And how exactly is he intelligent?
>>96653903He's not. Jace's edge has never been being the smartest person in the room, it's been the fact that he's a telepath. He outmaneuvers people not because he's smarter than them, but because he can check their notes.
>>96653903He's intelligent like Blue players are intelligent.Which is to say, not at all, but they enjoy imitating intelligence, which is why most of the busted and broken mechanics end up falling into blue. Card draw and cheap counters allow idiots to spend a few moments feeling like they're smarter than their opponents.
>>96653903He's less outright intelligent and more cunning, he thinks fast on his feet and adept at changing plans very quickly. His plans aren't the single best options, but what works works.He did reason out the plan to kill the Eldrazi on his own, for what it's worth.
>>96653903I always got the impression that Jace would be super smart only if he didn't get his memories erased every arc
>>96653903He quit before UB slop took over his game
>>96653903Jace is the SMARTEST person in the room, that's his special ability.As in he makes you retarded so he is smarter by elimination.This isn't a joke, this is the actual in world explanation, Jace isn't a 300IQ genius he is a mindrapist and illusionist.
>>96653903I've got it buried somewhere but there was a post about the difference between smart characters being written by dumb or smart writers. It was using the Sherlock show as an example. I'm sure one of you can find it. Anyway, Jace is written by dumb people, for dumb people. The only evidence of Jace's intelligence is the writer saying so.
>>96658144I second wanting to see the sherlock post if anyone’s got it
>>96658144Found it; cut for length:Anton Chigurh from No Country for Old Men is a smartly written smart character. When Chigurh kills a hotel room full of three people he books to room next door so he can examine it, finding which walls he can shoot through, where the light switch is, what sort of cover is there etc. This is a smart thing to do because Chigurh is a smart person who is written by another smart person who understands how smart people think.Were Sherlock Holmes to kill a hotel room full of three people. He'd enter using a secret door in the hotel that he read about in a book ten years ago. He'd throw peanuts at one guy causing him to go into anaphylactic shock, as he had deduced from a dartboard with a picture of George Washington carver on it pinned to the wall that the man had a severe peanut allergy. The second man would then kill himself just according to plan as Sherlock had earlier deduced that him and the first man were homosexual lovers who couldn't live without each other due to a faint scent of penis on each man's breath and a slight dilation of their pupils whenever they looked at each other. As for the third man, why Sherlock doesn't kill him at all. The third man removes his sunglasses and wig to reveal he actually WAS Sherlock the entire time. But Sherlock just entered through the Secret door and killed two people, how can there be two of him? The first Sherlock removes his mask to reveal he's actually Moriarty attempting to frame Sherlock for two murders. Sherlock however anticipated this, the two dead men stand up, they're undercover police officers, it was all a ruse. "But Sherlock!" Moriarty cries "That police officer blew his own head off, look at it, there's skull fragments on the wall, how is he fine now? How did you fake that?". Sherlock just winks at the screen, the end.This is retarded because Sherlock is a smart person written by a stupid person to whom smart people are indistinguishable from wizards.
>>96659072Emphasis especially on 'smart people are indistinguishable from wizards'.I actually liked the blockbuster Sherlock films, but they are rather guilty of giving Sherlock an edge based entirely on 'thinking magic'; which is ironic for a detective story. One of the hallmarks of good detective literature is providing evidence and clues that the audience can follow to 'solve the case' along with the detective. Great stories with Sherlock or Poirrot or similar will tell you that the protagonist is an incredible analytical mind, but also give you all their notes as you go until the reveal in the end where either you can test your hypothesis or the clues you've been piecing together will fall into place. Less good ones will at least give you some of the mystery to scrutinize, which isn't great but can be forgivable in particularly fantastic circumstances-- the films are largely in this category where you can think ahead some, but where Sherlock needs to be REALLY clever they'll recontextualize details you couldn't possibly have known. Ultimately it makes them more of a pulp adventure story and puts Sherlock firmly in the 'smart person for stupid people' camp; just not insultingly so.Jace is pretty egregious because as a telepath he actually does have the sort of mind magic ascribed to intelligent people, so when he blunders or errs it is even more notably stupid for him. The narrative must warp around him to make him right when it is necessary for him to be right, and then the narrative must warp back around him again for him to be wrong when the plot must go against him, often with a wink and a smile that someone or something is more clever than he is, like he came in second place in a fucking spelling bee.
Are there any smartly written characters in mtg
>>96653903Why do they refuse to call what he does psychic shit? I hate D&D and its weird notions of what is what. Non of this would even be a thing if you just accept the basic premise that magic and psionics doesn't have to be some radically different things that do the exact same shit.
>>96659143got any good detective films or books to recommend?
>>96659226Unfortunately a character can only ever be as clever as the writer.So no.
>>96659226Ugin's smart enough.Ob Nixilis is a damn genius when Nik Davidson is writing him.
>>96653903Not really, He often tricked and outplayed by others often.
>>96659413I haven't been reading nearly enough to give solid recommendations that aren't just pointing to old Agatha Christies or the less meddled with classics. The Branagh Murder on the Orient Express and etcetera are very accessible and don't meddle terribly with the plots, so they're maybe good if you're not sure what else to watch. I also suggest Knives Out as something of a dissection of mysteries and detective stories; characters are fabulously flawed and a combination of smart jousting between intellects and farcical damage control over missteps make for a rather entertaining experience; like letting your childhood imagination run wild over a game of Clue. As a kind-of out of left field recommendation, I'd suggest Basic from 2003. It's more of a thriller, it strictly doesn't give you the pieces you need to solve the mystery, but it only make a fool out of you when its ALSO making a fool out of the protagonists. Similar to Knives Out, it gives you insight into what smart (and dumb) people do when they think they're being clever.
>>96661406Thanks. seen knives out already but ill look into basic. appreciate the response
