Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Kentor_Slowhand_02 May 28, 2015 19:39:36	Which do you guys find more annoying; a player with a PC with an 8 INT, playing him like a genius, or a DM playing low INT monsters who are tactical master minds?
#2 MechaPilot May 28, 2015 19:55:52	Neither is more annoying than the other one because it's the same issue.  The only difference is your perspective, that is to say which side of the table you're sitting on.  A DM is probably not going to be irritated at her own portrayal of monsters, and a player is likewise not going to be irritated at her own portrayal of her character.  It is possibile that a player might get mad at another player who is portraying a higher than character intellect, but I have found that to be rather rare.   Also, just personally, one of my significant flaws is that I have very little patience with stupid people who aren't being stupid for the sake of comedy.  I would probably be more annoyed by a player accurately portraying an 8 INT PC than I would if that player applied her actual intellect to the PC.   I'd also like to point out that it's going to be very rare that a player can actually play an 8 INT PC as a "genius."  Most people do not have genius-level intelligence, and the player cannot impart intelligence that she doesn't have to her PC.  If we assume that the INT scores equate to 1/10 of real world IQ scores, most people will only be able to accurately portray INT scores of 8 to 14.
(Reply to #2) Macv12	MechaPilot wrote:
#4 SirAntoine May 28, 2015 21:46:20	Neither is annoying to me.
#5 AaronOfBarbaria May 28, 2015 22:09:21	Wolves will out-flank humans, octopi solve puzzles better than humans do, and any other number of absolutely genius things that animals do, and yet when you check out the D&D stats these incredibly intelligent (and totally smarter than most of us humans) creatures have ratings like 3 or maybe as high as 6 for animals that are more widely understood to be smarter than us pompous humans have been giving them credit for.   So no, somebody playing an 8 intelligence like it is smart? That's no issue to me.   Similarly, I don't get bent out of shape when someone's playing a character with a 20 intelligence like they are a completely regular person and not capable of matching wits with any other human on the planet.   The score doesn't dictate how the creature is portrayed - it just shows how well the facade that portrayal creates holds up when the chips are down (i.e. the 8 int acting smart is likely to be shown insufficient, and the 20 int acting like a twit is likely to be shown as smarter than they were letting on).
#6 CCS May 28, 2015 23:20:12	If I had to pick one it'd be the player. Why? Because no matter what the MM lists about the creatures I'm facing, there's no guarantee that the ones I'm facing are "typical" by-the-book examples. I don't know, and rarely ever find out, what the DMs got written down on his notepad. Players on the other hand..... Everyone at the table pretty much knows (or has a real good idea of) what a fellow party members stats are. Either simply by witnessing the modifiers to various dice rolls, or through the player talking about their character. So it's pretty easy to spot when someone is over playing/ignoring their int/wis/char stat.
#7 BoldItalic May 28, 2015 23:28:04	Kentor_Slowhand_02 wrote:
#8 Noon May 29, 2015 0:54:25	The DM, since he plays more enemies with genius than that player does.   Though I wouldn't pin it to the creatures int, but to the players acumen in play - he should play under that (otherwise the enemies make the PC's look like dolts), but occasionally raise the bar to try and make us as players raise our bar. Pushing us to do better, a bit like a coach would.
#9 Rya.Reisender May 29, 2015 5:12:32	INT doesn't really have much to do with being able to apply smart combat tactics. It refers more to how much knowledge you have from books and stuff. I'd expect a low INT fighter who worked at the military to probably be better at combat strategies than a high INT wizard who spent most of his life reading books.   Also this is something I usually clear up with my players before we start playing --- should I play monsters as smart as I can or make them intentionally dumb?
#10 Kentor_Slowhand_02 May 29, 2015 5:24:39	In regards to creatures, I am more or less talking about a situation we had in a past game. We were faced with a group of skeletons and zombies. We set up position waiting for the undead nasties to come to us. Instead, the DM had them take out bows and shoot at us because it was more strategic. To top it off, they targeted the low AC charters first. Now maybe I play zombies all wrong, but I am pretty sure that is something they wouldn't do.
#11 iserith May 29, 2015 6:22:38	I don't care if players or DMs play up a low ability score so long as it is fun for everyone and leads to the creation of an exciting, memorable story. It's a pretty untenable position to argue that somenoe isn't playing "stupid" enough for to accurately reflect his or her character's Intelligence score.   Kentor_Slowhand_02 wrote:
(Reply to #10) CCS	Kentor_Slowhand_02 wrote:
#13 BoldItalic May 29, 2015 7:44:07	Kentor_Slowhand_02 wrote:
#14 Ralif_Redhammer May 29, 2015 8:36:34	Agreed. They’re both symptoms of someone generally playing the same N(PC) all the time. It can be hard for new gamers, I understand. But it can also be hard for experienced players and DMs to do something counter-productive to their character's/monster's wellbeing.   MechaPilot wrote:
#15 DemoMonkey May 29, 2015 8:45:26	I'm not sure I find either of them annoying. DM's playing monsters as "geniuses" has more of a potential negative impact on the game, because they are already starting with perfect knowledge.   The DM has infinite power, particualrly in this edition; it behooves him or her to play with a suitable handicap.   Players not playing to their stats can just not be given inspiration dice. Problem will self correct, or they just don't care and it's not a problem in the first place.
