"Grunk too dumb to know how to win"

[Mark CMG]

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

Instinctually.

 

[Joshua Randall]

Real-life example - I was attacked on the bus home by a guy carrying a sack of groceries - he threw a box of macaroni at my head, then ran up and started repeatedly trying to whang me in the head with a can of tomato soup.

Sorry to laugh, but that is one of the funniest things I've ever heard.

Obligatory similar bus story: one day this weird guy sat down next to me, took off his shoe, and started talking to it. Like he was Maxwell Smart on the shoe phone. Except that he smalled bad.

The bus came to my stop, so I stood up get off, and Mr. Talks To Shoe got angry. I think he thought I was deliberately getting off to avoid him. "But this is my stop!" I said. Talks To Shoe grabbed my jacket, and I got scared, so I spun out of the jacket, jumped off the bus, and ran down the street.

Never did get my jacket back.

 

[Gez]

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.

Myself, I ask the player to determine a strategy, but I can let him roll to know if the strategy he determined is sound or not.

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"?

Tell your bright idea to the player of Cleverus the Smartipants.

 

[drscott46]

I have, for as long as I can remember, specialized in playing characters that are either idiots or delusional. Part of this is because I enjoy being a little "difficult" with the DM by misinterpreting everything he says. Part is because while I'm supposedly a halfway-intelligent person, I can never think of anything particularly brilliant or problem-solvish while actually sitting at the table gaming. I don't know why this is. All I can think of is that I spent most of my formative D&D years reading rulebooks or DMing but not playing.

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

But I definitely endorse the idea that if I think of something as a player, I will go back to my regular voice and syntax to mention it to the other players. It's also entertaining sometimes to have my (Int+Wis)<18 barbarian suddenly say something pseudo-intellectual or use a 25-cent vocabulary word, all while still omitting articles and sentence subjects.

 

[Brain]

I played a character with a decent INT but very low WIS, and would sometimes have him come up with good ideas through completely spurious logic - coming to the right conclusion for the wrong reason. It was fun to roleplay.

Sometimes it was very frustrating when someone else would suggest something unwise, because my gullible character would usually agree, unless it went against his morality.

 

[RFisher]

I hate one player telling another what his character should do out of character.

Sure. You don't want "telling". I want to encourage discussion, not bossiness.

 

[Aaron L]

Unintelligent people/characters can still come up with good plans and ideas, it just takes them longer to do so than smart people/characters.