D&D 5E So 5 Intelligence Huh

[iserith]

So Maxperson appears to be back to the position that there is an objectively good and bad way to roleplay.

 

[Maxperson]

So Maxperson appears to be back to the position that there is an objectively good and bad way to roleplay.

Mixed. Some things are flat out good or bad, but that doesn't mean that there is an objectively good or bad way to roleplay in general.

 

[Maxperson]

Ok, I think we're maybe *almost* on the same page.

The only quibble I have is that, for me, the absence of roleplaying isn't necessarily bad roleplaying.

If the player of the low INT character narrates how his dimwitted character came up with the solution to a puzzle, that could be good roleplaying.

Right.

If he narrates how his dimwitted character performed cites ancient texts and does multivariable calculus in his head, that's probably bad roleplaying.

Right.

But if he just has a solution to the puzzle and offers the solution to the rest of the table, that's neither kind of roleplaying. That's just playing the game.

That's back to goals. If roleplay is not one of the goals of the group, then not roleplaying is just par for the course. However, if roleplaying is part of the group's goals, then things should be roleplayed out, including solutions.

 

[iserith]

Mixed. Some things are flat out good or bad, but that doesn't mean that there is an objectively good or bad way to roleplay in general.

Please clarify.

 

[Maxperson]

Please clarify.

Roleplaying the opposite of something established, like stupidy is almost always going to be bad roleplay. I say almost because in game circumstances like a temporary intelligence boost are possible. A 5 int establishes that the PC is stupid. Roleplaying your PC appropriately will almost always be good roleplay.

That doesn't mean that there is a single objective way to roleplay in general, though. Virtually every trait your PC has will have many ways to roleplay. There are tons of neutral aspects of roleplay as well. Those aren't going to be pinned down by a stat or established traits and are up to the player to roleplay for his PC. There's no really wrong way to do that since you aren't running opposite to anything established.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

The counterargument of "Nuh uh!" leaves much to be desired.

The precise reason I told you "No" once you begun to effectively use it by insisting I'm mischaracterizing something I explained to you I am not.

Given that I have said that there are many ways to play a low intelligence, it's clear that you are misrepresenting what I have said. I have only said that it is bad roleplay to play a low intelligence as other than low, not that I have some specific way to play low I mind. Nor have I ever implied anything other than that.

Let me make it as clear as I can. Compare the following two statements:

"A low Intelligence score should be role-played as low Intelligence, such as by playing a 5 Intelligence score as if that meant the character has a 50 IQ, whatever it is that such an IQ would be role-played as."

"A low Intelligence score should be role-played as lower than you would play a higher Intelligence score, to whatever completely vague measure of 'lower' you personally wish to use."

Do you, or do you not, see how the first statement is exact in comparison to the second?

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

People seem to like to twist what I say. It happens a lot.

If a multitude of people seem to respond to you in the same way, I think it might be time to consider that the constant in the equation is not "people" so much as it is "I", and the implication therein that perhaps you are doing something which is causing the "twist."

 

[Maxperson]

The precise reason I told you "No" once you begun to effectively use it by insisting I'm mischaracterizing something I explained to you I am not.


Let me make it as clear as I can. Compare the following two statements:

"A low Intelligence score should be role-played as low Intelligence, such as by playing a 5 Intelligence score as if that meant the character has a 50 IQ, whatever it is that such an IQ would be role-played as."

"A low Intelligence score should be role-played as lower than you would play a higher Intelligence score, to whatever completely vague measure of 'lower' you personally wish to use."

Do you, or do you not, see how the first statement is exact in comparison to the second?

No. It's not even remotely exact because how does a 50 IQ act? There are many ways. Characterizing it as exact is a mischaracterization.

 

[Maxperson]

If a multitude of people seem to respond to you in the same way, I think it might be time to consider that the constant in the equation is not "people" so much as it is "I", and the implication therein that perhaps you are doing something which is causing the "twist."

Nah. The same posters do it over and over. The rest understand what I say and respond to it. I firmly believe that some posters just cannot respond to my arguments and have to twist them in order to "be right."

 

[iserith]

A 5 int establishes that the PC is stupid.

I don't think that is necessarily so.