Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 8188837" data-attributes="member: 7026594">I don't think this is really accurate.&nbsp; It's a bit of a caricature that D&amp;D players have batted around for decades.&nbsp; Moldvay does define the 3 Int as having communications difficulties, but in no edition does D&amp;D tell you that your 3 Int character can't dress themselves because they're too stupid.&nbsp; The closest I remember seeing is Feeblemind or 3rd edition ability score damage, where being reduced to zero would incapacitate a character. 3 Int is, in most editions, still supposed to be a playable character.And again, 3 is the extreme example.&nbsp; In our actual games we're dealing with more the 6 to 8 range, right?I asked Thomas and he didn't answer, but how do you define &quot;whether the character is actually sharp enough to come up with something&quot; in any objective manner which we can agree on at the table for a ruling? Do you require EVERY idea any character has to involve an Intelligence check, or the party can't use the idea? Or do you as DM just overrule the players sometimes? &quot;Sorry, Thag is too dumb to figure out the word puzzle and none of the rest of you did it, so you're not getting through the door.&quot;How does anyone make a ruling or judge whether my 6 or 8 Int character couldn't come up with an idea?&nbsp; If you make it a check, where do we draw the line and not require checks anymore?Do we just assume, based on that IQ approximation someone came up with in the late 70s or early 80s, that if I have a 126 IQ and my character has a 13 Int, any idea I can come up with he can come up with?If so, does that mean that if I play a character with 12 or lower I have to make a check every time?&nbsp; And that if I play one with a 14 or higher the DM should let me roll checks to solve any puzzle or problem I can't think of a solution to?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mannahnin, post: 8188837, member: 7026594"] I don't think this is really accurate. It's a bit of a caricature that D&D players have batted around for decades. Moldvay does define the 3 Int as having communications difficulties, but in no edition does D&D tell you that your 3 Int character can't dress themselves because they're too stupid. The closest I remember seeing is Feeblemind or 3rd edition ability score damage, where being reduced to zero would incapacitate a character. 3 Int is, in most editions, still supposed to be a playable character. And again, 3 is the extreme example. In our actual games we're dealing with more the 6 to 8 range, right? I asked Thomas and he didn't answer, but how do you define "whether the character is actually sharp enough to come up with something" in any objective manner which we can agree on at the table for a ruling? Do you require EVERY idea any character has to involve an Intelligence check, or the party can't use the idea? Or do you as DM just overrule the players sometimes? "Sorry, Thag is too dumb to figure out the word puzzle and none of the rest of you did it, so you're not getting through the door." How does anyone make a ruling or judge whether my 6 or 8 Int character couldn't come up with an idea? If you make it a check, where do we draw the line and not require checks anymore? Do we just assume, based on that IQ approximation someone came up with in the late 70s or early 80s, that if I have a 126 IQ and my character has a 13 Int, any idea I can come up with he can come up with? If so, does that mean that if I play a character with 12 or lower I have to make a check every time? And that if I play one with a 14 or higher the DM should let me roll checks to solve any puzzle or problem I can't think of a solution to? [/QUOTE]

Verification