#16 Kazadvorn May 29, 2015 9:21:35	It's really tough for some folks to get into character and accurately play PC's with really low or high scores in INT or WIS.   Look at the converse of a person playing an INT 8 PC in an 'intelligent' way... An average (or perhaps below average) person trying to play PC with INT or WIS = 20... How can you play a character that's smarter or has more 'common sense' than you?   That's why I don't worry about it... I tend to look at the stat scores as measures of things that are independant of the actual abilities of the player. If a person is an experienced and adroit RPG'er I don't force them to 'play dumb' if their character is a 1st level with an INT and WIS of 8 combined. If they want to play dumb, that's fine too...   Monsters, on the other hand, should be run 'in character'. But here again, you have to look at what INT might really mean. A pack of wolves probably has a pretty poor grasp of Algebra and Calculus... and can't quote much Shakespere. Hence a low INT score. But they're plenty smart when it comes to doing what they need to do to survive. They can assess a threat, make good use of terrain, plan the most advantageous way to attack a foe, break off an attack that's clearly failing... etc. Same with Goblins and other 'low INT' humanoids. Short on 'book learnin', but probably pretty clever when it comes to cutting someone's throat.
#17 bawylie May 29, 2015 9:50:12	8 is well within normal limits, you elitist ******!    :-)   Anyway, it doesn't matter. That -1 applied to checks manifests itself fine, regardless.
#18 kalil May 29, 2015 10:05:02	If the PC in question is a fighter with the soldier background he pretty darn well should know how to behave himself in combat. Probably a lot more so than a INT 18 wizard with the hermit background. There is more to a tactical decision that just intelligence. The wizard might beat the fighter hands down in a game of chess, but when they are in the heat of battle it makes a ton of sense that the combat trained fighter can take level headed descisions and act tactically correct on pure muscle memory.
#19 FFSAA May 29, 2015 10:13:56	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #19) AaronOfBarbaria	FFSAA wrote:
#21 MrHotter May 29, 2015 11:38:20
#22 Ralif_Redhammer May 29, 2015 12:04:24	Yeah, Charisma is a tough one...like when the crude uncivilized barbarian suddenly becomes Winston Churchill at a dinner party when it matters.   MrHotter wrote:
#23 iserith May 29, 2015 12:39:02	That's what Inspiration is for. Reward the kind of roleplaying you want to see at the table. Don't reward the kind you don't want to see. The crude barbarian might be Winston Churchill at the dinner party and he might even succeed without needing to roll, but no Inspiration for that player. The crude barbarian who offends the countess by asking her to pull his finger gets Inspiration and creates an opportunity for the smooth operator in the party to show his or her skills at directing everyone's attention away the unfortunate but totally expected shart and onto more pressing business.
#24 Zalbarthemad May 29, 2015 13:31:49	BoldItalic wrote:
#25 BRJN May 29, 2015 14:33:12	My HotDQ Paladin was INT 8 when I began.  I still played him as a battle tactician.  (Good thing, too - I was the only one in the group.)  I just pulled back when the fight was over and we had to figure out puzzles &c.  This made room for our INT 18 Elf Wizard to get spotlight time too.
#26 BoldItalic May 29, 2015 16:08:41	Zalbarthemad wrote:
#27 FFSAA May 30, 2015 10:00:38	Part of the problem may be the confusion caused by INT being treated differently than say DEX.  INT is treated as an out-of-combat ability and DEX treated as an in-combat ability.     Snakes in 5E have a DEX of 14 or 18 for instance, and yet they can't shuffle a deck of cards, juggle or do a limitless number of tasks an 8 DEX human can do easily.  Their DEX is assigned entirely based on how they function in combat.     INT meanwhile is assigned based on how the character performs out of combat so despite an animal being able to perform a few mental functions as well or better than a person in combat the fact that there are limitless numbers of out of combat things they can't do such as calculate the distance to the sun or figure out when the price for a magic item is too high means they get assigned a very low INT.
#28 edwin_su May 30, 2015 10:41:37	Kentor_Slowhand_02 wrote:
(Reply to #24) DoctorBadWolf	Zalbarthemad wrote: