D&D 5E So 5 Intelligence Huh

[MechaPilot]

I don't have to. Low int = low ability to reason. It's clearly lower than average, so a player running around with a low int PC reasoning everything out and solving all the riddles is roleplaying badly. If you're going to play low int PC as highly intelligent with a penalty, you are clearly doing it wrong. I don't need an exact number to be able to say that confidently and correctly.

Low INT can equal a low ability to reason. Whether it does or not is certainly not guaranteed because INT is described as having more facets than just reasoning.

Even if we take it as a certainty that low INT does equal a low ability to reason, quantification is still required or else you have no basis for determining whether or not a character is portraying a character as smarter or dumber than the character is, which is apparently something that matters somewhat considerably to you. Now, I have quantification for my position; it comes directly from the rules of the game, and none of your protestations can change how math works.

Again, feel free to do as you please in your own games, but the simple fact of the matter is that 5e INT scores do NOT equate to tenths of the characters' IQ scores.

 

[Maxperson]

Low INT can equal a low ability to reason. Whether it does or not is certainly not guaranteed because INT is described as having more facets than just reasoning.

No. While it does have other facets, it always includes reasoning as one of them, so low int will always equal a low ability to reason. There is no language that says you get to pick and choose which facets listed apply to you, so they all apply.

Even if we take it as a certainty that low INT does equal a low ability to reason, quantification is still required or else you have no basis for determining whether or not a character is portraying a character as smarter or dumber than the character is, which is apparently something that matters somewhat considerably to you. Now, I have quantification for my position; it comes directly from the rules of the game, and none of your protestations can change how math works.

Incorrect. I don't need a quantification in order to tell if you are playing a low int PC as highly intelligent, or even of average intelligence.

 

[Maxperson]

And yet I remember you implying if not outright saying that if you don't roleplay a certain way you're doing it wrong because the rules say you should roleplay that certain way. And they don't.

So what is your position now? Because if it's just your opinion that Intelligence should be played a certain way, we've got nothing more to talk about. You're welcome to your opinion no matter how silly I think it is. But if you're going to assert that people who don't roleplay an Intelligence 5 character as if it had an IQ of 50 are doing it wrong, I got all night, pal.

The rules say low int = low ability to reason. The rest you can figure out.

 

[MechaPilot]

No. While it does have other facets, it always includes reasoning as one of them, so low int will always equal a low ability to reason. There is no language that says you get to pick and choose which facets listed apply to you, so they all apply.

Yes. Basic PDF, page 8, Your Character's Abilities.

"A very strong character with low Intelligence MIGHT think and behave very differently from a very smart character with low Strength."

"Might," as in possible, not as in assuredly or will. All of the ability score examples use "might." Directly from the rules of the book it says that a low Int and a high Int character could possibly think differently, but does not state that they do.

Incorrect. I don't need a quantification in order to tell if you are playing a low int PC as highly intelligent, or even of average intelligence.

You need a point of comparison. If you're making up your own, which you are, that's fine. If you're using the quantification the rules themselves provide, as I am, that's also fine. However, in determining adherence to what "should be" you require a standard for what should be for any comparison to be made.

 

[iserith]

The rules say low int = low ability to reason. The rest you can figure out.

They don't say that - you do.

The rules say Intelligence represents, among other things, the ability to reason. The rules also say a score of 5 comes with a -3 modifier. Thus, when a player tries to have his or her character reason something out and there is an uncertain outcome, a -3 modifier applies to the Intelligence check. When I as a player say, "Simple Jack tries to apply his reason to figure out who kidnapped the scion of House Medani based on the clues we've gathered so far..." you as DM can call for an Intelligence check and I'd probably have a less than stellar chance of success. But if I say "Simple Jack looks at the evidence and thinks that Dick Barrage is behind the kidnapping..." no ability check applies because it's me as a player that determines how my character thinks, acts, and talks. Of course, if I have an established flaw that says "I'm as dumb as a bag of hammers," then you can give me some Inspiration if I play to that by fingering the least likely culprit (or whatever) or refrain from doing so when I don't play to it.

 

[BoldItalic]

The rules say low int = low ability to reason. The rest you can figure out.

Actually, they don't. Read them again and think more carefully about it.

Consider a 1st-level Rogue with an Int of 5 and expertise in Investigation. He has an Urchin background and little or no education. Okay so far?

Now, Investigation relates to the ability to make deductions (it says so in the rules), in other words the ability to reason. He is better than average at that (+1) but his ability to recall lore is generally less good (-3). So he is not stupid, just ill-educated.

Am I allowed to role-play him as reasonably bright but ignorant? Able to work out how to pick an unfamiliar kind of lock but unable to tell you where or when it was made? Or are you going to tell me that I'm doing it wrong?

 

[Maxperson]

Actually, they don't. Read them again and think more carefully about it.

Consider a 1st-level Rogue with an Int of 5 and expertise in Investigation. He has an Urchin background and little or no education. Okay so far?

Now, Investigation relates to the ability to make deductions (it says so in the rules), in other words the ability to reason. He is better than average at that (+1) but his ability to recall lore is generally less good (-3). So he is not stupid, just ill-educated.

Am I allowed to role-play him as reasonably bright but ignorant? Able to work out how to pick an unfamiliar kind of lock but unable to tell you where or when it was made? Or are you going to tell me that I'm doing it wrong?

Not entirely accurate. The 5 int does in fact mean that he has low reasoning ability. That he got training (fairly nonsensical all by itself) does not change that. Compared to someone who does not have low reasoning ability and who is trained, he is substandard. The low reasoning ability due to the 5 int doesn't go away. It was just masked somewhat by a skill.

 

[Yardiff]

The 'expertise' would equate to the character being a 'savant' in that skill. Doesn't change that the character has a low int.

 

[Yardiff]

Watch 'Critical Role' on the GeekandSundry website. One of the players has a barbarian with an int of 6, he roleplays his character very well, at least in my opinion.

 

[Zardnaar]

If you roll a low intelligence and then try to justify it by claiming it doesn't actually mean you are stupid it seems a bit munchkin like. You should not be coming up with great plans or whatever with low intelligence.