D&D 5E So 5 Intelligence Huh

[iserith]

Thankfully all the gamers I play regularly with do not agree with that statement (players aged 19-45, gaming experience ranging from 6 months up to 35 years). We all enjoy rolling stats and shaping a character around those stats along with their chosen class/profession and background.

What happens if somebody doesn't play Int 5 in the manner you would choose? If you just move on with your life, you and I have no disagreement. If you get all judgy and your game experience is ruined, then you're that guy.

 

[Sadras]

And we had a meeting and nobody likes that guy anyway. He's too judgy and his ideas are about 40 years out of date.

To echo @Maxperson's sentiment.
Players often determine if they like the DM's playstyle or storytelling ability and decide if they are a good fit for the group.
Why cannot the same be done for a player's roleplaying ability?

To be clear we are talking about a character with INT 5, not the shades of grey between an 11 and 12 ability score.

 

[JonnyP71]

What happens if somebody doesn't play Int 5 in the manner you would choose? If you just move on with your life, you and I have no disagreement. If you get all judgy and your game experience is ruined, then you're that guy.

It would be handled in a more diplomatic manner than that which you are suggesting, between sessions, so as to cause minimum disruption - we would certainly not make a scene about it at the table. The old character would probably end up being written out of the game, and the player would roll a new one more befitting to their play style.

Thankfully all our DMs are proactive, rather than reactive, and get involved in the character creation process with the players, so that expectations are made clear beforehand from BOTH sides.

"OK, so you've rolled a 5, where are you going to put it?"
"I thought maybe Intelligence."
"OK, well before you do that, you should be aware that it will hamper your character's ability to interact with in game puzzles, planning etc. Plus a lot of the plot and interaction we have is driven by Arcana, History and Investigation, are you SURE you want to put it there?"

If the player agrees, then he will be expected to play in that manner.

If the player however replies along the lines of:
"No. Int saves aren't very common so that's the best place for me to dump it."
... then they are probably not a good fit for our group's play style.

This is a simplistic example, but it gives an idea of the general approach of the 4 guys who take turns to DM our groups. Session 0 is always - meet the DM for character creation, campaign background, and any system explanation which may be needed.

 

[iserith]

To echo @Maxperson's sentiment.
Players often determine if they like the DM's playstyle or storytelling ability and decide if they are a good fit for the group.
Why cannot the same be done for a player's roleplaying ability?

You're, of course, free to game with whomever you like. But if someone is going to jump on here and say there's an objectively right or wrong way to roleplay, then there will be some pushback.

To be clear we are talking about a character with INT 5, not the shades of grey between an 11 and 12 ability score.

Int 5 means absolutely nothing to me on its own except a -3 penalty to Intelligence-related checks. You may have a preference for how that is portrayed, but that's all it is. Which is not to say your preference is unimportant. It's just that it's an opinion. We might even choose to portray a character with that ability score the exactly same way. But that's a choice, not a requirement, and neither right nor wrong.

 

[iserith]

It would be handled in a more diplomatic manner than that which you are suggesting, between sessions, so as to cause minimum disruption - we would certainly not make a scene about it at the table. The old character would probably end up being written out of the game, and the player would roll a new one more befitting to their play style.

Thankfully all our DMs are proactive, rather than reactive, and get involved in the character creation process with the players, so that expectations are made clear beforehand from BOTH sides.

"OK, so you've rolled a 5, where are you going to put it?"
"I thought maybe Intelligence."
"OK, well before you do that, you should be aware that it will hamper your character's ability to interact with in game puzzles, planning etc. Plus a lot of the plot and interaction we have is driven by Arcana, History and Investigation, are you SURE you want to put it there?"

If the player agrees, then he will be expected to play in that manner.

If the player however replies along the lines of:
"No. Int saves aren't very common so that's the best place for me to dump it."
... then they are probably not a good fit for our group's play style.

This is a simplistic example, but it gives an idea of the general approach of the 4 guys who take turns to DM our groups. Session 0 is always - meet the DM for character creation, campaign background, and any system explanation which may be needed.

Here's how I would handle it:

Player: I'm putting that 5 I rolled in Intelligence.
DM: Okay.

The End.

 

[JonnyP71]

Here's how I would handle it:

Player: I'm putting that 5 I rolled in Intelligence.
DM: Okay.

The End.

Fair enough, you do it your way, we'll do it ours.

 

[Sadras]

You're, of course, free to game with whomever you like. But if someone is going to jump on here and say there's an objectively right or wrong way to roleplay, then there will be some pushback.

Fair enough. As you are aware this does occur with other sensitive issues such as alignment.
I'm assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that you watch Game of Thrones.
Would it not disturb your level of enjoyment of GoT if the writers/GRMM craft situations where Hodor repeatedly comes up with the 'party's' battle plan?
The party consisting of Tyrion Lannister, Samwell Tarly and Jon Snow.

Int 5 means absolutely nothing to me on its own except a -3 penalty to Intelligence-related checks. You may have a preference for how that is portrayed, but that's all it is. Which is not to say your preference is unimportant. It's just that it's an opinion. We might even choose to portray a character with that ability score the exactly same way. But that's a choice, not a requirement, and neither right nor wrong.

Ok, I see your approach to ability scores.
Sorry will have to EDIT my response and get back to this a little later today, as I don't have time right now, got to pick up the wife.

 

[iserith]

Fair enough. As you are aware this does occur with other sensitive issues such as alignment.
I'm assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that you watch Game of Thrones.
Would it not disturb your level of enjoyment of GoT if the writers/GRMM craft situations where Hodor repeatedly comes up with the 'party's' Battle Plan? The party consisting of Tyrion Lannister, Jaime Lannister and Jon Snow.

You assume correctly that I watch Game of Thrones. As I said upthread, if someone portrays Hodor a particular way and then plays him some other way without some kind of reasonable explanation for the change, it would be odd. And there are mechanics for incentivizing players to act consistent with what they have established - Inspiration. But having an Intelligence of 5 on the character sheet isn't enough to say that the character must be portrayed as a Hodor-like character.

I don't give a dusty flumph about alignment either. Your character is who you say he or she is by description, portrayal, and the decisions you make for him or her. If you want to base that on your estimation of what a particular ability score means, go for it. Just don't tell me I have to or I'm a poor roleplayer.

 

[Ovinomancer]

What does it mean to "model 5 STR in an appropriate manner"? That means you follow the encumbrance rules, and apply the appropriate penalty to melee attacks.

I addressed this in the post you're responding to. There were a few words in there. To sum up again, since I must have cleverly disguised my intent previously: appropriate means in a way that the player and the DM agree.

Why is INT any different?

The key issue here, to my mind, which I've reiterated multiple times but on which I've seen no reply, is this: a wizard with a 5 STR is a perfectly playable character, whose player will have no trouble fully engaging with the challenges of the game. But as many in this thread are presenting it, a fighter with a 5 INT is not a character whose player can fully engage the challenges of the game, because to do so - to actually take part in what is, at heart, an intellectual pastime - is a failure of roleplaying.

I don't understand how this asymmetry is supposed to be justified.

If the GM wants the fighter to suffer for having a low INT, put in a lot of maze spells and languages that need deciphering!

I fail to follow your strawman. Are you trying to claim that by not being super or even averagely smart some form of extra punishment is being imposed that isn't similarly imposed by being a weakling? I don't understand how you see is as asymmetrical. Both are handicaps, I'd simply expect them to be actual handicaps. Nothing about a 5 INT implies you can't try to solve the fiendish puzzle, but I may just determine there's no chance and say you fail, as per the rules of the game. Or, I may decide there's a chance, set a DC, and let you roll, and you may get lucky. But even then, that character still isn't smart. I expect you do similar things with STR. The only asymmetry here is that you're claiming the INT is special, or being dealt with in a special way. I'm not treating it any differently than any other low stat.

You're, of course, free to game with whomever you like. But if someone is going to jump on here and say there's an objectively right or wrong way to roleplay, then there will be some pushback.



Int 5 means absolutely nothing to me on its own except a -3 penalty to Intelligence-related checks. You may have a preference for how that is portrayed, but that's all it is. Which is not to say your preference is unimportant. It's just that it's an opinion. We might even choose to portray a character with that ability score the exactly same way. But that's a choice, not a requirement, and neither right nor wrong.

This argument boils down to the character sheet being nothing more than a bag of mechanics, and totally divorced from the character concept in all ways. While I grant that the rules don't have any requirements on how you have to roleplay (and thank goodness for that), I think it's rather disingenuous to use that fact to argue that the mechanical statistics used to model the character in the game world should have no bearing on the roleplaying of that character, all because the rules don't say that they do. I also find it rather disingenuous, and frankly insulting, to suggest that anyone that holds to the idea that character concept and mechanics should be taken as a whole because that's the spirit of the game is "that guy" and having badwrongfun.

I recognize that people come to this game for different things, and have different ways to play it. I'm not knocking your preferred way. You should, perhaps, own up that you're engaging in knocking how other people play it.

 

[iserith]

This argument boils down to the character sheet being nothing more than a bag of mechanics, and totally divorced from the character concept in all ways. While I grant that the rules don't have any requirements on how you have to roleplay (and thank goodness for that), I think it's rather disingenuous to use that fact to argue that the mechanical statistics used to model the character in the game world should have no bearing on the roleplaying of that character, all because the rules don't say that they do. I also find it rather disingenuous, and frankly insulting, to suggest that anyone that holds to the idea that character concept and mechanics should be taken as a whole because that's the spirit of the game is "that guy" and having badwrongfun.

I recognize that people come to this game for different things, and have different ways to play it. I'm not knocking your preferred way. You should, perhaps, own up that you're engaging in knocking how other people play it.

I just cleared my ignore list yesterday and didn't realize until now that you're engaged in this discussion. As I recall, I blocked you a while back because you were unable to discuss a topic without constantly turning on the outrage manufacturing machine to distract from the points being made. So perhaps we can give this another try:

As I have stated numerous times in this thread, my objection is to the assertion that there is an objectively right or wrong way to roleplay a character as set forth by the rules as some in this thread have stated, suggested, or supported. Yeah, I think that the way some of you guys choose to prioritize is a complete waste of time and energy. You probably think the same of me. That's fine - those are all opinions, not assertions of fact.

It's when you (the universal "you") starts saying the rules say this is the right way to roleplay Int 5 and that is the wrong way that you're going to get pushback. I'm not the one claiming others are having "badwrongfun," as you stated. I'm arguing against such a notion, even if I think the way of some of you conduct yourselves at your own tables isn't my cup of tea. Therefore, if you are arguing against notions of "badwrongfun," we are in fact in agreement on that point. It's pretty clear to me who is saying others are having "badwrongfun" and who isn't. I invite you to reexamine this so that it is clear to you, too.

Finally, as to whether it's intended for us to portray our characters in accordance with ability scores, that is up to the individual since the rules do not mandate it either way. I might do, or I might choose not to. It's up to me to decide that, nobody else, social contract aside. The consequences for having low ability scores will arise when it's time for me to roll some dice which I will try to avoid to the best of my ability anyway no matter what my ability score.