"Grunk too dumb to know how to win"

[howandwhy99]

This thread isn't another rehash about how to roleplay characters with low mental stats. Portraying wise, yet unintelligent characters can be fun. But what happens when unintelligent and/or unwise characters go adventuring? Wouldn't roleplaying their drawbacks accurately mean choosing tactics the player knows are weak, deadly, even suicidal?

If the goal of the game is to challenge the players' skills, how do they play dumb characters without deliberately getting them killed?

I'm guessing it is another roleplaying challenge, not a game challenge. It just seems like a hindrance to actually becoming a better player. Instead of trying to out-think or outwit your opponents and sharpen your skills, you're thinking of how to be dumberer. Does that mean these characters can only be played for laughs?

I can understand how to play average to even genius levels of intellect. Players have as much prep time as the DM and can attempt to portray genius with good preparation - like memorizing notes or time-tested aphorisms. On the other hand, if a player said to me his genius character should know how to beat a master villian and I should let him roll to determine strategy, I'd just laugh. Simulation only goes so far. But what happens when you're the player at the table with the bright, game winning idea and are stuck playing "Grunk of the Dumb"?

 

[awayfarer]

My orc barbarian has 6's in all mental stats and he pretty much just takes orders. I figure he likely was already used to it. The best way to avoid stupid actions is not to act.

 

[Hypersmurf]

But what happens when you're the player at the table with the bright, game winning idea and are stuck playing "Grunk of the Dumb"?

I'd tell the player of the high-Int strategist character, and let the strategist character present the idea to the other characters.

-Hyp.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

But what happens when you're the player at the table with the bright, game winning idea and are stuck playing "Grunk of the Dumb"?

You say nothing! Or... if you get the opporunity to say the exact opposite of the really smart idea, someone who's playing a really smart character might get the opporunity to say how dumb your idea is, in fact, doing the exact opposite may be a good one.

My favourite current character has a 29 intelligence and a 6 wisdom (three hoorays for Lucifus). He simply delves into things he shouldn't. However, because of his intelligence, I can normally outline a thoroughly brilliant but completely impractical idea that due to his magic, can be made somewhat practical if completely daring. The ultimate in cool.

When you know the "rules of play" well enough, it becomes increasingly easy to play dumb/unwise/socially incompetent characters. You normally get a good laugh but there can still be an edge of seriousness as well. Others hopefully judge you on how well you roleplay rather than how "effective" you are.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[frankthedm]

Wouldn't roleplaying their drawbacks accurately mean choosing tactics the player knows are weak, deadly, even suicidal?

Yes! A big reason why no animal has a sub par wisdom. The Darwin Award goes to those who dumpstat wisdom!

If the goal of the game is to challenge the players' skills, how do they play dumb characters without deliberately getting them killed?

They retire the character and make a new one suited to the squad based tactics of D&D.

Does that mean these characters can only be played for laughs?

No, but that seems to be a common theme. They can also be played as an inconvenence to the party or as trouble waiting to happen.

But what happens when you're the player at the table with the bright, game winning idea and are stuck playing "Grunk of the Dumb"?

The Idea goes unsaid and the party suffers a TPK.

 

[frankthedm]

My favourite current character has a 29 intelligence and a 6 wisdom (three hoorays for Lucifus). He simply delves into things he shouldn't.

Sounds like an Alienist for some reason... Edit...Yep, he is.

 

[Henrix]

But what happens when unintelligent and/or unwise characters go adventuring?

Now Groo does what Groo does best!

 

[howandwhy99]

Choosing between (1) telling a high-Int character's Player or (2) not telling any Player your good ideas brings to mind a custom from old styles of play. In wargaming, it was understood each player didn't need OOC help. It was a matter of pride not to ask for help and offering it unsolicited was a faux pas.

If this is the case, how does assuming the role of a dumb character sharpen your playing ability? Is it all subtle clues to the others?

EDIT: Not acting on your own ideas or always retiring these characters don't seem like fun alternatives.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I'd tell the player of the high-Int strategist character, and let the strategist character present the idea to the other characters.

-Hyp.

QFT.

 

[Nifft]

Now Groo does what Groo does best!

QFMFT!!!

Ah, Sergio. How I miss the cheese dip.

-- N

PS: The explicit moral could be stated (in Socratic method):

Q: How does one play a stupid PC?
A: Humorously!