D&D 5E So 5 Intelligence Huh

[TheCosmicKid]

What I meant was consistantly portrayed the character that way.

I've seen one post on the paizo forums were a poster was complaining about someone in his group who played his character as a complete moron when his character sheet had high int score recorded. But I think that might just be one in a million.

Ability scores represent raw ability. Just because you have a high score doesn't mean you have to use it all the time. If a character has 18 Strength, that doesn't mean he's always lifting heavy stuff.

(Although Wisdom might be an exception, because if you have a high Wisdom and don't use it, isn't that an unwise decision?)

 

[BoldItalic]

I calls'em as I sees'em. Creative rules interpretation is creative rules interpretation.

Are you saying that all musicians are like accountants, or that all accountants are like musicians?

---

Pace any accountants reading this
Or musicians.

 

[MechaPilot]

Cartman would be low cha not int. And I think you use this as an excuse not try.


You want to see a low int roleplayed well watch Critcal Role. The barbarian Grog has an int 6 and he isnt offensive.

I didn't say Cartman would be low Int. I said that I believe that a lot of people who would play a low Int character would behave like Cartman's imitation of a differently abled person to get into the Special Olympics. I believe this because most people lack any real frame of reference for roleplaying a substantially low Int score. They would be as unable to do it as they would be unable to roleplay an Int that's beyond them.

 

[Maxperson]

You clearly didn't read what I wrote, because I never said you had to do anything. I said that in my opinion forcing a stat to apply equally to all facets of the stat interferes with creative expression. It logically follows that if an 18 Int must apply equally to all facets of the Int stat (mental acuity, information recall, and reasoning), then the character cannot be forgetful because Int explicitly covers information recall. If the 18 Int character can be forgetful, then Int cannot be required to apply equally to all facets of the stat because Int explicitly covers information recall.

You do not get to have your cake and eat it too. Either you can elect to apply a stat score to select facets of the stat, making a high Int character forgetful despite Int explicitly covering information recall, opening the door for making a similar low Int character by the same rationale, or you must apply the int score equally across all facets of the stat and therefore cannot have a forgetful high Int character.

And here are some of your own statements. Change "ability to reason" to "information recall" and you are refuting your own argument that you can have a forgetful high Int character.

Wrong. High recall =/= perfect recall. The absent minded professor with the 18 int can forget more than most people will ever have learned and still recall a great many things, thereby being both very forgetful and having an 18 int worth of recall ability.

Sorry you wasted so much time dragging up my old posts. They didn't accomplish what you hoped they would.

 

[Maxperson]

Yeah, I've been pretty consistent in playing my character as unwise. I was even gonna have him enter the dungeon without his holy symbol after throwing it away, despite requiring it to cast several of his prepared spells. The only thing that stopped me from doing so was that my fellow players didn't want their support handicapped that way.

I also had him try to throw away a key that we needed, but we retconned that into someone else picking it up because it would be rather idiotic to have left it behind just because nobody bothered to say they picked it up.

No, he does not live up to his high Wisdom.

You should ask the DM to drop your PCs wisdom to an appropriate number.

 

[iserith]

I've got a question for anyone reading this thread....

How many of you have seen or heard of someone with a high mental ability score roleplay it as signifigently lower then it is.

I have, in D&D 4e. Brickyard Lot was a Dark Sun character was a defensive staff wizard with the gladiator template that had a maxed out Intelligence. I imagined him as having taken quite a few hits to his gourd during his time in the gladiator pits, so I played him dumb as a post. Brickyard's stupid decisions that somehow always managed to work out were a great source of entertainment at the table. Every now and again he'd have a moment of clarity and offer up some esoteric bit of knowledge or complex plan, only to promptly forget it later on. It was a great character and a fun campaign that still gets a lot of "Remember when's" from people in that game.

 

[Satyrn]

You should ask the DM to drop your PCs wisdom to an appropriate number.

No way. Half my ability scores would be below 10 if I did that.

 

[Mallus]

I believe this because most people lack any real frame of reference for roleplaying a substantially low Int score.

This also raises the question: which is the appropriate 'real' frame a reference for a D&D character?

Real people with low intelligence?

Or fictional main characters with low intelligence?

Unless you're playing "The Tomb of Special Needs", you probably want to base your character on stupid (usually comedic) protagonists from fiction, say like Inspector Clouseau from the Pink Panther movies or, even better yet, Jack Burton from Big Trouble in Little China.

 

[MechaPilot]

Wrong. High recall =/= perfect recall.

Never said high = perfect. Go build your strawmen somewhere else.

The absent minded professor with the 18 int can forget more than most people will ever have learned and still recall a great many things, thereby being both very forgetful and having an 18 int worth of recall ability.

Tell it to yourself Max. You're the one you're arguing against.

 

[Maxperson]

Never said high = perfect. Go build your strawmen somewhere else.

You implied it heavily with your statements about what I said. Without said perfection, your argument falls flat and I am right with my statement. Go build your Argument from Fallacies on your own.