D&D 5E Don't play "stupid" characters. It is ableist.

[Voadam]

But, let's say you're playing an INT 8 PC. Now, because of how smart you are you routinely take charge, plan assaults/tactics, etc., things that repeatedly would be difficult for someone of average intelligence, let alone lower intelligence. What you are doing is giving yourself a dump stat where (due to other choices you make) really has no significant negative impact on your PC. Because you play your PC smarter than they really are, role-playing-wise you have all the benefits of a high INT PC without the high INT.

I have seen this sort of thing often enough after playing for over 40 years. Fighters with INT 6-8 come up with brilliant tactics, solve complex puzzles, etc. because the players are brilliant. Then, to offset the INT penalty (in 5E), they rely on other PCs to make the Intelligence checks with their bonuses and even take Resilience for INT saves, or choose classes (like Rogue) with INT saves...

A wizard who dump stats strength can rely upon others in the party to handle any strength checks so there is no significant negative impact on the PC for giving themself the dump stat either.

Both are impacted by the mechanical impacts of their dump stat to the same degree.

The physical stats usually have zero constraints on roleplaying and so are strictly mechanical restraints.

The question is whether the mental/social stats should be similar in being strictly mechanical restraints or should be roleplaying restraints as well.

If you go with roleplay restrictions as well this means that class builds that favor physical MAD have a choice of playing roleplay concepts that either fit low mental/social stats or shift stats to match the roleplay narrative concept but are subpar builds for the class.

If you wish to roleplay smart, be a wizard or a sub-par high int anything else.

A smart leader narrative role like Hannibal from the A-team or Roy from Order of the Stick have the choice of being behind the curve on stats fighters or play wizards and have no stat power drop.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

A wizard who dump stats strength can rely upon others in the party to handle any strength checks so there is no significant negative impact on the PC for giving themself the dump stat either.

Both are impacted by the mechanical impacts of their dump stat to the same degree.

The physical stats usually have zero constraints on roleplaying and so are strictly mechanical restraints.

I would slightly quibble with this.

I think that there are several issues going on here that are only being addressed obliquely. Given I don't particularly care to take sides, I will outline them as I see them:

A. The "dump stat" problem. It's not enough to say that there might be an issue with "dumping" intelligence in 5e; instead, I think it is more correct to say that 5e incentivizes dumping intelligence to an extent we have not otherwise seen. Simply putt, there are the two "god stats" (Dex, Cha). Then there is the "everyone can use it" stat (Con). Then there's wisdom, which, at a minimum, people like for the passive perception and because it's one of the primary saves.

That leaves only two dump stats for most players- intelligence and strength. As strength has real mechanical effects, and, for the most part, intelligence doesn't, it becomes an easy choice. In other words, unless you're a wizard, wizard-adjacent (like EK or AT), or a very niche case (Mastermind Rogue, for example), intelligence is always going to be the dump stat.

Which means that if you allow people to choose to have low intelligences with absolutely no consequences for that choice, then they will always choose to take the low intelligence and say, "But I'm naturally cunning and a good tactician!" Or come up with other reasons to justify playing the character the same way that they play their 18 intelligence character. There are innumerable threads on this.

So for mixed groups in which this is a problem, there are usually only four solutions:
1. A table agreement that you can't dump intelligence.
2. A table agreement that you will appropriately play (depending on table norms) the intelligence.
3. House rules that make intelligence more valuable.
3. The DM, with extreme prejudice, employing tactics that target intelligence and intelligence saves until (1) and/or (2) and/or 3 happens. "Hey look kids! Big Ben! Parliament! An intellect devourer!"


B. The "role playing" vs. "roll playing" debate. This is now more than 40 years old, and I don't think we will get very far in this more recent iteration. I do think that there is an interesting conversation to be had about the appropriate boundaries regarding roleplaying (similar to what we have seen with acting), but I do not think that the way that this thread has presented itself makes it an ideal topid to explore that discussion.

I would say that most tables I have played at that have been heavy into "role playing" to tend to incorporate the physical abilities into the character conception, and that we have the same divide. In other words, people who aren't taking the physical abilities into account for RPing say, "Look, we don't do this for the physical abilities, so why should we for the mental ones!" While the people who do it for the mental ones say, "Look, we do it for the physical abilities, so of course we do it for the mental ones!"

Two ships passing in the night.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

@Snarf Zagyg 5e aggressively encouraging PCs to dump int just realistically simulates the fact that people who voluntarily choose to be adventurers can't be very bright!

