Empathy with low IQ

[Thamior]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Most of the characters who have Empathy are the same characters who would have high IQ. The flaw in Empathy only appears in the unusual case of a dumb character who is particularly good at people reading.

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Sensitive is worse than useless on it's own. But it's still a bonus to your Psychology skill.

I'm sorry, but IQ 10 is not dumb. And Sensitive is bad even at IQ 12! At IQ 12 you have approximately 30% of success (roll against 9). I.e. it is misleading 2/3 of times you use it. And you better off going against it to profit. Not only it is disadvantageous, it is open for abuse by flipping the result.

Still a bonus to psychology? For 5 points? With a disastrous tie-in I have to role-play? No, thank you. I'd rather take talent.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Thamior

I'm sorry, but IQ 10 is not dumb. .

It doesn't qualify you as notably observant either.

With a disastrous tie-in I have to role-play?

No, you don't. You have no need to invoke Empathy. It lets you ask for an Empathy roll. Just don't ask.

[Thamior]

Therefore I provided 12 IQ example. 13 IQ to break 50-50. And this is even worse because you can't even cheat the broken rule. Brilliant. Also you don't have to be genius to be empathic IRL.
If I took an advantage and I don't role-play it why did I take it in the first place? If I take it I will voluntarily use it - this is good role-playing. I want those bonus points and satisfaction.
Sorry, but your arguments didn't convince me at all.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Thamior

Therefore I provided 12 IQ example. 13 IQ to break 50-50. And this is even worse because you can't even cheat the broken rule. Brilliant. Also you don't have to be genius to be empathic IRL.
If I took an advantage and I don't role-play it why did I take it in the first place? If I take it I will voluntarily use it - this is good role-playing. I want those bonus points and satisfaction.
Sorry, but your arguments didn't convince me at all.

To a point I'm sympathetic to the fact that you want low IQ to work with Empathy, but some traits just aren't useful unless they are complemented. Attack powers are pretty useless if you can't hit your target. Aquatic isn't very useful for desert campaigns. Other IQ based things won't work if you can't make activation rolls. Being the best swordsman, but not having the ST to wield a sword. Traits often require other traits (skills/advantages) or specific setting features to work effectively.

Empathy requires interpretation that was based off IQ. There are things you can already take to mitigate that (Based on X or adding Reliable) if you want to be a good empath with a low IQ. You still get a discount, you just have to buy other things to make up for your lack of IQ.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Thamior

Therefore I provided 12 IQ example. 13 IQ to break 50-50. And this is even worse because you can't even cheat the broken rule. Brilliant. Also you don't have to be genius to be empathic IRL.
If I took an advantage and I don't role-play it why did I take it in the first place? .

If you got Sensitive, and didn't make it reliable, and didn't use it to boost a lie detection or psychology skill then you had no reason to take it and just shouldn't have.

[Thamior]

Originally Posted by naloth

To a point I'm sympathetic to the fact that you want low IQ to work with Empathy, but some traits just aren't useful unless they are complemented. Attack powers are pretty useless if you can't hit your target. Aquatic isn't very useful for desert campaigns. Other IQ based things won't work if you can't make activation rolls. Being the best swordsman, but not having the ST to wield a sword. Traits often require other traits (skills/advantages) or specific setting features to work effectively.

Empathy requires interpretation that was based off IQ. There are things you can already take to mitigate that (Based on X or adding Reliable) if you want to be a good empath with a low IQ. You still get a discount, you just have to buy other things to make up for your lack of IQ.

Useful is one thing, but harmful? If you have attack but low chance of hitting with it, mostly you just miss, mostly you don't hit yourself or allies. And when you do hit yourself or an ally is when you roll a critical miss. And aquatic is not harmful to you either. It's just an ability you don't use. And it is obvious why you don't get to use it in non aquatic settings.
Sensitive, on the contrary, is leading you astray when GM lies to you when you fail the roll. It is actively harming you. And it is not obvious at all out of the box why exactly it does that?
So in your examples when there is no synergy, yes the advantage of having those traits is not so lucrative but it is there and with no implied disadvantage to you. This is actually what I was advocating for. And this is what we get if we tweak Empathy as I and many others in this thread have advised.
I understand that having ability to be 100% sure about whether a person is lying is massive. But the way it is mitigated is not working. And it is not even consistent with the basic sense of the rules as someone has mentioned here.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Thamior

Useful is one thing, but harmful? If you have attack but low chance of hitting with it, mostly you just miss, mostly you don't hit yourself or allies.

Arguably when you have a higher chance at a critical failure or to hit the wrong target than what you aim at, it's a lot like low IQ and Empathy.

The point, however, is that bad choices are usually avoided by experience or advice rather than by altering game rules. It's not broken to say "you don't want this unless you have something get gets your roll up to X". After all, you don't want to go skydiving with an instructor that has no or really low skill, any more than you want to pilot have a 10 or less either. There's no end to occupations that have serious consequences if you attempt things with a low roll (demolitions?, stunt men?, electrical work?).

That being said, saying you don't get a reading on a failure and deliberately misleading them on a critical failure should be up to the GM. I've alternated with "detect lies vs acting" by sometimes saying you can't tell and other times saying that you're sure it's either the truth or a lie. You can't critically fail that, so what the MoS does is pretty much up to the GM. People that lie well should reap a certain reward if they also buy the skills to do so.

