D&D 5E So 5 Intelligence Huh

[I'm A Banana]

A 5 INT can be fun. You could play such a character that befriends more animals than people. This is especially fun if there is another character of low INT in the party.

Think Derek Zoolander and Hansel- " I miss not knowing things with you."

Heck, I'd be tempted to go Full Zoolander with this guy. INT 5 is totally "What is this?! A center for ANTS?!"

 

[Maxperson]

It measures mental acuity, accuracy of recall, and the ability to reason via a modifier to an ability check. It doesn't tell me how I should roleplay my character and neither should you.

No. It does not limit it to just the bonus or penalty. A bonus or penalty = bonus or penalty, and is not the end all, be all of the ability to reason or recall things. The bonus or penalty can help you with roleplaying the deficiency or gift, but it does not take the place of roleplaying intelligence as the rules have spelled it out.

 

[Mallus]

It measures mental acuity, accuracy of recall, and the ability to reason via a modifier to an ability check. It doesn't tell me how I should roleplay my character and neither should you.

FYI... I meant to XP your post, not laugh. It's late. I need to get the hell out of my office...

 

[Maxperson]

Of course, by this logic, most players should not be permitted to play characters with an intelligence of 18 or 20, the limit of human intelligence in D&D5, because they aren't nearly smart enough to roleplay it correctly. They cannot help but "do it wrong."

There's a reason why I just give information to very smart PCs on occasion. It makes that PC feel like it is as intelligent as it is. That said, there's a big difference between not playing up to your strengths because you are unable, and willingly ignoring your weaknesses by playing your PC smarter than he is.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Page 177 of the PHB says, "Intelligence measures mental acuity, accuracy of recall, and the ability to reason."

If you are also not roleplaying out what the game tells you is limited by a low int score, you are doing it wrong. Per the rule there, a PC with a 5 int has a diminished ability to reason, so he's not going to be running around solving riddles.

Intelligence covers explicitly that, by the metric given. The PC with Int 5 will be solving riddles 15% less frequently than someone with Int 10.

There are many other things which Intelligence does not cover. A human with Int 5 is fundamentally different from an ape with Int 5, because humans are fundamentally different from apes. They may both have identical ability to solve puzzles and recall information, but the human will still have superior organization and tool use, among other things. Even a feebleminded human is still a human, with all that entails.

 

[Maxperson]

There's also no IQ cop to play if you just leave your players be & let them roleplay however they think is appropriate (letting the dice fall --with appropriate modifiers-- as they may).

As for the question: do my players understand intelligence & roleplaying? Well, they're a PhD in linguistics who's a pharma advertising VP, a librarian, and a former medical journal editor taking time to finish his novel. So... hopefully yes?


Who defines "appropriate"?

The dictionary definition of what intelligence and IQ means. There is of course some wiggle room since there is a lot we don't know about the nature of intelligence, but only some. It's pretty clear that someone with a 50 IQ isn't going to be running around solving riddles unless he's the rare idiot savant.

Of course it's more than that. Otherwise you could roll up Dr. Swarm of Bats (INT 2, WIS 12, still not a bad doctor), who is my next next PC, BTW.

So you're cool with Dr. Koko, Baboon MD? Excellent! How about Giant Elk, Texas Ranger? Let's Watership Down this whole MF'ing joint!

Nah. Low intelligence is really hard to play correctly, since if you have it you will likely not be smart enough to have a class. I don't have to worry about it, though. None of my players stick a 5 into int. They want to be able to partcipate.

I made it up out of judgment in my brain.

That's what I thought. There is no such rule, but there is a rule that says that a baboon with a 5 int is just as intelligent as an elf with a 5 int.

 

[Maxperson]

Intelligence covers explicitly that, by the metric given. The PC with Int 5 will be solving riddles 15% less frequently than someone with Int 10.

It's more than just numbers, though. Through the first three and a half editions of the game, IQ = int x 10. A 50 IQ if roleplayed correctly, isn't going to just be 15% less likely to solve the riddle.

There are many other things which Intelligence does not cover. A human with Int 5 is fundamentally different from an ape with Int 5, because humans are fundamentally different from apes. They may both have identical ability to solve puzzles and recall information, but the human will still have superior organization and tool use, among other things. Even a feebleminded human is still a human, with all that entails.

Right, but a 50 IQ human isn't going to be learning much or solving much.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

It's more than just numbers, though. Through the first three and a half editions of the game, IQ = int x 10. A 50 IQ if roleplayed correctly, isn't going to just be 15% less likely to solve the riddle.

Except no, that formula is not true according to any of the rulebooks. Maybe you have an old magazine that said that, but there's a reason why they've never put that into the actual books - because it would create unplayable characters! Likewise, they're not going to put the gender-based stat modifications in any actual books, because those are equally ridiculous for slightly different reasons. Both rulesets are equally canonical at this point, which is to say not at all.

You need to separate out what you think from what the rules actually say. The rules say that the character with Int 5 is going to solve puzzles 15% less frequently than baseline, and if that doesn't jive with what you think it should say, then the problem isn't with the book.

 

[Maxperson]

Except no, that formula is not true according to any of the rulebooks. Maybe you have an old magazine that said that, but there's a reason why they've never put that into the actual books - because it would create unplayable characters! Likewise, they're not going to put the gender-based stat modifications in any actual books, because those are equally ridiculous for slightly different reasons. Both rulesets are equally canonical at this point, which is to say not at all.

It was in the official 3.5 Q&A. And yes, a very low int is unplayable, which is why you should avoid a really low int score. Both the 1e PHB and DMG state that intelligence roughly corresponds to IQ. The 2e PHB describes what low int means, and it means dull witted or slow, even to the point of being unable to speak if it's low enough.

I'm not just making stuff up here.

 

[MechaPilot]

It was in the official 3.5 Q&A. And yes, a very low int is unplayable, which is why you should avoid a really low int score. Both the 1e PHB and DMG state that intelligence roughly corresponds to IQ. The 2e PHB describes what low int means, and it means dull witted or slow, even to the point of being unable to speak if it's low enough.

I'm not just making stuff up here.

But you are as it relates to 5e. 5e is not 3e, 2e, or 1e. THAC0 is not used in 5e, cantrips are unlimited in 5e, and INT does not map to IQ on an INT x 10 = IQ points basis in 5e.