Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BoldItalic" data-source="post: 6835663" data-attributes="member: 6777052">Actually, strictly speaking, it doesn't. In the sentence on p.177 it doesn't use the word "low" and therein lies our problem.If you want to inject the word low into the sentence and you want to get people to agree with your modification, you need to negotiate agreement on what the word "low" means in this context. So far, in this thread, that negotiation hasn't exactly succeeded, which is why we are here, four hundred or so posts later, no further forward.There is a suggestion in the PHB (p.14) that a character with low intelligence might speak simply or easily forget details. It's only a suggestion but it's about all we have to go on as far as RAW is concerned.To help everyone unite in agreeing a common position, I'm now going to propose an assertion that I'm fairly sure everyone here will disagree with.If Intelligence measures mental acuity, accuracy of recall, and the ability to reason, then low Intelligence measures it badly.As in: frogs are not very good at estimating how clever you are.See? I've twisted the meaning of the sentence so that intelligence is not the ability to think, it's the ability to measure thinking. It's consistent with the syntax of the sentence but I'm playing fast and loose with the semantics. I've been devious and exploited the ambiguity of natural language. I've done this to make you all think.</blockquote>