[Thamior]

Originally Posted by naloth

Arguably when you have a higher chance at a critical failure or to hit the wrong target than what you aim at, it's a lot like low IQ and Empathy.

The point, however, is that bad choices are usually avoided by experience or advice rather than by altering game rules. It's not broken to say "you don't want this unless you have something get gets your roll up to X". After all, you don't want to go skydiving with an instructor that has no or really low skill, any more than you want to pilot have a 10 or less either. There's no end to occupations that have serious consequences if you attempt things with a low roll (demolitions?, stunt men?, electrical work?).

That being said, saying you don't get a reading on a failure and deliberately misleading them on a critical failure should be up to the GM. I've alternated with "detect lies vs acting" by sometimes saying you can't tell and other times saying that you're sure it's either the truth or a lie. You can't critically fail that, so what the MoS does is pretty much up to the GM. People that lie well should reap a certain reward if they also buy the skills to do so.

Thing is 13 IQ is not low by any margin. It's a PHD level intellect. In more or less realistic games you can't get much higher. And still you can't reliably tell whether someone is lying with IQ this high (50/50). This is counterintuitive and contradicts with general image of sensitive people both IRL and in fiction. They are not MENSA geniuses, to be more precise: not necessarily.
And if you have IQ 10 like most people do AND have Sensitive, you are not sensitive (unless you enhance) - you are hysterical, you overreact and misconstrue peoples expressions. Then it is clearly a disadvantage.
When you aim with low skill you still have a dice range where you just fail and not critically fail. And a pretty damn wide range too. And this is exactly what I would like to emulate here. Or integrate degree of failure. Like fail by 3 or 5 and get lied to by GM.
And what about abuse? When player knows he has a chance of success this low he will know that most of the time he should act opposite to what he senses. It's simple mathematics. And, as I suggest, when he simply DOESN'T sense anything, he could not do that, because he won't be sure. It's more fun. You have to think. There is risk. And if you add to this critical failure when GM does lie to you, it's even more interesting. With this in mind, hell, you can even make the -3 penalty higher. Like, - 5. I'm not against limiting the power of this advantage, I'm against how it is done now.

[ericthered]

Pyramid 3/21 and Power Ups 3: talents feature the Empath talent. Its meant to replace empathy, and includes the special IQ roll. If you need a better response to that roll, you can uncap the talent level for that talent for that player. I often uncap talents for players whose base attribute is low to start with.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Thamior

Thing is 13 IQ is not low by any margin. It's a PHD level intellect. In more or less realistic games you can't get much higher. And still you can't reliably tell whether someone is lying with IQ this high (50/50). This is counterintuitive and contradicts with general image of sensitive people both IRL and in fiction. They are not MENSA geniuses, to be more precise: not necessarily.

A PhD is more a matter of persistence in a field. Quite a few people that I know that have them aren't especially well rounded in other areas of life. 12ish stats are pretty common for adventurers. They are a cut above most people. That's why you're playing them. Likewise, the advantages adventurers can get are somewhat cinematic. A 50% chance to guess what someone is really like when you're merely introduced? That's almost supernatural.

At the 5 point level it functions more like a talent and notes that it's not entirely reliable. If you want to have moderate or low IQ with a higher success number, why isn't either Reliable or Talent your solution?

You normally invest points in things if you want to be good at them. There's no basis for complaint if you don't invest in get the skills to use it effectively.

And if you have IQ 10 like most people do AND have Sensitive, you are not sensitive (unless you enhance) - you are hysterical, you overreact and misconstrue peoples expressions. Then it is clearly a disadvantage.

A talent for 3ish skills costs 5/lvl. Sensitive costs 5 points for a +1 to 5 skills. That doesn't seem like a disadvantage.

The ancillary benefit of "asking for a feeling" about someone, is more reliable if you're better at interpreting things. You don't have to use it, you don't have to rely on it, and failure gives you the wrong impression. Presumably if you know it's not reliable you won't trust it too far. That doesn't make you hysterical and you're not obligated to try to analyze people with Empathy.

And what about abuse? When player knows he has a chance of success this low he will know that most of the time he should act opposite to what he senses.

You're reading more into "lie" than is intended. It means you can't rely on what's said and that your impression is more likely to be misleading the informative.

The GM saying "he's pompus and selfish" doesn't mean that he lacks those traits or even that he has those traits. It may be a false impression based on a certain reaction or just something said at that moment.

It's simple mathematics. And, as I suggest, when he simply DOESN'T sense anything, he could not do that, because he won't be sure. It's more fun. You have to think. There is risk. And if you add to this critical failure when GM does lie to you, it's even more interesting. With this in mind, hell, you can even make the -3 penalty higher. Like, - 5. I'm not against limiting the power of this advantage, I'm against how it is done now.

I suspect you're trying to fix something that isn't broken. Like I said before, plenty of players have made great use of this ability as written. Before your complaint, I never saw heard a complaint.

It's really more of a specialized talent with a somewhat specific bonus. Like all Talents, it's only useful if you're interested in further developing your character with the traits that it encourages.