I think you are missing my point: they aren't "ability scores" they are somewhat garbled collections of aptitudes for specific in-game tasks. They shouldn't influence personality traits. The legacy of treating them like inherent qualities of the character is exactly what I want to excise.
So, let’s look at that 5e definition of Intelligence again. “Intelligence measures a character’s mental acuity, accuracy of recall, and ability to reason.” So it makes sense that a character’s Intelligence modifier would apply to checks made to make reasoned deductions, to accurately recall information, or to perform other tasks requiring a degree of mental acuity. What it shouldn’t do, in my opinion, is restrict the scope of actions the player is allowed to take. Characters with low strength aren’t restricted from being allowed to perform certain physical activities, why should characters with low intelligence not be allowed to, say, suggest certain ideas. It’s inconsistent, and extremely prone to DM bias, as what an Int 8 character “could” or “couldn’t” think of, figure out, or remember seems highly subjective and arbitrary, even if you assign IQs to Intelligence scores (which again, I find distasteful). By all means, if you as DM think the task might fail and would have a consequence for failure, call for an Intelligence check. But saying “your character isn’t smart enough to come up with that plan/make that deduction/solve that puzzle/remember that fact” without calling for a check feels wrong to me.
The player gets to choose how to assign their ability scores. If you want to be an intelligent barbarian, you can. Some people being better at certain facets of an aptitude whilst less so at others is handled via skills. Choose the skills that reflect the facets you want your character to be good at.
That's fine--like I said before, some people do. I just happen not to. shrug
www.enworld.org
So I was a bit confused by your first post; since it just seemed a slight reshuffling of ability scores.
It's not as if a player with high wisdom or intelligence can necessarily roleplay these characters with these mental scores well. It's not as if, for example, having a high wisdom means a player will play their cleric with any common sense. Actual wisdom is rarely reflected or translated well in the game. But Wisdom is a pretty terrible attribute since IMHO it tries to cover too much ground, including ground already covered by Intelligence and Charisma.
I do agree with this. Obviously having different ability scores will affect the way players portray their characters. I just don’t think it’s something that needs policing - the way ability checks work alone will encourage players to favor actions that, if a check is required to resolve them, they will have a better chance of succeeding at.
Side note: common sense isn’t really a part of what Wisdom represents in 5e. According to the PHB, “Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition.” If it wasn’t for the names of the scores being sacred cows, 5e Wisdom would be better referred to as “Awareness” or something like that.
