D&D 5E Geniuses with 5 Int

[Guest 6801328]

Bravo, sir. I tend to judge people on the forum by one simple attribute: Do they seem like someone I would want playing at my table? And you, sir, have passed.

(I do withdraw this recommendation if there's some major BO issue going on, of course.)

Actually, I was just kidding with all that. Really when I roleplay it's more like, "Curses! What foul beasts doth we faceth that regrow their hellish appendages such! Oh would that I hadeth divineth inthpiration for a way to combateth thith menath!"

(That's my Wizard, Ser Reginald. The character concept is that his lisp tends to get worse as his HP goes down. Cool, huh?)

 

[TwoSix]

Actually, I was just kidding with all that. Really when I roleplay it's more like, "Curses! What foul beasts doth we faceth that regrow their hellish appendages such! Oh would that I hadeth divineth inthpiration for a way to combateth thith menath!"

(That's my Wizard, Ser Reginald. The character concept is that his lisp tends to get worse as his HP goes down. Cool, huh?)

Certainly much better than my last barbarian character, who tended to crap his pants when he went down to 0 HP. I got a little too "immersed" in that character in the last session I played with that group.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Certainly much better than my last barbarian character, who tended to crap his pants when he went down to 0 HP. I got a little too "immersed" in that character in the last session I played with that group.

And you're worried about BO?

 

[TheCosmicKid]

I'll preface the preface by saying that when I'm DMing "Insight" is not a lie-detection skill. (Otherwise why even have Zone of Truth as a spell?)

Is Stealth also not a personal-concealment skill because invisibility is a spell?

Assuming that Insight *is* a lie-detection ability, I further don't ever use "social PvP" between players in my games. Not saying those who do so are playing wrong, but that's just contrary to what I think the spirit of the game should be. Players are supposed to be cooperating in a fiction, and if they feel the need to Deceive or Persuade (or detect lies) between characters, then something is going wrong at the table.

Non sequitur.

At this point I would call this adversarial playing. It’s plausible that Bruce wouldn’t suspect anything, and if Bruce’s player were supporting Eloelle’s player in roleplaying her character concept, he could easily choose to not be suspicious at all.

You're still doing it. You're telling Bruce's player that Bruce ought to act a particular way, and trying to justify it to yourself and to me by disparaging the player as being "adversarial" and not "supporting". Bruce's player is not the bad guy here. He just wants Bruce to act according to his character. And Bruce is a paranoid bastard who suspects everything, even that noblest paladin Clark of Kent.

And like I said above, in a post you may have missed because you were writing all this, the group runs into this problem even if they're not rolling dice against each other, and even if Eloelle's player agrees that Bruce should figure it out. But since they're rolling dice now, let's talk about that. You question the player's motives in making the die roll, as if he's just looking for an excuse. But he doesn't need one; in this narrative paradigm, he could simply declare that Bruce sees through the lie with far more justification that Eloelle's player could declare that he doesn't. (Per the guideline you mentioned earlier that a defending character's player is entitled to narrate the outcome of an adversarial act, and a lie being an adversarial act.) No, the most charitable way to view this situation, without having to attribute malicious motives to Bruce's player, is to think that he honestly doesn't know whether Bruce would see through the lie or not. Bruce is a pretty good lie detector but Eloelle is also a pretty good liar, so it could plausibly go either way, and in this game dice are the standard method of adjudicating an uncertain outcome.

But at the same time, if Eloelle’s player is allowed to roleplay in a way that bothers Bruce’s player, I suppose he has every ‘right’ to reciprocate by roleplaying in a way that bothers her, in the sense that when somebody cuts you off on the highway you’re justified in tailgating them with your high beams on. So he uses Insight and knows Eloelle is lying.

If that’s what this has come to, if Bruce’s player really won’t cooperate with me on playing this character, and the DM won't back me up, then I'd go all Hamlet on them. if I were playing Eloelle I would simply say, “Nope, I’m not lying. I failed the roll and I don’t know the answer. Eloelle makes up stories because she feels really insecure about her low Intelligence, and I was acting that out so you could be entertained by the crazy stories that she tells herself. Honestly, she’s delusional. It’s sad.”

And so on, until Bruce’s player dropped it.

And then I’d give my best maniacal cackle and rub my hands together with glee. And then as we moved on to the next scene I’d whisper, just loudly enough for the rest of the table to hear, “Fools…”

Okay. Wow. See my earlier post re: you being the disruptive, abusive, unpleasant, and childish one.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Then maybe you can answer a question for me: when you're at a fancy party in a mansion, and you've got a wine glass in one hand, and a little plate in the other hand...probably with little hors d'oeuvres made from Wheat Thins, which SUCK because they slide around on the plate...and you meet a senator or a millionaire or something...HOW DO YOU SHAKE HANDS?

Basic options:

1) politely beg off shaking hands because your hands are obviously full. Most rational and gracious people will understand. Most people aren't skilled jugglers, nor do they have 3 hands.

2) learn to hold your plate & glass with one hand. It requires a bit of finger strength, but can be done.

3) look for a surface upon which you can place said dishes or glasses.

3a) look for a waitperson to take (some of) your stuff.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Is Stealth also not a personal-concealment skill because invisibility is a spell?

It sure ain't an Invisibility spell. Are you going to compare History to Legend Lore next?

You're still doing it. You're telling Bruce's player that Bruce ought to act a particular way, and trying to justify it to yourself and to me by disparaging the player as being "adversarial" and not "supporting". Bruce's player is not the bad guy here. He just wants Bruce to act according to his character. And Bruce is a paranoid bastard who suspects everything, even that noblest paladin Clark of Kent.

And like I said above, in a post you may have missed because you were writing all this, the group runs into this problem even if they're not rolling dice against each other, and even if Eloelle's player agrees that Bruce should figure it out. But since they're rolling dice now, let's talk about that. You question the player's motives in making the die roll, as if he's just looking for an excuse. But he doesn't need one; in this narrative paradigm, he could simply declare that Bruce sees through the lie with far more justification that Eloelle's player could declare that he doesn't. (Per the guideline you mentioned earlier that a defending character's player is entitled to narrate the outcome of an adversarial act, and a lie being an adversarial act.) No, the most charitable way to view this situation, without having to attribute malicious motives to Bruce's player, is to think that he honestly doesn't know whether Bruce would see through the lie or not. Bruce is a pretty good lie detector but Eloelle is also a pretty good liar, so it could plausibly go either way, and in this game dice are the standard method of adjudicating an uncertain outcome.

What I hear reading this is the playground bully saying, "No, ma'am, I was just trying to fend off his vicious assault and somehow he ran onto my fist."

Poor, poor Bruce. He's just trying to roleplay his character! It's not his fault if the way he chooses to do that, among the infinite range of options open to him, causes Eloelle problems. Maybe it appears antagonistic to her because that's how she thinks about everything!

Okay. Wow. See my earlier post re: you being the disruptive, abusive, unpleasant, and childish one.

How so? I'm giving everybody a roleplaying out! I'm now playing a delusional, nutty, muttering warlock. Maybe you missed the Hamlet reference. TwoSix gets it: I'm trying to keep everybody guessing whether Eloelle is delusional, or whether she's really a genius. In other words, I'm trying to immerse the other players in the story I'm telling by making them feel like their characters would. I'd be delighted if somebody at my table did something like that. The fact that you see it as disruptive/abusive/unpleasant/childish says...something.

I suppose if the other participants were actively trying to undermine Eloelle's character concept then this could really look like a childish way to respond. But since you've stated quite clearly that that's not the case, this seems like a happy outcome for all.

The reality, of course, is that if I ended up a table with someone like Bruce who takes some kind of deep, existential offense to a reinterpretation of the Int score, is I wouldn't play this character. The entire point of roleplaying is to entertain the other people at the table, after all. I probably also wouldn't return to the table, although I only mention that because I'm curious to see how you're going to turn that into me being a petulant One True Way gamer.

 

[Manbearcat]

Bravo, sir. I tend to judge people on the forum by one simple attribute: Do they seem like someone I would want playing at my table? And you, sir, have passed.

(I do withdraw this recommendation if there's some major BO issue going on, of course.)

Shouldn't be a problem. [MENTION=6801328]Elfcrusher[/MENTION] strikes me as much more of a Raphael than a Donatello.

 

[Guest 6801328]

3a) look for a waitperson to take (some of) your stuff.

Wait...you have servants? This is like the Earl of Grantham meets J.R. Ewing or something, right?

Feel the Bern, man. The revolution is coming.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Update to the Eloelle/Bruce story as I think on it more:

1) If Bruce were indeed playing his character as you describe, rolling Insight every time another player did/said something (aside from the fact that this would get old real fast) then long before the scenario in question I would have adjusted Eloelle's character appropriately, and moved to the "Is she crazy, or is it all a ruse?" concept. The premise of that character no longer functions if you can't tell the "out of scene" narration around the table; it's not much fun to keep it to yourself.

2) If, on the other hand, Bruce ostensibly was playing such a character but was never actually rolling Insight vs other players, and then suddenly decided to do so in this case, or perhaps only when Eloelle was being deceptive, then that would confirm the "he's trying to undermine her character concept" hypothesis and it might be time to find a new table.

 

[BoldItalic]

No, actually, that's pretty backwards. The advent of technology actually ALLOWED people to become untethered from desks. Secretaries of D&D type tech levels had manual scribework to do. That is incredibly time consuming. They would have to be present in their offices to set and manage their bosses' schedules; they receive visitors, known and unexpected.

Can't do all that AND be in-class transcriptionist.


A history of cheating on tests not being deceptive? I'm calling shenanigans. You're drifting from self-deception to delusions & psychopathy.



So, he owned ALL the schools and the university that he got his education from? His former teachers are his employees?

How Ouroboros-like.



You usually can't teach in a field with just an honorary doctorate. And those who do are not on permanent faculty or admins.



OK, definitely getting a strong psychopathic vibe now. This guy's a horrorshow villain sending others on suicide missions to maintain his academic position.


See above.


Okay. What does he teach where his Int5 won't have him at a minute by minute disadvantage in the classroom?



So, the school has an administration of 1? How many other teachers? How does he keep any of them on when word of his serial plagiarism reaches them? What happens when THEY reveal the emperor has no clothes?



Yes I have: University of Dallas, Trinity University, Loyola and Tulane. Plus I've been a guest in the houses of those who make multimillion dollar donations to two of those universities...because I went to school with them.

By & large, they're not too tolerant of frauds, either.

You're describing latter-day America and saying he doesn't live there. That's okay. Threbes isn't in America. Threbes is in a completely different world where the social mores are utterly different. They are whatever I choose to make up.

So far, you know that it's a world where a retired adventurer who has survived to reach 18th level despite having an Int of 5 has accumulated sufficient money and contacts to set up a university and make his own rules.

Rules like, all ideas and discoveries made by students and staff are the property of the university and claiming personal credit for them is fraud.

Rules like, secretaries don't answer the door. That's the receptionists' job.

And so on.

You see, I can just go on making stuff up about this gnome guy and the more you tell me I'm not allowed to make it up my way because the world I'm making up is not the same as the world you live in, the more interesting and amusing it becomes.

Acknowledgements
"We would like to thank [MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION] for his stimulating and thought-provoking contribution to the development of this fiction."