What's a good way to write a smart character without coming

The same way smart people in real life get bit without being obnoxious

You only offer suggestions when asked for them, or you politely and. On condescendingly ask "can I make a duggestion?" As an actual question rather than just a preamble to a rant, and back off if refused and lives aren't in danger

You realise that your smarts were gifted to you partially through hard work but mainly through random chance and thus aren't something to be proud of or hold over other people who have their own gifting.

You help people in order to Ben helpful not to show off.

You can also replace intelligence with wisdom, strength skill ect and it will be the same

>>53242505

Intelligence isn't "random chance". It is all work. Unless you were born with a mental disability, being dumber is just a lack of caring and willing ignorance. And intelligence is a sign of working harder and caring more.

So outside of the outliers of mental handicaps or flat out genius/prodigy stuff, it is not random chance at all. If you're an idiot it is your fault and someone being smarter is due to them having merit.

>>53242422

Have him/her be comically bad at something or struggle with something that comes easy to others. Just make sure it's something that might pop up more than once or twice.

>>53242561
Intelligence ≠ Knowledge

>>53242561
Is this retard for real?

played a half orc wizard like Beast from X-men. Well spoken and keen but not condescending.
other guy played a stupid barbarian half orc that took a shit in the corner of a library we were exploring.
Like the episode of Futurama with the intelligent monkey and his wild parents.

>>53242561
>Intelligence isn't "random chance"
Intelligence totally is a hereditary genetical trait though, just like any other. A person born with less of an inclination for it can still excel through hard work, but a person born with better genes will have a much easier time and, provided that they both put in an equal effort, always come out on top.

>>53243450
Inclination does not equate results. Someone who puts in the work, learns and experiences will always be more intelligent than the one who doesn't, regardless of genetics.

>>53243497
You're conflating intelligence with life experience. They're not the same thing.

And you repeat what the person you responded to already said in an attempt to refute what he said. So if you're trying to claim that you're a person with a whole lot of life experience, you're also living proof that it isn't the same thing as intelligence.

>>53243497
That's not what intelligence means, though. Intelligence IS the inclination.

>>53243561
>That's not what intelligence means, though. Intelligence IS the inclination

Not in the common vernacular. It means being learned and/or experienced and usually refers to book learning specifically.

>>53243610
...what? See >>53243027 Intelligence is very specifically something akin to mental computing capacity (recent definitions subdivide it into several rough areas), while knowledge is more about accumulated information. The two things are not equivalent. You can always gain more info through hard study and practice, but you're not going to get substantially smarter as a result.

>>53243610
I have never met a person who uses the word intelligent to mean that. Rather it is used to mean someone who learns easily.

>>53242422

Make the character more scary and intimidating *because* of his intellect rather than besides it.

>>53243610
0 KNW right here

It's been said, but I gotta say:

>>53242561
>Intelligence isn't "random chance". It is all work.
Objectively false.

>>53243497
>Someone who puts in the work, learns and experiences will always be more intelligent than the one who doesn't, regardless of genetics.
A person that develops their mind to "think better" is always going to "think better" more so than someone who doesn't.
But someone born with a genetic inclination towards higher intelligence AND "puts in the work" is going to "think betterer" than someone without the genetic inclination, even if they put in the same work.
We are not all born equal.

>>53243610
>It means being learned and/or experienced and usually refers to book learning specifically.
As they said, that is really knowledge or expertise, not intelligence.

I have some experience with the nuances of this.
I had a manager once that was clearly dumber than me, but knew his damn job and when employees spoke to him and he was having trouble understanding, he had them slow down and repeat it so that he got it, then made decisions according to established policies.
He was not intelligent, but used his mind to it's full potential.
I knew a brilliant guy who devoted his time to smoking pot and debating nonsense.
He was intelligent, but never used his mind intelligently.
I am very close to someone who is more intelligent than me, but never pursued sharpening their reasoning mind but instead developed deeper knowledge of the subjects of their interest.
I myself am fairly intelligent, but seem even smarter than I am because I have developed mental tricks to rapidly come to conclusions and develop ideas, with varying levels of success.

The analogy I like to use is a pick-up truck versus a sports car.
A well maintained pick up is going to perform better and more reliably than a neglected Lamborghini, but if both are perfectly maintained, the sports car is going to always win in a race.
Suggesting otherwise is foolishness.

File: SamanthaCarter200.jpg (28KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 640x360px

>>53242422
>What's a good way to write a smart character without coming off as obnoxious?
Simply have them intuitively understand new situations immediately, figure out possibilities and solutions effortlessly, and generally be very knowledgeable in their fields of expertise.
Intelligence is not linked to any personality trait.
There are many obnoxious, "know-it-all" types that are all intelligent, but the reverse is hardly always true.
The affable bouncer in the local bar could have the nation's highest IQ score.
Also, not everyone with high intelligence is an "intellectual" who is concerned with higher learning and accumulating knowledge.
Some very, very smart people simply prefer to do physical things, so they do.

Simply have them display other, more pleasant personality traits, such as warmth, kindness, and humility, while also being smart.

>>53243064
i think he's actually pretty intelligent

>>53245271
Well, he certainly could be.
Just because someone is fundamentally wrong about something, it doesn't necessarily mean they're not intelligent.

>>53245259
INTERNAL
SEX
ORGANS

>>53245347
he's intelligent because he recognizes that the common usage of intelligence is unintelligent, fundamentally misunderstanding learning

File: 1494612155575.png (917KB, 687x1165px) Image search: [Google]

917KB, 687x1165px

>>53245259
This is the best anwser to OP's question, so far.
Nice thread going on, by the way.

>>53242505
>Make an intelligent character named Dugg
>Each time there's a problem I pop my head in with the catchphrase "May I make a Duggestion?"

>>53242422
Just don't be obnoxious.
Why would a smart character have to be obnoxious? Is there some rule I don't know about?

File: 1360499687997.png (146KB, 474x549px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 474x549px

>>53242422
Make them shy. Add a stutter for bonus points.

>>53245743
>he's intelligent because he recognizes that the common usage of intelligence is unintelligent, fundamentally misunderstanding learning
But that's just wrong you fucking idiot.