Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Swarmkeeper" data-source="post: 8192820" data-attributes="member: 6921763">Ignore is one way to put it.  Interpret stats however they like in nuanced or not-so-nuanced ways is another.You'll need to be more specific because I am not seeing anywhere in the "Using Each Ability" section which prescribes how each gradation of the ability score must be roleplayed.Key word:  "interpretations" And, per the definition of "roleplaying" we've both quoted now, it is up to the player to determine how to interpret.I suspect we both feel that a player using Google to solve riddles in the game is an example of a player not playing in good faith.  Being a jerk or acting like one can ruin any game.  But we're not here to discuss jerk players or jerkish player actions.Examples on a forum can be tricky but see my response above about jerk players.  First of all, the fighter player is hogging the spotlight.  On top of that, it doesn't seem the DM is doing anything to spread the spotlight around.  So, yeah, less of a "roleplaying" issue and more of a "breaking of the social contract" issue.Again, I'll say that I believe that most players at our table do use their ability scores to inform (at least partially) how they roleplay their character.  In 5e, though, there is no prescription regarding ability scores for exactly how players must do this.  I completely understand where you and others are coming from:  you want the players to roleplay according to their stats.  Perhaps that is something that has been prescribed in a past edition of D&D.  I'm saying that the 5e definition of roleplaying lets the player decide what their character does (attempts, really), thinks, and says.  Adhering to that definition while running 5e has freed up my ability to focus my energy towards creating engaging environments, interesting NPCs, and challenging encounters.  The players handle their PCs to the best of their abilities (pun!), I take care of everything else.Please consider that there is often a difference between what a player thinks their character knows and what the truth in the game world really is, as set by the DM.  I'm sure you are not suggesting that the INT 20 Wizard knows everything from the books and real world, either. Any player is certainly welcome to recall anything they know from the books or real world in my 5e game.  And, despite this, mental stats still mean something at our table because using player knowledge from the books and/or the real world will only get their PC so far.  A player applying such metagame knowledge in game play while assuming it to be correct without first testing their assumptions in the game world may soon find that their PC is not faring so well.  And the result at the table where I DM:  players - some brand new to D&D, some who've played for decades - who roleplay their characters, warts and all, and engage with the game world through those characters.  Sure there are a couple min-maxers in the group who steer clear of their PC weaknesses in game play, but we have fun with them all the same.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification