D&D, so obviously we would at SOME point go into the sewers. My bookworm loremaster female bard has the noble background, and she likes dressing pretty and fashionably. You remember how wherever we arrive, I go and buy a set of high-quality clothes? (party nods) That's in-character. I am aware it won't really help her in any way (until we need to disguise her for whatever reason. I mean, she has a goddamn wardrobe inside those bags of holding), she just likes to have pretty clothes. Yes, she's learning 12 skill points per level, but she's also getting scammed by every two-bit guy on the street with a ball and three cups. -shrug- Anyway, she LOVES reading quest reports whenever we go to a local adventurer's guild, which means that she has the greatest power known to AD&D. META KNOWLEDGE. Of course we would at some point go into a sewer. Every adventuring party at some point goes into a sewer. So she has a set of ugly, veeery tall rubber boots and overalls, because there's no way in Tyr's name that she's gonna step into the much in her dragon leather high heel boots and giant silk robes. Nu-uh. Just no. Then at one poiunt they needed to enter a room with no obvious exit. So she placed three immovable rofs on the door. Because no way she was gonna fall for the 'the door closes behind you and it cannot be opened' trick. "Why do you have a ring og water breathing? We're nowhere close to the sea!" "Rooms that fill with water are a classic trap." "One of us always lies, and the other only speaks the tru-" "This one speaks the truth." "How do you figure?" "Because he's the one explaining the rules. In order for the puzzle to be fair, the instructions or rules have to be clear, which means you cannot get the one that lies to explain the rules. Therefore, the one explaining the rules is the one that always speaks the truth." "Don't you wanna ask him a question to find out?" "Alright, sure? Did you just tell us the rules?" "...yes." "See? Dumbest riddle in the book." How to play it without being obnoxious about it? "Loan me 5 gold please." "You're broke again?" "Only until the Cormandyr prince gets his inheritance" (wis 8) Party facepalms Need a riddle solved? Bardic lore + 7 other lores and class features specifically tailored for knowledge are there for the party to make use of. ...just never leave her in charge of the party funds. Or in short. Remember to explain and play where your knowledge comes from, and for goodness sake, have an easy, obvious flaw. In my bard's case, it was wisdom 8.

I've played an evil character. I murdered a drow, while playing as a drow renegade, because I knew he'd slip prison and report my existence to his superior. When the party didn't kill him, they even got in my way, and the guards arrived while I argued to kill him. So, I went on a 40 minute side adventure in which I broke into prison and killed the guy in his cell. Got out of it without being seen. Bladesingers are fantastic assassins. I didn't consider Speak With Dead, so I got caught since I said my House name to scare him before killing him. The governor was impressed, rather than upset. After a private conversation, I was hired as her personal assassin and manipulator. The gold was worth it. That said, he never went against his party without reason. When another drow joined our group, she and he butted heads, until finally it came to a fight. I won, and earned her respect as a result. We ended up literally burying the hatchet because I realized he wouldn't understand the metaphor and think it was a literal ceremony when settling disputes between Overworlders, and it was a funny joke since I prepared the hatchet in secret and publically asked for both her and a shovel.

Bro why was there no spoiler warning

I have something I call rage casting, it functions like an incredibly violent wild surge but it can happen to anyone with magical talent. Explosive rage is now a more literal phrase, and because it’s so broken I only allow it in non combat situations. It writes entire chapters in half a second as a result.

me and my friends are applying this to our games, trying to become better and better people through our games. I've also heard that they might be applying ttrpg's into therapy, with professional's monitoring and i feel like it would be a great step in group type therapies

Makes me think of Frost from Once Upon a Witchlight

I'd like to make a point - not so much a corrective one as much as maybe a different outlook, and that is there are teachers and there are educators. They don't have to be mutually exclusive, but one of them is a job and the other is a passion for sharing what they know.

I have an idea for a reccuring villain in my Vampire the Masquerade campaign- or rather, recurring VILLAINS. They're basically 4 vampires that work in Sabbat who dress up like agents from Matrix and all look identical. They are stronger than a vampire with mastered potence (superstrenght), mastered fortitude making them extremely durable, and they are very coordinated in a fight almost like they were a single person. If you know some VtM lore, you might already know what they are. Anyway, the reason they're a reoccuring villain in this case is that whenever they encounter them, the players' goal is gonna be something else than killing them- indeed, some npc's will tell players to avoid them at all cost. And even if they kill one or 2 agents, there are 4 of them total. So their numbers combined with their powers of strenght and superhuman durability, the chances of players actually killing them all in the first encounter is gonna be very slim (Tho not impossible), and killing one will provoke the rest to seek revenge guaranteeing that they're gonna meet again.

In Sherlock's defense. They DO NOT say if you are smartest, you can treat people like garbage. They made Sherlock into a sociopath. That's why everyone like his adaption. Cause he is emotional severed and struggles with understanding emotions.... Though, I can see how a character like this in dnd can go bad. Suddenly, the dumb ass player will act exactly like you claim Sherlock of being with out being a sociopath.... despite acting like one.

I had played a very smart wizard in D&D once, first time I had played a backline bandit and the way I played him was to quietly listen through what everyone said and share my thoughts on what they had said. He never actually really came up with plans, more tried to pick out the flaws in others and when he was confronted with a verbal joust, his intention was never to win but to share his perspective, which often ended with everyone thinking he had triumphed, one joust involving a discussion of chains, someone brought up how a chain could be used to harm, to be whipped at someone to cause pain, my character then shared that he much preferred how chains could connect things, because weapons come in all forms but chains are a bit more specific in connecting things and indeed how they connect things, with yet more connections. Towards the end of the run he had made an error made in an emotional state due to his friends essentially being held captive in a limbo between life and death but the thing he attempted to prevent with his blunder did in fact come to pass. I dont play with that table anymore, mostly because of how no one was willing to listen to me or my characters when we made our points but the first few sessions as that wizard were very fun and I enjoyed how I played him

Played an alchemist called Dr. Anders once. Generally he was a surly and terse talker, and the one person in the circus (pathfinder 2e extinction curse module) who distinctly HATED being there. My favourite moment was when we were sent to investigate a monastery, and the party complained about Anders starting to loot. Simply replied with "I don't mind the do-gooding, but I'd like it to be worth my time." An ulterior, often selfish, motive is an excellent way to gray up your character, even when they partake in heroism. Anders was also the type of person who considered himself able to perform the necessary evil, and saw a kindred spirit in the party rogue, whom he supplied with high-grade poisons.

It's even sadder when you realize FCG did for Orym what Scanlan couldn't do for Vax.

I keep ending up fascinated with playing classes that require Intelligence for the key ability. So I just go for someone who knows what they are doing for their spellcraft, and otherwise are basically idiots in almost all other situations, especially since I tend to dump wisdom in those characters so it also plays off of the classic "unwise professional" type. Who is a bit too dumb and naively brave to be the squishy spellcaster and stand in front of the giant suit of armor harboring a Giant and point blank a spell to hobble the thing before it hobbles me XD the party gets mad too because my characters steal all of the NPCs and snacks hmhmhm

I think another great example of a well done jerky genius is Beau also from critical role. even before she got her circlet, she had a 14 int, but she due to her monk subclass she had a lot of proficiencies that helped her with more varied information that someone like Caleb had. When she rolled for int, it was explained that since she was abducted by monks and forced to be a part of their library and she was a smart girl so she learned against her will. Even when she became more comfotable with her friends, she uses her time trapped in the library as an excuse for what she knows instead of being confident. And what helped sell her being smart is that she spent a lot of time in the library investigating topics, and has a thirst for knowledge. Matt had Marisha roll for history or religion to find out information to help the group, it's not just she has it already, it's something she has to earn

Sherlock is a bad example imo. he's not just a genius, he's got problems. They knew how to right a genius who is connected, who respects those around themselves. For example, his brother. And "Sherlock" demonstrated how being condescending was a flaw. His character arc was all about learning to get along better with others despite a very obvious disability (autism maybe). Fair points on the struggle of writing a compelling character though.

I disagree with the opinion that dnd is a good on-board system or a good system for new players. Maybe for those who have already played dnd-based video games and already know the basic rules, but for a new player? Dnd has a ton of rules, like a ton, which you need to get a handle on to even create a character, not to mention playing it. Explaining the rules of a rules-light system like any given PbtA or Forged in the Dark game takes 10-20 minutes and even complete newbies know enough to play it (speaking from experience here). Additionally, again from my experience, I found that DND teaches a lot of bad habits to new players, because it gives a very strict rules framework and people get kinda stuck in that framework, rarely trying to think outside the box. Here rules light systems act as a bit of a "sink or swim" kind of an experience, where you HAVE to treat it as cooperative storytelling exercise rather than a tactical skirmish game, since rules act as "if you want to do X here's how to handle it" rather than "here's the options you have, just pick one of them". I've been dming for a better part of a decade now and a first session of MotW or BitD with completely newbies sees them have fire in their eyes and display impressive out of the box thinking each and every time, and first session of dnd usually feels like playing a video game but with pen and paper (even with people who don't play video games)

I'm DEFENITELY not a genius, but I find it much harder to play characters with low intelligence. Having played for a while I sometimes have idas just from experience and it's rough when your character isn't smart enough to say anything. If I can think of a way to defeat a Basilisk with a cape, a vial of oil of slipperiness and a bit of luck my character should too, or I go insane. :P

Most evil things are just people being human. And then they eventually become good due to the influence. Well if you need it, what you do to get it is just nature. The key is to pay attention to everything always.

this will probably fade into the comments and not be seen and i only started watching them a year ago and i am at the last few peisodes of campaign 1 now. here goes: i always thought it was coming from Sam and not Scanlen, but for a much simpler reason. My guess is Sam thought with Scanlen dying a lot and and not contributing a lot, he would play someone who can help. This means someone with tons of healing potions, a golum like helper for phisical stuff, tones of gems infused with magic of things that vox machina always looked for in almost every time. add also the fact that Tarry could assosiate with all of them from daddy issues like the twins, intelectual mind like Percy, innocents guided by a mother like figure as Pyke and so on. later on watching forwards i was convinced all this was the case. i also think he planed with mercer to close Tarry's chapter cause he wanted Scanlen back but thats just a personal guess. and i am basing that guess on the fact that for few episodes while playing with Scanlen they were pointing out how important he was to the group as a member and as a family. Sam just needed to know Scanlen was a part of the group not just helpful.

I’ve had the idea for a wizard/spore druid who is smart on nature stuff and insanely smart on mushroom stuff, but if you ask him about say, fire magic or fiends, he’d be totally clueless, it’s not his field and he isn’t super interested, but if you ask him if there is a mushroom that can help heal a cut, he might start ranting about the pros and cons of various mushrooms that could be helpful until you stop him and ask if there are any of them near here so we can deal with the cut we have on hand

I think, this is a great archetype to take inspiration from for even less dramatic character ideas. Even stuff like being the only survivor from the tribe or a small village can explore similar tones.

This is literally the situation with humans and vulcans from Star Trek as well.

Oh I currently play a wizard, a ornery over-worked librarian wizard who smokes cigarettes like a chimney, but her stance on the matter is that the acquisition of knowledge is holy, and while sharing and collaborating is important, the joy of discovering knowledge in and of itself is what is important so she never shares more than she needs (so that other people can dive deeper if they want to, and she will always provide resources if asked). This means she also respects the knowledge the other players may have - that she may not have - as she is essentially a library shut in and knows very little of the world outside of books despite her age of 350, and she is well aware of this fact.

I think I was accidentally doing this exact thing… Got a careless character, she’s a young immortal demon of sorts, at a around 150, barely passing a human’s lifetime So she eventually finds out the fact that there are magic artifacts that are really powerful, but the setting still has most people not believe in the supernatural So she began collecting those out of boredom first, to keep them out of the way of humans who might use em wrong Then eventually she began to study them, collecting what history they had, and WHY they could be used wrong And then eventually, since she lacked some the abilities that her peers had, she began trying to figure out her own way of combating them _And what I didn’t realize is that the research made her seem smart_ That wasn’t exactly the intention? But we did get there!

Or just likes being alone. You could have them roleplay as being a loner. The players arn’t outcasts they are adventurers. Maybe that could regret the action. At the start of the video I was thinking to make them an ally. Maybe a situation where they have to use magic to save a life, teaching them. People shouldn’t change, they should be true to themself. A weakness and strength are separate, how does getting distracted help you focus.

But it is about the action. Maybe the chosen one could be an ally. The hero must do it. The spirit did it, not aang. Teamwork is a good thing.

If u don't notice, you're a bad gm

Wish the was the dragon at the end of bg3

I had a Lieutenant in the Marines that dropped this golden nugget of wisdom: "It's more important that you know how to find the answer, than it is to know the answer."

You can also choose the kind of intelligence you want your character to have; booksmart, streetwise, clever, witty/socially, savvy, perceptive, knowledgeable, etc

Guys I can't believe he spoiled the episode for us 🙄

As a player who plays a lot of wizards, I always ask "Would I know this?" instead of asking to roll. This lets the DM decide if I should roll, or if it makes sense for me to know things, such as backstory characters, locations, or beliefs. I also decline rolls that I believe my character wouldn't know. One of my wizards, a drow, hated necromancy, as he believed it an instrument of Lolth. While he still worshipped Lolth, it was out of fear. Midway through the campaign, he chose to be a devoute worshipper of Eilistraee, once a group of renegade hunters tried to capture him and one of his travelling companions, an artificer who did see herself as better, but she was raised as the First Daughter of her own drow House. She was taught that she was better, and when we butted heads, we had an argument in character, then a fight between us, and I won, shaking her worldview entirely. The next session, we had downtime, so I secretly made a hatchet and asked everyone if they had a shovel. While everyone else thought I was going to kill her, I instead had her help dig a small hole outside the walls, into which we both buried the hatchet, literally. Because my character did not understand surface world metaphors and instead took the phrase to be a literal ceremony of peacebringing. The meme of "Seven Charisma Ceremonies" was born, as we both had used charisma as a dump stat, and both of us, as a result, had 7 charisma. Do not mock the 4'8" king. He is deadly. Not great weapon master polearm master double smite paladin on a crit againat a fiend depite disadvantage powerful, that was Lo, House of Kar.

I have known many brilliant people. They are often insufferable. Empathetic intelligence and social intelligence has nothing to do scholastic intelligence or mechanical intelligence. They are separate

I don't know. If as a DM you create a challenge that is meant for the players to go after, which is the case here, remember that he is the one who dangled the piece of information in front of them. Said challenge has to be manageable with the PCs party only. Remember : we're not talking about something secondary or an objective coming completely from the players nor are we talking big army battle that obviously would require some amount of NPC to face even if only as a distraction, : We're talking PCs party size conflict that the dm is the source of it all here not the other way around. No matter how you slice it that is unfair to do. I would leave such a table in a heartbeat.

"A long lived species would have less motivation" seems BS to me Think about humans who have a longer predicted lifespan than other humans, do they have more motivation? No! Usually, they have LESS motivation. Old people can expect to live less time than young people, so if "how long you have left determines motivation level" old people should be more motivated to accomplish than the young, but the opposite is true. Ditto for people whose lifespans are shorter due to diseases. I don't like how people speculate on this as though it's a topic we have zero data about, we have relevant data (and it all runs contrary to the most common speculation). Elves would probably have more motivation IMO because it will never be too late to start something new.

To be fair, the remark where only a drunk person struggles to plug in their phone is a reference to something Holmes says in the original novels, except it's a pocket watch. The man was a drunk and Holmes figured it out because he struggled to rewind it.