 

[FrozenNorth]

I would slightly quibble with this.

That leaves only two dump stats for most players- intelligence and strength. As strength has real mechanical effects, and, for the most part, intelligence doesn't, it becomes an easy choice. In other words, unless you're a wizard, wizard-adjacent (like EK or AT), or a very niche case (Mastermind Rogue, for example), intelligence is always going to be the dump stat.

I, sir, quibble with your quibble. Str, for the most part, doesn’t have any real mechanical effects. There aren’t a whole lot more Str saves in the game than Int saves, and the effects from failing to save against an Int save are far nastier (failed to save against a Web? Time to break out the save spells!). Moreover, there are more spells that replace high strength than replace high Int.

Generally, the party is fine with 1character with decent Str to break down doors and the rest can dump Str.

At the end of the day, many characters are going to dump Str, Int and Cha (get the party face to speak for you). The issue is that if you dump Str (which many caster characters do), no one is going to tell you how to play your character.

Which means that if you allow people to choose to have low intelligences with absolutely no consequences for that choice, then they will always choose to take the low intelligence and say, "But I'm naturally cunning and a good tactician!" Or come up with other reasons to justify playing the character the same way that they play their 18 intelligence character. There are innumerable threads on this.

There are always consequences to low Int. They are detailed in the game. What is being objected to is adding additional consequences.

Once again, each table is an island onto itself, but I have seen a lot more characters dump Str or Cha rather than Int.

B. The "role playing" vs. "roll playing" debate. This is now more than 40 years old, and I don't think we will get very far in this more recent iteration. I do think that there is an interesting conversation to be had about the appropriate boundaries regarding roleplaying (similar to what we have seen with acting), but I do not think that the way that this thread has presented itself makes it an ideal topid to explore that discussion.

At the end of the day, a “roleplaying” vs “rollplaying” debate will never get resolved, but only gets noxious when one side tells the other how to play, and doubly noxious when the person telling others how to play is the GM.

 

[FrozenNorth]

@Snarf Zagyg 5e aggressively encouraging PCs to bump int just realistically simulates the fact that people who voluntarily choose to be adventurers can't be very bright!

You joke, but it has a grain of truth. Most monks, clerics and druids start with a 16 Wis, but I can count on the fingers of 1 hand the high-Wisdom characters that I would refer to as “wise” (and the game is overall better for it).

For those who follow Critical Role, Jester is absolutely the last person I would go to for advice, despite having a very high Wisdom score.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

You joke, but it has a grain of truth. Most monks, clerics and druids start with a 16 Wis, but I can count on the fingers of 1 hand the high-Wisdom characters that I would refer to as “wise” (and the game is overall better for it).

For those who follow Critical Role, Jester is absolutely the last person I would go to for advice, despite having a very high Wisdom score.

A great warrior, eh? War not make one great.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I, sir, quibble with your quibble. Str, for the most part, doesn’t have any real mechanical effects. There aren’t a whole lot more Str saves in the game than Int saves, and the effects from failing to save against an Int save are far nastier (failed to save against a Web? Time to break out the save spells!). Moreover, there are more spells that replace high strength than replace high Int.

Really? Note that there is a difference between not many, than none at all.

Strength-
1. Has an effect on "to hit" and "damage" (when you don't use a finesse weapon)- sure, you can avoid it with dex, but PAM/GWM and big ol' weapons is an advantage for some.
2. Carrying capacity. I know, some people don't care about encumbrance ... but a lot do. That's a mechanical effect.
3. Grappling.
4. Heavy armor.
5. Jumping distances.

Etc. Look, I'm not here to really debate this- but ... just no. I can't agree with what you're trying to sell.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

This is one of the reasons I tend to ask for rolls to achieve goals. I think character build and choices should matter.

So if you have an 8 strength it's going to matter, at least now and then.

Yeah my strength 10 acrobat feels it. Which sucks because at least a 12 would make a lot more sense, but he also needed high Int, and not terrible Cha, and dumping wisdom or con is just too big a nerf in 5e…

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

At the end of the day, a “roleplaying” vs “rollplaying” debate will never get resolved, but only gets noxious when one side tells the other how to play, and doubly noxious when the person telling others how to play is the GM.

I'm sure it's always the "other side" that is inflicting this noxious idea upon the good and true side, which is whatever side I agree with at that time.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

For those who follow Critical Role, Jester is absolutely the last person I would go to for advice, despite having a very high Wisdom score.

She's simply too enlightened for your puny soul to comprehend her wisdom!