Stop me from obliterating him!

[zero skill LPB]

this guy is looking forward to playing this character?

I look at the baseline here. 4 or even 6 skill points/level minus INT mod = unh uh, wouldn't be prudent.

I could see playing a class with 2 skill points/level (min'd out to 1/level by that INT mod), but playing a class that has skill points as a feature getting that feature squelched? Bleh.

 

[jdavis]

I don't really get this mindset. If it had been a Half-Orc Barbarian who rolled a 7 Int (using the 4d6-1 method) would we be saying that he wasn't a playable character because he was just too dumb to function? I don't think so. I think that the game clearly intends for a 5 to be a playable ability score for Intelligence. If it wasn't, then the scores would be capped on the low end.

So the problem must be with our interpretation of what a 5 Int constitutes. I can easily imagine a whole host of mentalities that would reflect a low intelligence but an ability to function within society. What about somebody who just does NOT understand math at all. They might be able to count to 10 and understand that 100 is a bigger number than 50 but adding and subtracting would be mechanics that eluded them. They could still function well enough to feed themselves and pursue a trade of some sort.

.

If it was a Half Orc Barbarian with a 5 intelegence then he would be way ahead of a Elf Bard with a 5 inteligence. Barbarians are meant to be that way.

A Paladin's mount has a inteligence of 6, a worg has a 6, a wyvern has a 6 intelgence and it is described as: "Some Wyvern's speak Draconic, but most are too stupid to understand any language."

They didn't cap any of the scores but this falls into the realm of if this character should be played not if this character could be played. Yes you could play a character with a base and limited understanding of anything above a stone age level and that lacked the common sense and intuition to come in out of the rain, but would you actually want to, this character would rank on the inteligence scale between a Hippogriff and a Hill Giant, but would fall 3 short on the Hill Giant's wisdom score and 6 short on the Hippogriff's wisdom score. He would not understand the difference between gold and copper when dealing with money and he would have a tough time even relating to the enviroment around him. Think of the absentminded professor, but replace professor with Cave Man, and he is supposed to be a Elvish Bard. How is this not going to be unwhieldy and hard to deal with in a game? The characters would have to quite literally lead him around by the hand, he would say the first thing that poped into his mind, heck he would probably say everything that poped into his mind, he couldn't read or write, heck he could only speak in small easy to understand terms. He is supposed to be a Bard, how can he sing if he doesn't even comprehend what he is singing? If he had a 5 inteligence and a 10 wisdom then I would think he got along on his base instincts but he doesn't have any base instincts, he has a 7 wisdom.

 

[mmu1]

But then again, the bard isn't going to be responsible for learning how to tan hides, smith, build houses and the neolithic revolution. There's a lot more factors in the evolution of those humaniods then just intelligence. Sure, if you built a civilization out of 5 int bards, they'd all probablly sit around saranading each other and scratching, and probablly quickly go extinct.

I was thinking more along the lines of creatures like Ogres, Ettins and Trolls, rather than "cavemen".

As for Rel's question about what I'd say about a Half-Orc barbarian who rolled a 7 (presumably adjusted to 5) - yeah, I'd also say it wouldn't be a playable character, and I likely wouldn't allow it in any game of mine - not because a barbarian with 5 INT couldn't function, necessarily, but because I'm not going to inflict a character who is mentally deficient and requires constant supervision, but is also very powerful and violent on the rest of my players. Not any more than I'd force them to adventure with a rabid animal...

Like jdavis said, whether a character could be played and if it shold be played are separate issues.

 

[jdavis]

Here I'll quote out of the Bard discription:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Bards are wanderers, guided by whim and intuition rather than tradition or law"

This character would have very little intuition not to mention he could never find another town if he left the one he was in, he would have a hard time reading or understanding even a simple map and would be unable to cope with the world alone.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Bards see adventures as opportunities to learn"

Well he lacks the ability to learn anything more complicated than "Fire Bad"


"They practice their many skills and abilities "

Can't do that either.....


"and they especially relish the opportunity to enter a long-forgotten ancient tomb "

Would have problems with long forgotten ancient tombs as he would not understand things being ancient, not to mention he would probably forget the long forgotten tomb shortly after they left it.


"to discover ancient works of magic "

see "fire bad" above


"to decipher old tomes"

yea right, he can't decipher picture books.


"to travel to strange places"

He has a hard enough time coping with familiar places.


"to encounter exotic creatures"

I like my dog I'll name him George, and I'll hug him and pet him.


"and to learn new songs and stories."

Oh come on.............
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"He often serves as the spokesman of the party, using his social skills for the party's benifit"

I like eating, do you like eating?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Charisma, Dexterity and Inteligence are important for many of the Bard's class skills"

Well two out of three isn't bad, I hope he spends his one skill point a level well. He will only get 4 skill points as a starting character (4 + inteligence modifier{-3} x4 = 4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Bardic Knowledge"

Well we will just throw that special ability out the window. He will be at a negative to do something he is supposed to be really good at till 3rd level.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[DDK]

And you know this because...? You must obviously personally know brun's player and the circumstances involved in order to make this much of a character judgement?

I know his type, yes.

Like I said, the guy made a character that would be effectively useless. If he had made a half-orc barbarian with those stats, I wouldn't have such a problem with it, but the fact remains, as I previously indicated, that the bard class is quite reliant on skills to flesh out and balance the character.

Making a character that is a liability to the rest of the party means that he only thinks about himself and his own wants/likes/whatever. The fact that such a character could decrease the enjoyment of the game for everyone else through being such a liability, means that not only doesn't he give a rat's fat about anyone else at the table, he actively wants to cause trouble for them.

That is borderline sociopathic behaviour, or so my psych said...

Brun was asking for advice on how someone could properly play such a character. I was assuring him it is viable, because i've seen such done before in our games (albeit not with a 5 and a 7, but with a 6 and a 7).

Any chance the guy named his character Rath?

 

[Squire James]

Rather than worrying about him ahead of time, play the darn game! If he's annoying, obliterate him (ok, the character, not him)! If he's not, all is well. Sheesh, the solution's awfully simple...

You don't even have to smite him... a simple Hold Person should suffice.

 

[Rel]

I'm right there with you, Squire James.

This seems like a "self correcting problem" if it is a problem at all.

I'll reiterate again that I'm not advocating playing this character. In all likelihood, this character would never make it into my campaign, but that is not because I'd ban him. It is because as soon as the player saw that his skills were terrible and that he would be difficult (but not impossible) to roleplay well, the player would probably scrap the character and start over.

If the character did make it into the campaign, it would be on the understanding that he would be required to be played in such a way as to not be incredibly annoying to the rest of the party or to the GM. Again, this is not going to be an easy job for the player, but I maintain that it is possible.

If the character winds up getting killed early on due to his ineptitude, fine. If he winds up being completely ineffective or a liability to the party, they would be within their rights to boot him. If the player isn't having any fun playing him, he can quit and make a different character. Any way you slice it, this wouldn't be a problem in my campaigns. (It wouldn't be a problem anyway most of the time since we use point-buy.)

 

[jdavis]

Rather than worrying about him ahead of time, play the darn game! If he's annoying, obliterate him (ok, the character, not him)! If he's not, all is well. Sheesh, the solution's awfully simple...

You don't even have to smite him... a simple Hold Person should suffice.

That would depend on the player, this could get incredibly annoying real quick and would have absolutly no upside to it, it is a skill based character without skills. The character could be played properly and be annoying and a load on the party without adding much, he could be played for laughs (this character would be on a 6 year old's mentality level, if it was played that way it would be a mess) or the character would be played by ignoring the numbers on the sheet. Any one of these three ways will be a problem eventually. The best intentioned way this could be done would be that the guy didn't understand the significance of such low rolls and played him normal, change the stats and all problems are solved, you will never have to see if this turned out to be a pain in the butt or a disaster or just annoying because it would work out just fine if his Int was 10 or 12 and his wisdom was at least 8. Why waste time seeing how bad this will fail and finding out how it will hurt your game, to quote Barney Fife "Nip it in the bud".

 

[DDK]

If you've ever played Fallout 2 (and possibly Fallout 1; can't remember), you should know how to role-play such a character.

*cough*dialogue options*cough*

Lol, this reminds me of something I tried ages ago to combat this.

Someone played an atypical dumb fighter-type (this was in GURPS though) but he wouldn't, despite repeated warnings, roleplay the stupidity of his character.

Now, the player wasn't all that bright anyway so for the most part I let it slide, but every so often, when it mattered, he'd be far too canny and so I hit upon a solution: it didn't matter what the player SAID, what mattered was what the NPC HEARD.

So essentially I interpreted whatever the player said and converted into 'dumb speech'. Like, instead of saying, "Can I have that masterwork sword, 350gp right?", the NPC would hear, "SHINY! I LIKE SWORDS! GIMME BIG SWORD! ME GOT SHINIES FOR BIG SHINY SWORD! SHINY FOR SHINY! Hehehehe."

When the NPC responded in a manner like, "Err... ok... big, shiny sword. You mean this one?" the player slowly began to realize what was going on... he got really pissed at me but, eh, he should've been roleplaying the damn character's Int anyway

 

[Dr. NRG]

Playing an animalistic druid with a 6 int and a 6 charisma was one of the greatest challenges of my roleplaying career. It can be fun to break out of the mold and try to do something completely atypical. That said, it can also be a big pain in the butt. The particular case in point featured a very strict by-the-book stat rolling method, which (in point buy terms) resulted in a 52-point character as well as my 24-point character in the same party... but I digress.

The fourth or fifth time the druid, played as a foul-tempered SOB, interrupted the 52-point paladin to rub his polar bear buttocks against the NPC the party was trying to impress, things sort of came to a head.

{On a tangent}, regarding Aspergers syndrome, by no means despair of the notion that the sufferer can lead a relatively normal and productive life. I daily interact with a brilliant computer programmer who undoubtedly suffers from undiagnosed Asperger's (in my informed, but unprofessional opinion). He can pull off Rainman-like feats of mathematical/programming genius, while still unable to deal with personal interactions on the level of going grocery shopping. Provided the right support structure is there, this kind of person can be highly productive -- and be rewarded accordingly. {End tangent.}

The player of bard in question seems, at first glance, to be suffering from a common malady -- the desire to do the totally un-optimal thing just to break the mold. It's like playing a barbarian with all his physical stat's under 10. The player is the issue here more than the character. Is the player bored, or what? Does the player want this desperately to be different? I have found that people who play demonstrably sub-par combinations of race/class/stats are either rebelling against the notion of min-maxing, or feel they have "done it all before" in terms of playing effective characters...

NRG