D&D 5E So 5 Intelligence Huh

[pemerton]

I'm all for realism, but realism isn't RAW. The rules don't say any such thing.

I was responding to a question from [MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION]. I gave what I think are the most plausible answers, given the spell rules and the subject matter.

Frogs have INT 1, birds (owls, eagles, vultures) INT 2, elephants, housecats, wolves and tigers INT 3. Does that mean that an INT 3 human is no more fluent in language, or no more capable of counting, than a tiger or housecat? Or to put it another way: is a being with the cognitive and linguistic capabilities of a housecat a suitable vehicle for a player to use in a RPG?

This is why I agree with [MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION] and other that the INT score is only one of multiple considerations in understanding the cognitive, recognitional, linguistic etc capabilities of the imagined beings in the gameworld. When we are told that they are animals such as frogs, cats etc then one of the other relevant considerations is our knowledge about those animals. (Eg that no housecat can understand, let alone us, a natural language.)

 

[estralita]

Wow, over 50 pages. Just read through it all, and am a bit overwhelmed. Can I get a general summary? Here are a few questions I had on people's stances:

1. How would you, personally, play a character with 5 INT? Is there more than one way to play a character with 5 INT?

2. Is Int treated differently than the other Mental stats?

3. What is it you are arguing specifically here?

Just want to get a better handle on the debate.

 

[Maxperson]

I was responding to a question from [MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION]. I gave what I think are the most plausible answers, given the spell rules and the subject matter.

Frogs have INT 1, birds (owls, eagles, vultures) INT 2, elephants, housecats, wolves and tigers INT 3. Does that mean that an INT 3 human is no more fluent in language, or no more capable of counting, than a tiger or housecat? Or to put it another way: is a being with the cognitive and linguistic capabilities of a housecat a suitable vehicle for a player to use in a RPG?

This is why I agree with [MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION] and other that the INT score is only one of multiple considerations in understanding the cognitive, recognitional, linguistic etc capabilities of the imagined beings in the gameworld. When we are told that they are animals such as frogs, cats etc then one of the other relevant considerations is our knowledge about those animals. (Eg that no housecat can understand, let alone us, a natural language.)

The main issue I have with that argument is it is an argument based on realism, and Iserith has fought me tooth and nail on other issues where I have argued realism and he has insisted that realism doesn't really matter. Either it doesn't really matter or it does really matter.

 

[Maxperson]

Wow, over 50 pages. Just read through it all, and am a bit overwhelmed. Can I get a general summary? Here are a few questions I had on people's stances:

1. How would you, personally, play a character with 5 INT? Is there more than one way to play a character with 5 INT?

I would go with Forest Gump or someone with Downs Syndrome myself. There are other ways.

2. Is Int treated differently than the other Mental stats?

Yes and no. It's very different than cha or wis, because int is a different stat that does different things, so of course it's treated differently. It's no different when it comes to the number, though. low = low and high = high for cha and wis. I would expect someone with a 5 cha not to try and roleplay that PC like it's James Bond. I would expect someone with a 5 wis not to try and roleplay as if the PC is as wise as Solomon.

3. What is it you are arguing specifically here?

Some people here think it's okay to play a 5 int as if it were a genius, but with some sort of flaw. That's just bad RP. A 5 is not a genius. Period. Low int = low ability to reason, per the rules.

 

[iserith]

Wow, over 50 pages. Just read through it all, and am a bit overwhelmed. Can I get a general summary? Here are a few questions I had on people's stances:

1. How would you, personally, play a character with 5 INT? Is there more than one way to play a character with 5 INT?

There is not enough context about the character to answer your first question. The answer to your second question is "Yes."

2. Is Int treated differently than the other Mental stats?

Yes, different mental stats apply to the resolution of different tasks. Intelligence and the particular modifier derived by its score may apply to tests for accuracy of recall (e.g. "I try to recall what I've read about the weaknesses of trolls..."). Wisdom and its particular modifier may apply to a test of how attuned a character is to his or her surroundings (e.g. "I try to be aware of hidden threats as I travel through the dungeon...").

3. What is it you are arguing specifically here?

Unlike some others, I am arguing that the rules do not say one way or another how one should roleplay a character with a low Intelligence score.

 

[Maxperson]

Unlike some others, I am arguing that the rules do not say one way or another how one should roleplay a character with a low Intelligence score.

You have argued, though, that there is no rule! No rule! No rule! That supports my idea of IQ = int x 10 in 5e, while at the same time arguing that you would deny the frog a roll for an IQ test even though there is no rule! No rule! No rule! That supports your assertion there. You are making a realism argument just the same as I am, but yours is okay apparently.

 

[iserith]

You have argued, though, that there is no rule! No rule! No rule! That supports my idea of IQ = int x 10 in 5e, while at the same time arguing that you would deny the frog a roll for an IQ test even though there is no rule! No rule! No rule! That supports your assertion there. You are making a realism argument just the same as I am, but yours is okay apparently.

1. Take a deep breath and try to remain calm.

2. Read this post again.

 

[Maxperson]

1. Take a deep breath and try to remain calm.

No need. I'm perfectly calm.

2. Read this post again.

There is no rule there that supports your argument that intelligence is different for baboons than humans or elves.

You are making an unsupported in 5e realism argument and calling it good, while at the same time putting down my realism argument because it has no 5e support.

That's hypocritical.

 

[iserith]

No need. I'm perfectly calm.

There is no rule there that supports your argument that intelligence is different for baboons than humans or elves.

You are making an unsupported in 5e realism argument and calling it good, while at the same time putting down my realism argument because it has no 5e support.

That's hypocritical.

Stop harrasing me Mechapilot. Go bother someone who will take it.

Stop harassing me Maxperson. Go bother someone who will take it.

2. Read this post again.

 

[Maxperson]

Stop harassing me Maxperson. Go bother someone who will take it.

Mecha was laughing at my posts when it was uncalled for and inappropriate, not pointing out flaws in arguments. She since apologized and stopped. The two of us are good as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not going to stop responding with valid arguments to public posts of yours. That's not harassment.