D&D 5E So 5 Intelligence Huh

[iserith]

Nobody here is imposing, advocating, or even tentatively suggesting any restrictions on your character's ability to attempt Strength-based tasks. What a character wants and tries to do is part of their motivation, not their ability scores. A low-Int character could similarly go around trying to prove his or her intelligence, like Otto from A Fish Called Wanda. But Otto is still stupid. He's acting to the best of his very limited abilities, but they're still very limited abilities. He draws stupid conclusions from what he reads. He comes up with stupid plans. He does stupid things. What we're concerned about here is players using their intelligence and knowledge to draw conclusions, make plans, and do things on their character's behalf that are completely out of character. Otto thinks the London Underground is a political movement. Kevin Kline (or scriptwriter John Cleese, if you prefer) presumably knows it's not. Which information should Otto act on?

If Otto's player established his or her character as believing that the London Underground is a political movement, then Otto's player would be contradicting that which was already established by acting as if Otto's did not believe that.

Before it is established, however, Otto's player is free to decide what Otto thinks the London Underground is. He or she may say Otto believes it to be a political movement or a railway system as he or she likes. If Otto's player said something like, "Otto tries to recall what the London Underground is based on what he's read ," then the DM can decide to call for an Intelligence check with an appropriate DC. At this point, Otto's Intelligence score comes into play by imparting a -3 modifier to the check (if Otto has an Intelligence of 5) and he is 15% less likely to recall what it is than another character with a 10 or 11 Intelligence.

 

[iserith]

Er, I said it was up to the player to roleplay the limitation

Totally agree with the rest of what you said. If you aren't going to roleplay the limits of your stats, there's no point in having numbers for them.

The numbers are the basis for modifiers which are applied to attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws.

 

[Maxperson]

If Otto's player established his or her character as believing that the London Underground is a political movement, then Otto's player would be contradicting that which was already established by acting as if Otto's did not believe that.

Before it is established, however, Otto's player is free to decide what Otto thinks the London Underground is. He or she may say Otto believes it to be a political movement or a railway system as he or she likes. If Otto's player said something like, "Otto tries to recall what the London Underground is based on what he's read ," then the DM can decide to call for an Intelligence check with an appropriate DC. At this point, Otto's Intelligence score comes into play by imparting a -3 modifier to the check (if Otto has an Intelligence of 5) and he is 15% less likely to recall what it is than another character with a 10 or 11 Intelligence.

Way to completely miss the point.

 

[Maxperson]

The numbers are the basis for modifiers which are applied to attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws.

We don't need numbers for that. Just let the players come up with bonuses and penalties on the fly for themselves. No point in setting bounds if the players are just going to ignore them.

 

[iserith]

Way to completely miss the point.

What point am I missing?

 

[iserith]

We don't need numbers for that. Just let the players come up with bonuses and penalties on the fly for themselves. No point in setting bounds if the players are just going to ignore them.

Those bonuses and penalties matter when the DM calls for mechanics to come into play when he or she believes the character's fictional action has an uncertain outcome. They help determine a result the DM can narrate.

 

[Hriston]

It's probably a good thing nobody has argued that, then.

I'm pretty sure there was at least one person up-thread arguing an Intelligence 5 character shouldn't be allowed to participate when there's a puzzle to solve.

The truth is that your PC with a 3 strength is weak. Period. Nobody has said he can't be roleplayed as someone weak, but who has heart. The problem is when the player roleplays the 3 as if it were a 10, 15 or even 20.

What problems arise when my Strength 3 character, Arnie the Oak, constantly flexes his muscles and brags about his feats of strength? Or what sorts of things do you see as causing problems that you wouldn't want my character to attempt?

No. It's factually not metagaming. No out of character knowledge was used by the PC. None. Nil. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

Ah, I see where you're confused. Metagaming is when the player uses out-of-character knowledge.

 

[Maxperson]

What point am I missing?

The limits on Otto's intelligence, beliefs and actions where there prior to any establishment by the players and had ZERO to do with any int modifier.

 

[Warbringer]

The numbers are the basis for modifiers which are applied to attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws.

The rules provide the modifiers, the scores are the bounds in which the player should be considering character options. If not, why bother with scores that define the range of a character's ability ti interact with the world around them?

Low str -> weak
Low dex -> clumsy, poor reaction
low int -> poor reasoning and planning
low con -> poor health
low wis -> poor insight, poor ability to learn from experience
low cha -> poor ability to influence others

role-play it .. no?

 

[Maxperson]

I'm pretty sure there was at least one person up-thread arguing an Intelligence 5 character shouldn't be allowed to participate when there's a puzzle to solve.

Participate? Sure. Act as if he's Einstein and run around solving puzzles as if they are nothing? That's bad roleplay.

What problems arise when my Strength 3 character, Arnie the Oak, constantly flexes his muscles and brags about his feats of strength?

Nothing unless you are actually successfully lifting what a 10+ strength PC can. Strength is harder to abuse than intelligence.

Ah, I see where you're confused. Metagaming is when the player uses out-of-character knowledge.

Yes, that is where your confusion is. Metagaming is the PC using knowledge the player has, but the PC doesn't.