D&D General You Were Rolling Up a New Character, and Just Rolled a 3. What Is Your Reaction?

[kigmatzomat]

Since we use 4d6 (drop low) 7 times (drop low) it means rolling all ones on 4d6 twice. That's like one in ten billion odds. My quick math has 1 in 1.2x10^10.

I would have to keep it and then declare them the "character of destiny, a hero against all odds."

 

[TiQuinn]

That 3 is going straight into Wisdom.

Foolhardy, oblivious adventurers = great adventures.

Wisdom has always been my favorite dump stat for this reason!

 

[kigmatzomat]

sure, technically there's nothing FORCING you to act a 3 int in a specific way...but like...cats in dnd have 3 int. as do foxes, elephants, tigers, sperm whales, walruses...

And those all behave exactly the same.

so it's perfectly accurate to say a 3 intelligence is "animal level reasoning" when multiple animals literally have that level of intelligence.

Raccoon and primate smart is pretty clever at tasks they can conceive. Heck, watch a squirrel figure out an aerial route from point A to point B.

But you have to add sapience, the stealth feature of PCs races, which includes complex reasoning, abstract concepts, tool use and language. That grants communication, manipulating the environment, using one thing to mess with another thing, and those last two add a hojillion options. Many, many, many of which are bad ideas but still, options!

Having had to be around small children, I would set the floor at the "kindergarten" level . Someone pointed out that int 3 is a -4 so they still have a 10% chance of success at DC15 for untrained tasks and I would say kindergartners have around a 10% chance to accomplish anything an average untrained adult has a 30% chance of success. Like, I think average kindergartener vs someone who is incredibly sheltered (e.g. the royal family) fits that 1:3 ratio.

They are capable of complex tasks, following directions, simple "finger" math, a bit of reading (which is mostly sounding out words) and using instructions with pictures (Legos taught me that).

Meanwhile, a cat will do a better job managing their scat than a kindergartner. A far, far better job.....

 

[AlViking]

That's my point. Int. 3 on a character is clearly not the same as the general intelligence of a house pet or toddler. You can build a perfectly functional character who goes on to great things, reaches level 20, etc. with Int. 3.

Why is the intelligence of a mastiff or cat not an appropriate measure? The stats have to mean something - and in the case of a 3 it's the lowest ability anyone anywhere in the world could have without being altered by accident or disease. I would say that a 3 wisdom is someone who is pretty high up on the autism spectrum.

The D&D attributes do not have real world analogues. They are far, far too reductionist and simplistic for that. They are a game device that reflect a D&D character's competence at extremely narrowly defined tasks. There is no such thing in the real world as Int. 3, or anything like it.

But we do have extremes, a 3 and an 18 represent those extremes.

In terms of roleplay, this means that your assumptions about how Int. 3, Char. 3, Str. 3 should be performed are completely biased and not based on any kind of objective reality. Objecting to how someone else chooses to play their character because of their attributes is simply projecting your own assumptions. The game mechanics will impose specific limitations that will probably suggest ways of playing the character to you, but extending these to judge someone else's interpretation of, say. Wis. 3 is totally subjective.

No, it means that I make different assumptions than you do. Someone with an 18 strength is the equivalent of a top tier athlete that has spent years in physical training. Someone with an 18 intelligence is at an Einstein or Steven Hawking level of intelligence, even if they're a Sheldon Cooper with an 8 wisdom and charisma. Someone with a 3 intelligence is on the opposite end of that spectrum. Things like IQ tests are fundamentally flawed so we don't have a way to accurately measure it in the real world does not mean we can't assign a number to it in a game.

I agree it's simplified but it still roughly equates to human capability and includes the entire spectrum of potential.

This goes the other way, too. Maybe I want to play my Char. 18 character as someone who is completely obnoxious and destable, but manages to get their way through sheer chutzpah and intimidation, while you see Char. 18 as the most charming person in the world. Both are valid! And if we think of pop culture characters, I am sure that we can think of examples of both.


That's why I think characters should be based on the things that writers have been building characters from forever - goals, flaws, needs - and not arbitrary scores that were designed as game aids, and derived specifically from war games.

Trust players to roleplay their characters the way they want. Diversity is a good thing. Maybe their intepretation will be something you never, ever would have imagined...and that is amazing!

I think ability scores should matter and affect your character's RP as much or more than adjustments to chance of succeeding on skill checks. They can play into flaws or not depending on what I view as the character's strengths and weaknesses. But if my character had a 3 intelligence that means they're going to be severely limited in what they do because they are at the rock bottom of intellectual capacity possible for a human.

I'm not judging how other people play and it's not like I ever measure players on whether or not they are "correctly" playing their character. I disagree with your point of view but I'm only talking about how I run my characters and games. I solved the issue in my games of someone with a character with a 3 intelligence playing a genius long ago by using point buy.

We all play with different assumptions and different reasons.

 

[AlViking]

Since we use 4d6 (drop low) 7 times (drop low) it means rolling all ones on 4d6 twice. That's like one in ten billion odds. My quick math has 1 in 1.2x10^10.

I would have to keep it and then declare them the "character of destiny, a hero against all odds."

I just rolled double twenties twice in my last session, once when the NPC was making an attack with disadvantage. I've also seen double ones. So like Han said - never tell me the odds.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

And those all behave exactly the same.

...ok? is this supposed to be clever? they otherwise have different stats. games abstract things. this doesn't mean anything.

Raccoon and primate smart is pretty clever at tasks they can conceive. Heck, watch a squirrel figure out an aerial route from point A to point B.

pretty clever...compared to most animals. as for the squirrels, yeah, instinct is a hell of a thing.

But you have to add sapience,

we'll get back to that.

Having had to be around small children, I would set the floor at the "kindergarten" level . Someone pointed out that int 3 is a -4 so they still have a 10% chance of success at DC15 for untrained tasks and I would say kindergartners have around a 10% chance to accomplish anything an average untrained adult has a 30% chance of success. Like, I think average kindergartener vs someone who is incredibly sheltered (e.g. the royal family) fits that 1:3 ratio.

that's an incredibly arbitrary figure with absolutely 0 evidence to back it up.

Meanwhile, a cat will do a better job managing their scat than a kindergartner. A far, far better job.....

first off that's disgusting. second, even assuming that were true, i would not say...waste management...is equivalent to full blown sapiance on the intelligence scale (im pretty sure it's not even on that scale at all - it's a function of instinct for cats). thirdly, cats are roughly equivalent in intelligence to toddlers (though cats trade abstract thought for better spatial memory), not kindergarteners. so, i mean, i guess if you want to play a 2-3 year old in the body of an adult...it's...there...?