D&D 5E Geniuses with 5 Int

Ovinomancer · Apr 6, 2016

Elfcrusher said:
Sure, it could get hard for the player to continue to RP, but there's always options, and the onus is entirely on the player to figure out how (although hopefully the other participants would enjoy the character enough to make helpful suggestions in the tricky spots). "Because I'm a genius, I easily resist the evil sorcerer's Truth Magic, and I tell her that I don't know the answer." And that's ok because it's the exact same outcome as not knowing the answer and failing the saving throw.

And what happens when the character does know the answer to the next question the evil sorcerer asks? You keep digging holes, man. I dig where you're coming from, but the specific choices you've made are inconsistent and incapable of being followed outside of a range because they're kludges on the system, not solutions. Better to find a better reason than 'I defer to my tiger, that's why I act stupid, I'm really a genius'. That falls apart when there's no tiger.

TheCosmicKid · Apr 6, 2016

Ovinomancer said:
I've often seen this argument, and if presented as the genius doesn't always solve the riddle, it's good, but when, as more commonly, it's used as an example of the fool or low intelligence character solving the riddle, it just sucks. For one, Frodo isn't dumb by a longshot. He's quite mentally capable, as was his uncle Bilbo. And riddling is established as a favorite pastime of hobbits, with Bilbo being established as quite good with riddles (having defeated the Gollum version of the Sphinx). This is an example of the smart, but not genius, guy who does riddles as a hobby solving the riddle rather than the genius of a wizard. It's not a very good example of a disparity in mental ability.

It's not Frodo in the book. I misremembered it as Pippin, but upon double-checking, it's actually Merry, who's no fool either. So let's call this one a tie.

TwoSix · Apr 6, 2016

Ovinomancer said:
And what happens when the character does know the answer to the next question the evil sorcerer asks? You keep digging holes, man. I dig where you're coming from, but the specific choices you've made are inconsistent and incapable of being followed outside of a range because they're kludges on the system, not solutions. Better to find a better reason than 'I defer to my tiger, that's why I act stupid, I'm really a genius'. That falls apart when there's no tiger.

Actually, there wouldn't really be any problem to just have the evil sorcerer find out the answer. What's important is that you can't leverage your personal narration to be an advantage that your stat normally wouldn't give you. But, in the "getting mentally interrogated by evil sorcerers" scenario, knowing the answer is actually a disadvantage.

And losing the tiger is easy to fix. Maybe you still see a spirit tiger. Or maybe you're distraught and unable to think clearly. I mean, part of the fun of play is framing these connections between your character concept and the current scenario!

Dannyalcatraz · Apr 6, 2016

Because I'm a genius, I easily resist the evil sorcerer's Truth Magic, and I tell her that I don't know the answer."

So now, the character ALSO has fiat saves against truth magic? REALLY not buying this at all.

And still unanswered, how does the Ranger defer to a tiger who is not present?

This:

Maybe you still see a spirit tiger. Or maybe you're distraught and unable to think clearly.

..is insanity; delusional thinking- not a lack of intelligence. Stupidity and madness are not synonyms.

Really, all you're doing is complicating a game with these little caveats you introduce to support the counter-RAW/RAI stat mechanics.

TheCosmicKid · Apr 6, 2016

TwoSix said:
What's important is that you can't leverage your personal narration to be an advantage that your stat normally wouldn't give you.

The general problem that Ovinomancer is identifying is that the narration must get increasingly arbitrary and ad hoc to ensure that you never gain this advantage. If you simply gave the character the high Int score that she deserves, you wouldn't have this problem.

TwoSix said:
But, in the "getting mentally interrogated by evil sorcerers" scenario, knowing the answer is actually a disadvantage.

Turn the tables and cast zone of truth on the evil sorcerer afterwards.

Guest 6801328 · Apr 6, 2016

TwoSix said:
And losing the tiger is easy to fix. Maybe you still see a spirit tiger. Or maybe you're distraught and unable to think clearly. I mean, part of the fun of play is framing these connections between your character concept and the current scenario!

Yup.

I'm happy to keep playing the "ok, so then what happens if..." game, because it's turtles all the way down. I might not be coming up with the *best* ideas here (nor were my initial 4 character sketches particularly well thought out), so maybe the answers are odd-ball, but it's meant to illustrate a point about how ability scores can be used.

I'll admit I'm puzzled why [MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION] and others are so adamantly opposed to any of this. "I would be annoyed playing with any of those 4 characters" I would totally understand. But that's very different from "it just won't work" or "it's against the rules".

And, yes, it could be challenging in some circumstances to maintain the persona. But for crying out loud isn't challenge what we want? It's what I want.

MostlyDm · Apr 6, 2016

I have to say that although I wasn't personally sold initially, the longer the argument goes on the more I'm warming up to it. I still probably won't do it for myself, but I definitely would be amused to see how well someone could play this at my table.

I mean, I have an Int 9 Wis 14 character in a game, and I'm playing off his low int primarily as lacking education and growing up in a remote, isolated village. I'll probably nudge his Int up a little when I can. Regardless, I'm not playing him as particularly stupid. Certainly less stupid than I have played NPCs with 9 intelligence.

So I'm already engaging in this conceit to some extent. It's just a matter of degree.

I think most people accept some amount of "interpretation" of stats as a consequence of their broad abstraction. The part of this that seems to be offensive is just the level of interpretation being engaged in.

Dannyalcatraz · Apr 6, 2016

I'll admit I'm puzzled why @Dannyalcatraz and others are so adamantly opposed to any of this. "I would be annoyed playing with any of those 4 characters" I would totally understand. But that's very different from "it just won't work" or "it's against the rules".

The character concepts are great; the mechanic you're choosing to model them with is poor. End of story.

My favorite system is HERO. I could easily model each and every one of those PCs in that system. D&D, using Int with you quirky, idiosyncratic definition? Not so much. It makes not a lick of sense.

The game is pretty clear on what it means to have high or low stats. You're tossing that out.

TwoSix · Apr 6, 2016

TheCosmicKid said:
The general problem that Ovinomancer is identifying is that it the narration must get increasingly arbitrary and ad hoc to ensure that you never gain this advantage. If you simply gave the character the high Int score that she deserves, you wouldn't have this problem.

I would argue it isn't arbitrary at all, since it's always grounded in the character concept. Ad hoc, sure, but that's part of the fun.

TheCosmicKid said:
Turn the tables and cast zone of truth on the evil sorcerer afterwards.

Sure, why not? You've accomplished something in the game, and are spending resources to gain the information to boot. I mean, if the DM was willing to give out the info on an Arcana check, I think beating up a boss and casting a 2nd level spell probably deserves it.

TheCosmicKid · Apr 6, 2016

MostlyDm said:
I mean, I have an Int 9 Wis 14 character in a game, and I'm playing off his low int primarily as lacking education and growing up in a remote, isolated village. I'll probably nudge his Int up a little when I can. Regardless, I'm not playing him as particularly stupid. Certainly less stupid than I have played NPCs with 9 intelligence.

And that's fine. 9 Intelligence isn't particularly stupid -- it's only a smidge below average. Perfectly reasonable to explain this as being rustic. And you're not saying that your character succeeds at checks that the numbers say he doesn't. It's when someone comes up with a 5 Intelligence character and claims that they actually know everything and are only pretending not to that my eyebrow starts to go up.

D&D 5E Geniuses with 5 Int

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!

TheCosmicKid

Hero

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator

TheCosmicKid

Hero

Guest 6801328

Guest

MostlyDm

Explorer

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

TheCosmicKid

Hero

Similar Threads