D&D 5E The Int 8 Party: A Solution?

[Werebat]

One thing I would say is make them see their Intelligence in a different light when it comes to roleplaying and decision making. Have their Intelligence Score relate to the character's IQ. Now that they know this, they have to act out what they think somebody with that IQ would be like.

Yeah, I... The thing is, if you can rely on your players to be constantly "on their honor", even when it is detrimental to their characters, this would probably work out OK. If not... then the DM is going to be engaged in a constant war against the players' shenanigans as they proceed to play their Int 8 characters as though they were in the 12-14 range (or wherever the players themselves are). Until it is to their advantage to act dumb.

In reality, I'd guess that SOME players could be trusted to actually RP low Int characters, even to their own detriment -- but by and large these are also the sort of players would would not be likely to dumpstat intelligence in the first place, unless they really wanted to RP a low-Int character.

If you have a table of five players, and four of them make Int 8 characters (the fifth is playing a wizard), it's a fair bet that not all of them did so because they really wanted to RP high functioning borderline mental deficient characters.

 

[Slit518]

If you have a table of five players, and four of them make Int 8 characters (the fifth is playing a wizard), it's a fair bet that not all of them did so because they really wanted to RP high functioning borderline mental deficient characters.

Exactly why you have them roleplay their IQ. If they don't want to, then they shouldn't make an 8 Int character.

 

[Corwin]

Exactly why you have them roleplay their IQ. If they don't want to, then they shouldn't make an 8 Int character.

Great theory. Now all they need is to know their IQ. Who decides that? I think, how an individual answers that speaks a great deal to their playstyle.

EDIT: Additionally, how exactly does one determine the "correct" way to "roleplay" an "IQ"? IQs are not personality traits, in-and-of themselves.

 

[Lylandra]

Yeah, I... The thing is, if you can rely on your players to be constantly "on their honor", even when it is detrimental to their characters, this would probably work out OK. If not... then the DM is going to be engaged in a constant war against the players' shenanigans as they proceed to play their Int 8 characters as though they were in the 12-14 range (or wherever the players themselves are). Until it is to their advantage to act dumb.

In reality, I'd guess that SOME players could be trusted to actually RP low Int characters, even to their own detriment -- but by and large these are also the sort of players would would not be likely to dumpstat intelligence in the first place, unless they really wanted to RP a low-Int character.

If you have a table of five players, and four of them make Int 8 characters (the fifth is playing a wizard), it's a fair bet that not all of them did so because they really wanted to RP high functioning borderline mental deficient characters.

I have a player who almost always refuses to play a character with an INT score of less than 10. Because he knows that his "RL INT" would be 14+ and he doesn't like to be the one who should not voice a good plan just because it would be OOC for the "mental lowbob" to come up with it.

However, Int is only one of three mental stats and I guess "common sense" and "common reasoning" can be explained with a good (or at least average) wis score. When my above mentioned player played his one Int 8 character (because he was playing 4e point buy and a paladin really had no good reason to have more than int 8), he really sticked with it. He had the character rely on my wizard's knowledge and proper planning, while he was the emotional and moral backup. He played that character like a big, friendly guardian of justice.

 

[Werebat]

The skill monkey used your house rule to gain even more skills and the Paladin, A class that already needs 3 high attributes and has a feat tax in the form of Resilient Constitution was further penalized?

You're going to need to get rid of the 27 point buy if you want players to move away from min-maxing. 27 points is too few to sacrifice power for flavor in campaigns like Curse of Strahd.

Depends. This group has six players, six PCs. That 50% bump in number of PCs probably trumps the difference between good optimization and complete optimization.

(Also, that paladin has a homebrewed order focused on battle dancing -- she is a drow who worships Eilistraee -- who uses Dex for damage when using a longsword with two hands and is in any event rocking gauntlets of ogre power.)

As I say, I think the real test is in what players decide when creating new characters. The two who kept their Int 8 characters both said that they did so because they had already established their characters as a bit slow at times, and did not want to change that. In fact, the fighter actually had a STR of 21 due to gaining a +1 bump from a mutation in Firestorm Peak, that he COULD have adjusted down to provide some points to put into INT, but he chose not to. It's telling to me that the bard (brand new, never-before-played PC) is the one who ended up with a six-point bump to INT after this houserule was announced.

My theory is that going forward, people will be tempted to allocate 4 points to having an INT of 12 if it means an extra skill for their PC, even if INT is otherwise a "dump stat" for their class.

Besides, in the campaign I play in (the DM there plays in my game), I gave my druid an INT of 12, and I'd like to get SOMETHING for that. ;^)

 

[Slit518]

Great theory. Now all they need is to know their IQ. Who decides that? I think, how an individual answers that speaks a great deal to their playstyle.

EDIT: Additionally, how exactly does one determine the "correct" way to "roleplay" an "IQ"? IQs are not personality traits, in-and-of themselves.

My original post had a link to a 1 page, free packet explaining how to determine a character's IQ.

http://www.dmsguild.com/product/208621/IQ-for-the-Adventurer?term=iq+for+&test_epoch=0

Of course an IQ isn't a personality trait, but finding out a character's IQ, and then finding out what types of traits are associated with that type of IQ can help.

For example someone with an IQ around 80 is seen as slow (not mental retardation, but more-so slow to react, get information right away, etc...).
They may be a bit dull, and react before thinking about the consequence (not all the time, mind you).

Those are but some examples.

 

[Werebat]

Actually, IQ 79 is considered borderline mental retardation, and 80 is one point above that.

Forrest Gump's IQ was 75.

That gives a little perspective on what an Int 8 (roughly IQ 80) would be like.

Someone with an Int of 6 (roughly an IQ of 60) has severe problems. They’re unlikely to be able to support themselves. Essentially, you can expect the same things out of an adult with an IQ of 60 that you’d expect out of an 8 year old child.

 

[iserith]

I can see why some folks would want to play Intelligence as informed by IQ, but is this being put forth that it's a mandate at some tables? Like, "Steve, that plan is just to smart for your character to come up with. Add some more conclusions that don't follow logically and also drool."

 

[Slit518]

I can see why some folks would want to play Intelligence as informed by IQ, but is this being put forth that it's a mandate at some tables? Like, "Steve, that plan is just to smart for your character to come up with. Add some more conclusions that don't follow logically and also drool."

The OP was looking for a reasonable solution. Instead of changing the game mechanics, the table could do what one of the core foundations of the game was about, roleplaying. I just supplied a simple to use, easy to understand method for player's to easily come to that conclusion, and maybe put it in their head that, "Oh yeah, my character is kind of slow."

 

[Werebat]

I can see why some folks would want to play Intelligence as informed by IQ, but is this being put forth that it's a mandate at some tables? Like, "Steve, that plan is just to smart for your character to come up with. Add some more conclusions that don't follow logically and also drool."

Well, way back in AD&D Int was specifically stated to be roughly equivalent to IQ (divided by 10). So I guess it might seem natural to keep doing this to those of us who played back then.

Besides, what else would Intelligence really be? Don't say "common sense" or "interpersonal skills" because these are already covered by Wis and Cha, respectively. And if Intelligence were really just a measure of arcane magical aptitude and book learnin' (Education), why not call it that instead?