Quote:Original post by Johnny Sunshine
I think this is a matter of creativity. I often play AD&D, and I can't tell it enough times: the INT score does not measure the character's intelligence.
The 3rd edition SRD (well, actually it's 3.5) states:
Quote:Intelligence (Int)
Intelligence determines how well your character learns and reasons.
So it looks like either the focus changed or that INT represents the character intelligence.
The other abilities meanings are described here (and Charisma also describe the character attractiveness, as well as a bunch of other things such as leadership or persuasiveness).
Now, that's not very important WRT the OP's question.
D&D and games alike are abstraction. In order to successfully build this abstraction, one have to make simplifications, and the wizard = intelligent and warrior = powerfull is one of them. Actually, nothing prevent you from playing a dumb wizard (but then the complexity of the higher spheres of magic will be innaccessible for you) or a weak fighter (again, some of the finer things a better warrior might learn will prove to be harder or impossible to do with this character).
Personnally, I prefer some other kind of magic (for example, the kind that is outlined in Gaborit's novel "Les chroniques des crépusculaire"; sorry, I believe it has not been translated in English. In this novel, the magic power comes from a better affinity with nature and with some small creatures that are the effective source of magic. Your affinity allows you to make these very rare creatures danse, and their danse creates magical effects. This kind of magic is not based on intelligence - allowing you to play a dumb wizard that will be as powerfull as a clever one). When it comes to warriors, I'm affraid that they'll still need some strength and some dexterity if they want to survive in a brutal world.
Regards,