Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8469867" data-attributes="member: 6987520">Why, I do, of course! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Seriously, though, this is based on prior versions of D&amp;D where an INT 18 is already established as a genius-level intelligence. True, 5E doesn't make this distinction, but for myself I like keeping it. But this can also work in the player's favor. Some of the people I've played with were not terribly bright, but their PCs had INT 16 or better. In such cases, if the player can't think of something or figure it out, I allow them to roll because I see their PC as being &quot;smarter&quot; due to the high INT score.As far as &quot;role-playing&quot; goes, perhaps that was a poor choice of words on my part. I don't necessarily mean personality or such, even an average intelligence person can seem smarter if they want. It is more about the results of the non-mechanics, such as the aforementioned puzzles, where the players get the challenge instead of a roll. But sometimes it does screw with the mechanics as well. For example, I might call for a DC 20 Intelligence (Investigation) check. One PC has INT 8, no proficiency in Investigation, but the player &quot;figures it out&quot; in a scenario where the PC cannot do it, even if the roll was a 20. In such instances I have to reign the player in a bit because they are &quot;over playing&quot; what should be a &quot;weaker&quot; score.Honestly, I've never had any issues with playing this way (or at least no one has ever spoken out against it) because the way I use INT and other ability scores makes sense to the groups I've been in. shrugSee the above. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="DND_Reborn, post: 8469867, member: 6987520"] Why, I do, of course! ;) Seriously, though, this is based on prior versions of D&D where an INT 18 is already established as a genius-level intelligence. True, 5E doesn't make this distinction, but for myself I like keeping it. But this can also work in the player's favor. Some of the people I've played with were not terribly bright, but their PCs had INT 16 or better. In such cases, if the player can't think of something or figure it out, I allow them to roll because I see their PC as being "smarter" due to the high INT score. As far as "role-playing" goes, perhaps that was a poor choice of words on my part. I don't necessarily mean personality or such, even an average intelligence person can [I]seem[/I] smarter if they want. It is more about the results of the non-mechanics, such as the aforementioned puzzles, where the players get the challenge instead of a roll. But sometimes it does screw with the mechanics as well. For example, I might call for a DC 20 Intelligence (Investigation) check. One PC has INT 8, no proficiency in Investigation, but the player "figures it out" in a scenario where the PC [I]cannot[/I] do it, even if the roll was a 20. In such instances I have to reign the player in a bit because they are "over playing" what should be a "weaker" score. Honestly, I've never had any issues with playing this way (or at least no one has ever spoken out against it) because the way I use INT and other ability scores makes sense to the groups I've been in. [I]shrug[/I] See the above. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification